FINAL REPORT

Program 1998 Emergency Spring Food Security Program

Locatlon The Anvil Region, Central , The Federation

Mnn~clpalltles Sipovo, Ribnik , , and Gornjl Vakuf

Grant Number AOT-G-0098-00073-00

Grant Dates 27 February 1998- 3 1 October 1998

Submitted to Mariza Artificio-Rogers & Pam Fessenden Office of Foreign Dlsaster Assistance (OFDA) 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC

BY Partners for Development (PFD) 16 16 N Fort Myer Drive, 11" Floor Arlington, VA 22209 Tel (703)528-8336 Fh (703)528-7480 pfd@jsi corn

Besarina C~kmaNo 5 7 1000 Bosnia and Herzegovlna TelIFax 3 87-7 1-446-626 E-mail pfdl @compuserve corn Partners for Development AOT-G-00-98-00073-00 1998 Emergency Sprzng Food Securzty Program Fznal Report

SUMMARY

This final report 1s for OFDA grant AOT-G-00-98-00073-00 titled Emergency Sprlng Food Security 1998 grant of $620,211 to Partners for Development (PFD) The grant period was 27 February - 3 1 October Project actlvitles were implemented in the municipalities of Sipovo and Ribnlk m Republika Srpska (RS), and Jajce, Donjl Vakuf, Bugojno, and Gornji Vakuf of the Federation As explained In the mld-term report, an lncrease in the number of eliglble beneficlanes in the Federation municlpallt~esand the time and resources required to serve these addltlonal households precluded the inclusion of municipality in the Federation

W~thcomplimentary funding from the British Department for International Development (DFID), the program assisted 4,611 households or mdividuals through the provision of 732 MT of seeds, 5 16 MT of fertlhzers and expedients, and 1,500 sets of hand tools The complimentary DFID and OFDA support along with cost savings from lower seed prlces allowed PFD to d~str~buteseed, fertilizer and hand tools to 55% more households than origmally projected (4661 households vs 2997 projected)

All project supplies were procured and distributed in tlme for the Spring plantmg season Educational activities for farmers and daily post-dlstr~butlonand crop monitoring actlvitles also took place throughout the hfe of the project

Overall, the project improved the lives of 4,611 vulnerable households by helplng to meet a considerable portion of thelr lmmed~atefood needs Based on an impact-survey for this project, PFD estimates that the 18,444 indiv~dualbeneficiaries produced, on average, 503 kilograms of harvest This harvest provided not only key nutritional value for the beneficiaries, but it also allowed llmited household funds to be evpensed on potentially productive actlvit~es(e g , repalr of homes, farms, enterprises) rather than on purchase of food

In addition, lt 1s also clear that these emergency seed programs have substantially Increased the number of actlve farms and hectares planted In both the RS and the Federation This has led to higher ylelds per ton of seed through several factors including tralnlng, uslng appropriate seeds at the appropriate time, and the provision of fertilizer

Thls project also has Important Impacts with respect to local in~tiatlveand partnerships, local capaclty building, and publlc education PFD worked with local partners In planning, distribution, and ~mpact-assessmentand also used local busmesses for the procurement and transport of materials

Finally, this report notes the manner in which the OFDA and DFID grants to PFD are complimentary in their impacts and contribute to leveraging additional funding for programs For instance, the comblned OFDA and DFID funding has facilitated PFD wlnning $1 45 mdlion from USDA for agricultural development in the area PROGRESS AGAINST OBJECTIVES

Descript~onof D~str~bution,Y~elds, and Benefic~aries The project objective was to provide 665 MT of seeds and 1,000 sets of hand tools to targeted households resulting in an estimated production of 7,118 MT of crop yields As the following table demonstrates, the jomt OFDA and DFID program distributed 732 MT of seeds, 5 16 MT of fertilizers and expedients and 1,500 sets of hand tools Table 1 Commod~t~esby Mun~c~pahty Locat~on MT of fert~hzer MT of Seeds* Hand Tools (DFID) (OFDA/DFID) (OFDA/DFID)

4 Donj1 Vakuf 40 4 48 5 247

5 Bugojno 69 9 84 0 594

6 Gomjl Vakuf 17 5 25 5 0

Total 516 Source PFDjeld andjnancial records *Does not rnclude vegetable seed

OFDA funds supported the distributed potato, corn, barley and wheat seeds Hand tools, includmg shovels, hoes, and rakes, were available to the most vulnerable households In order to maximize y~elds,two types of fertilizers and a protection agent for the potato crop were used Appropriate quantities were d~stributedto each household based on crops, elevation and land characterist~cs

