Concurrent Monitoring

AP INTEGRATED IRRIGATION AGRICULTURE TRANSFORMATION PROJECT ( APIIATP)

Report -2

2019

1 CTRAN CONSULTING LITMTED - D E C 2019

Contents Executive Summary ...... 8 Results Framework ...... 15 Chapter -1 ...... 15 About the APIIAT Project - Coverage ...... 22 1.1 Introduction ...... 22 1.2 Geographical Coverage ...... 22 1.3 Project Beneficiary ...... 23 1.4. Methodology ...... 23 Chapter -2 ...... 25 Institutional Strengthening & Capacity Building of WUAs ...... 25 2.1WUA strengthening and Formation of New WUAs/ Re-delineation of existing WUAs: ...... 26 2.2 Institutional Aspects in tanks with below 100 acres ayacut area: ...... 26 2.3 Capacity Building of WUAs: ...... 28 2.4 WUA Office Infrastructure: ...... 29 2.6 Para workers: ...... 31 2.7 Social Audit and Public Disclosure: ...... 32 2.8 Water Tax & Corpus Collection: ...... 33 2.9 Support Organisations: ...... 33 2.10 WUA Self-Rating ...... 35 2.11 Cascade Development Plans & Tank Development Plans: ...... 37 2.13 Analysis of WUA Data ...... 38 2.14 Others: ...... 46 2.15 Key observation & Suggestions ...... 47 Chapter – 3 ...... 49 Rehabilitation and Modernization of SSCBI System ...... 49 3.1 Introduction ...... 49 3.2. Progress of Civil works in independent tanks and tank cascades ...... 49 3.3. Assessment in LBT Tanks ...... 55 3.4. Assessment in Sample tanks ...... 59 3.5 Monitoring of Environmental and Social Safeguards Management in component A-2 ...... 59 3.6. Actions to be taken ...... 63 3.7 Action to be taken suggested in the 1st half yearly report ...... 65 3.8. Change in Key Indicators ...... 65 Chpater.4 ...... 67

Improving Water Productivity and Efficiency ...... 67 4.1 Introduction: ...... 67 4.2 State Level PGM Activity Implementation Progress: ...... 67 4.3 Training/ Awareness programs for PGM Groups: ...... 69 4.4 Project Tanks visited: ...... 70 4.5 Findings of Willing/ Non-Willing Water Sharing’s Between Adjacent Farmers: ...... 72 4.6 Suggestions...... 72 Chapter–5 ...... 73 Climate Smart Crop Production and Diversification ...... 73 5.0 Introduction ...... 73 5.1. Preparation of Annual Action Plan for the Agriculture/Horticulture Components for FY 2019-20 ...... 75 5.2.Trainings(Orientation Programs/Workshops) ...... 76 5.3. Exposure visits (within the state) ...... 77 5.4. Implementation Status of Agriculture Production Interventions...... 77 5.5. Implementation Status of Horticulture Interventions ...... 79 Chapter 6 ...... 83 Climate Smart Aquaculture ...... 83 6.1. Objective ...... 83 6.2 Activity- wise progress achieved- Observations ...... 84 6.3 Study on assessing the potential of fisheries in different types of tanks: ...... 86 6.4 Suggestions for expediting the implementation of the project...... 86 Chapter 7 ...... 90 Post-Harvest Management, Market and Agri-Business Promotion ...... 90 7.1 Introduction...... 90 7.2 Implementation Status of Agribusiness Activities ...... 91 7.2.2Trainings & Capacity Building & Workshops ...... 92 7.3 Suggestions & Recommendations ...... 93 Chapter -8 ...... 97 Project Management and Capacity Building ...... 97 8.1 Institutional arrangements ...... 97 8.2 Geographical Information System...... 98 Chapter -9 ...... 100 Socio-Economic Profile of sample households ...... 100 9.0 Introduction ...... 100 9.1 Selected sample farmers in the study area ...... 100 9.2 Classification of sample farmers according to landholdings status ...... 100

9.3 Classification of household according to social categories ...... 101 9.4 Demographics of the Households ...... 101 9.5 Employment status of sample respondents and household members ...... 104 9.6 Asset possession of households ...... 106 9.7 Possession of agriculture assets ...... 107 9.8 Possession of milch animals ...... 108 9.9 Household income ...... 108 9.10 Consumption pattern (Expenditure) ...... 109 9.11 Borrowings...... 109