All commodities were d~stributedin time for the Spring planting season During the project, problems related to weather or pestdence were not encountered, although one of the potato seed var~etiesmatured slower than expected With respect to beneficiaries, the project d~stributed seed and fertilizer to 4,611 households, which 1s around 55% more than PFD estimated in the original project proposal Table 2 Beneficlanes by Municipality Locat~on Households Served Est~matedBenefic~ar~es

5 Bugojno 700 2 800

6 Gomj I Vakuf 341 1 364

Total 4,611 Source PFDJield andfinanc~alrecords The follow~ngtables detall the amount of each seed distributed in the RS and the Federat~on,and they Indicate the actual yield produced at the end of harvest season

Table 3 Actual Seed Distribut~onand Harvest Yield in Republika Srpska Municipality Potato (MT) Barley (MT) Corn (MT)

Slpovo 200 5 60 3 kbnlk 149 5 50 6

Total 350 110 9

Actual Yleld Rate 7 3 13 5 13 1 Actual Yleld MT 2555 1485 1179 Sourze PFDfield andfinanczal re~ords

Table 4 Actual Seed D~strlbut~onand Harvest Y~eldIn the Federat~on Municipality Potato (MT) Wheat (MT) Corn (MT)

Donji Vakuf 36 5 10 2 2 Gornjl Vakuf 2 1 47 7 0 5 Total 200 95 3 10 4

Actual Yield Rate 7 2 13 2 13 1 Actual Yield MT 1440 1258 1356 Source PFD field andfinancral records

In both entities, the 550 MT of potato seed distributed produced 3995 MT of harvest, resulting in an actual yield rate of over 7 to 1 In the RS alone, !10 MT of seed produced 1485 MT of harvest, resulting in an actual yleld rate of 13 5 to 1 Slmllarly in the Federat~on,95 MT of wheat produced 1258 MT of wheat crop, givlng a actual yield rate of over 13 to 1 The 19 MT of corn seed provided by the program to both entitles resulted in the production of 2535 MT of harvest, which corresponds to an actual yield of 13 1 to 1

2 2 Summarv of Impacts In assessing Impacts, PFD employed an extenslve survey of 500 participant households and 200 non-participant households The survey used a multistage, stratified area probablllty sampling technique and included residents throughout the area of operation Key Impacts are as follows Soc~o-Econom~cImpacts Food Security PFD supplemented diets m two ways (a) Dlrect Through gram and potatoes, the project prov~dedmany necessary carbohydrates, vitamins, and mmerals On average, the program prov~ded4,6 11 households with 2 MT of harvest (or 503 kg per mdiv~dual),

(b) Indirect By el~minatingthe need for households to spend large percentages of hm~tedfinds on grams and potatoes, those saved funds-- at least that port~onallocated for other foodstuffs-- can be used for other, more protein- or mmeral-rich foods, such as d~aryproducts, meats, and vegetables In add~tion,provision of tools should pay pos~t~ved~v~dends for future food- product~on

Local Partnerships/Local Init~ativeSeed programs generate a much greater degree of self-help than regular food-a~dprograms In terms of amount of local organ~zat~onand work requ~redto produce food

Econom~cBenefits The combined 9,273 MT of harvest In the RS and the Federation had a market value of over $1 8 million The grant enabled local procurement of approximately $500,000 of seeds and fertdlzer, which produced a harvest that, ~fsold m local markets, could provide each benefitt~nghousehold wlth $400

With project costs at $800,000 and total output value of $1 8 m~llion,PFD realized a return on mvestment of 2 25 to 1 Use of DFID provided fertilizer resulted In a 30% increase in crop y~eld Also, as noted previously, benefitting indiv~dualswere able to apply limited household resources on mvestments other than on food- for example, on repalr of homes, businesses and farms Table 5 Market Value of Harvest Project Yleld (MT) Market Value DM Market Value US$ Potato 3,995 1,797,750 1,089,545

Wheat 1,258 277,200 168,000

Corn 2,535 456,273 276,529 Barley 1,485 490,050 297,000 Sub-Total 9,273 3,021,273 DM $1,83 1,075 Source PFDJield andfinanc~alrecords

Local Capacitv Bu~ldlnaImpacts The education component of the program was designed to assist new farmers, part~cularlywomen-headed households General lnformatlon was provided to all farmers on the best use of new seed varieties, land and expedient use, seed capturing for future plantmg, and frost damage mit~gationtechniques PFD worked w~thNe~ghborhood Councils to help Identify women-headed households and people who requlred techn~cal assistance PFD also accepted walk-ms

Institut~onal/Educat~onalImpacts The program worked to re-establ~shand strengthen linkages between local mtitut~ons,specifically among munic~palagricultural officials, the Un~vers~tyof and local charlt~es For mstance, agr~culturalexperts from the University of Banja Luka and mun~cipalitiespartmpated together In some of the program's educational actw~tles 3 PROCUREMENT AND LOGISTICS

Elght suppliers In Bosnla and Croatla were notified and Invited to submlt sealed b~ds,SIX of which responded with complete bids After review and confirmation, two contracts were signed w~threspect to prlce, product speclficatlons and transportation As per the project proposal, PFD was able to procure a portion of the seed material from a supplier with whom FA0 is working to rehabilitate seed production capaclty m Bosnla-Herzegovina Rehabdltating Bosnia's seed production capac~ty1s crucial to securing Bosn~a'slong term food production and securlty capaclty As stated previously, all project supplies were procured and d~str~butedin time for the Sprmg planting season

4 ISSUES ENCOUNTERED

As stated previously m the mid-term report, the program encountered two Issues requiring some action andlor modificai~onto the project ds originally proposed

4 1 Seed Procurement and Dtstribution Seed material procured from the FA0 supported Federation based supplier had a cosmetlc defic~ency,and all part~esInvolved agreed that the health of the seed should be recertified m Repubhka Srpska The results of several analyses from different laboratories eventually demonstrated the seeds were fit for distribution Because of these tests, distribution was delayed by two days This delay did not adversely affect the program

4 2 Number of Beneficiaries and Munlci~ahtiesThe project distributed seed and fertil~zerto approxlmately 55% more households than or~g~nallyest~mated In the project proposal These add~tionalhouseholds were served in both the Federat~on(approxlmately 1,300 or 130%) and Republika Srpska (approximately 300 or 15%) Based on past programs, the 15% increase In Republlka Srpska was not unusual The slgn~ficantIncrease in the number of households Included m the Federation was due to residents who returned after the proposal was written, but beforelwh~lethe project was bemg implemented

As explained In the mld-term report, PFD chose to add beneficiaries to the three largest contiguous municipal~tiesin the Federatlon- Jajce, Bugojno and Donji Vakuf , decrease servlce to the most remote areas of Gornji Vakuf, and drop the Municipality of Kupres from the program With these changes and the quantlty of seed per household decreasing slightly, PFD was able to serve 100% of the ellglble beneficiaries in Jajce, Bugojno and Donji Vakuf as well as needlest Senefic,anes in Gornjl Vakuf W~threspect to project impacts, the average households yields met 6-7 months of total household food requirements

5 KEY FINDINGS

5 1 Overall Impact The Spring 1998 program implemented by PFD succeeded in providing a large and vulnerable population with much needed assistance In reactivating agricultural activities As in past programs, this one sign~ficantlyhelped in meeting short term food needs and contributed to increased food self reliance

Through funding programs such as this, USAIDIOFDA is responding to complex emergency situations as well as facil~tat~ngthe transition from relief-based operations to those promoting more rehabrlitative and developmental activit~esin the region 5 2 Comulimentarv Donors Crucial to the success of this and past programs managed by PFD has been support from both OFDA and DFID PFD, as an American NGO, is helped in wlnning DFID awards when the US government, via USAID and/or OFDA, also provides funding

To highlight the importance of leveragmg funding, consider that the return on investment by both OFDA and DFID for this program was 2 25 to 1 Without the DFID-sponsored fertilizer (which increased yield 30%), PFD would have realized a return on investment of only 1 76 to 1

5 3 Integrated Assistance While food security programs have proven greatly helpful to residents and returnees, it is also true that other types of ass~stance-housing and community-structure repair, job-creation programs, etc- will be necessary to help keep people in place and to help draw back those yet to return rnternatronal relref and development

Area of Operation