List of Annexures 1.1 Tanks covered and Field visit schedule - Districts - investigators team and Subject specialist team field visit for 60 tanks 1.2 Beneficiary Status 1.3 Status of various indicators of result framework 2.1 District wise tanks with less than 100 ac ayacut 2.2 Status of Sub committees in the tanks visited 2.3 Key trainings 2.4 Status of Office Building infrastructure 2.5 Record maintenance status 2.6 Para-workers status in the project villages visited 2.7 Social Audit boards status in the project villages visited 2.8 Summary of SO rating for the period Oct-Dec 2019 2.9 Summary of WUA self-rating for the period Oct-Dec 2019 2.10 Summary of CDP/ TDP exercises in the visited villages 2.11 Summary of tanks visited 2.12 Various uses of tanks and its users 2.13 Laskar availability in tanks 2.14 Neeruganti availability in tanks 2.15 Water to tail end farmers 2.16 Water to tail end farmers WUA and Non-WUA comparison 2.17 Number of shortfalls in control and project tanks 2.18 Assessment and allocation of water in control and project tanks 2.19 Assessment and allocation of water with in project tanks 2.20 Crop planning before season 2.21 Crop planning before season - WUA and Non WUA comparison 2.22 Water schedule - Control and Project tanks comparison 2.23 Water schedule - WUA and Non WUA tanks comparison 2.24 Mode of water distribution - control and project tanks comparison 2.25 Mode of water distribution - WUA and non WUA tanks comparison 3.1 Progress of civil works in Anatapur district 3.2 Progress of civil works in Chittore district 3.3 Progress of civil works in East Godavari district 3.4 Progress of civil works in Kadapa district 3.5 Progress of civil works in Krishna district 3.6 Progress of civil works in Kurnool district 3.7 Progress of works as on 31st December in Nellore district 3.8 Progress of civil works in Prakasham district 3.9 Progress of civil works in Srikakulum district 3.10 Progress of civil works in Visakhaptanam district 3.11 Progress of works in Viziyanagaram district 3.12 Progress of civil works in West Godavari district 6.1 District-wise Action Plan of the activities 2019-20 9.1 Ayacutdars District wise 9.2 Various Uses of Tanks and Number of Users 9.3 District wise - Lascar availability in Tanks 9.4 District wise - Neeruganti availability in Tanks 9.5 Water to Tail End farmers - District wise 9.6 Number of Shortfalls in Last Five Years - Control Vs Project tanks comparison- District wise 9.7 Assessment and Allocation of Water Before Season – Control Vs Project tanks comparison – District wise 9.8 Crop Planning Before Season – Control Vs Project comparison- District wise 9.9 Water Scheduling and Release – Control Vs Project tanks comparison - District Wise

9.10 Mode of Water Distribution – Control Vs Project tanks comparison - District wise

List of Tables 2.1 District wise tanks with less than 100 ac ayacut 2.2 Status of Sub committees in the tanks visited 2.3 Key trainings 2.4 Status of Office Building infrastructure 2.5 Record maintenance status 2.6 Para-workers status in the project villages visited 2.7 Social Audit boards status in the project villages visited 2.8 Summary of SO rating for the period Oct-Dec 2019 2.8A SO wise Trainings 2.9 Summary of WUA self-rating for the period Oct-Dec 2019 2.10 Summary of CDP/ TDP exercises in the visited villages 2.11 Summary of tanks visited 2.12 Various uses of tanks and its users 2.13 Laskar availability in tanks 2.14 Neeruganti availability in tanks 2.15 Water to tail end farmers 2.16 Water to tail end farmers WUA and Non-WUA comparison 2.17 Number of shortfalls in control and project tanks 2.18 Assessment and allocation of water in control and project tanks 2.19 Assessment and allocation of water with in project tanks 2.20 Crop planning before season 2.21 Crop planning before season - WUA and Non WUA comparison 2.22 Water schedule - Control and Project tanks comparison 2.23 Water schedule - WUA and Non WUA tanks comparison 2.24 Mode of water distribution - control and project tanks comparison 2.25 Mode of water distribution - WUA and non WUA tanks comparison 3.1 District wise number of works grounded and physical progress above 50%, 25%-49%, 10%-24% and below 10%t 3.2 Issues and suggested action to be taken for expediting execution of rehabilitation and modernization work 3.3 In the previous report certain actions are suggested. Few of them are issummerised below 3.4 Status of key indicators 4.1 State Level Progress on PGM Activity 6.1 Annual Action Plan 2019-20- Project activities 6.2 District wise status on Captive seed nurseries 9.1 Key training events organized 9.2 Publications/videos during the half yearly period 9.1 Classification of Sample Farmers According to Landholdings Status 9.2 Distribution of Sample Respondents According to their Caste Group 9.3.1 Household members’ gender 9.3.2 Summary of Respondents age in both control and project tanks 9.3.3 Summary of Respondents age in both control and project tanks 9.3.4 Summary of Respondents literacy levels 9.3.5 Summary of literacy levels of sample households 9.3.6 Primary Occupation of the Household members 9.4 Landholding wise and housing type - % 9.5 Household items 9.6 Agriculture implements 9.7 Percentage of Income sources in control and project areas 9.8 Expenditure status %

9.9 Percentage- Source of borrowings

Abbreviations AAP Annual Action Plan ANGRAU Acharya NG Ranga Agriculture University APDs Assistant Project Director APIIATP Andhra Pradesh Integrated Irrigation Agriculture Transformation Project CAS Crop Adoption Survey CB Capacity Building CDP Cascade Development Plans CHC Custom Hiring Centre CIGs Common Interest Group CMSS Community Managed Seed System CWB Crop Water Budgeting DPD District Project Director DPMU District Project Management Unit DPR Detailed PROJECT report DPUs District Project Unit FGDs Focus Group Discussions FPO Farmers Producer Organization ICM Intensive Crop Management ICRISAT International Crop Research in Semi-arid Tropics INM Integrated Nutrient Management INM Integrated Nutrition Management IPM Integrated Pest Management JDAs Joint Director of Agriculture LBT. Longitudinal Benefit Tracking MARKFED Marketing Federation MC Managing Committees NABARD National Bank for Agricultural Rural Development NGO Nan Governmental Organization PGM Participatory Groundwater Management PHM Participatory Hydrogeological Monitoring PIP Project Implementation Plan PMU Project Management Unit PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal QCS Quality Control System RFPs Reply For Proposal SAB Social Audit Boards SERP Society for Elimination of Rural Poverty SO Support Organisation SPMU State Project Management Unit SSCBI Small Scale Community Based Irrigation

TACs Technical Advisory Committee TDP Tank Development Planning TRPs Training Resource Persons WSF Water Soluble Fertilizers WUA Water User Association

Executive Summary Component A-1 The key objective of the component is to enable Water Users for taking over the primary responsibilities such as tank system improvement and its management, implementation of sectoral activities with community participation. Across the 12 district total tanks got approved are 652 in three spells (TAC1, TAC2, TAC3). Out of total tanks, 323 Independent tanks and 329 are cascade tanks. In Independent tanks, 298 tanks have WUAs and of these, 278 tanks have Managing Committees (MC) and the rest 20 WUAs doesn’t have MCs. In 173 Cascade tanks, 147 tanks have WUAs and of these 124 WUAs have Managing Committees (MC). There is -a gap of 7 to 16 percent across independent and Cascade tanks

In cascade system, the tanks that are below 100 ac ayacut are not part of any WUA system. Formation of new WUAs needs to be initiated,the district wise tanks with less than 100 acres areas follow: District wise Tanks with Less than 100 Acres

For the building of WUA office, the sites have been identified in 34 tanks and for construction of building 2-4 estimations are received. Identification of sites remain static for 6 months, but there is progress in estimations preparation. The books have been supplied to all WUA and minutes book writing is initiated in the project where paraworkers have been identified. The para workers have been identified in 233 WUAs. In Srikakulam all women Para workers have been identified. The social audit board template prepared observed in 6 tanks. The system of rating of SOs is adopted to assess the performance of SOs on 5 key parameters. The district teams have already initiated SO rating. At present 4 SOs in Grade ‘A’, 3 in ‘B+’, 2 in ‘B’ and 7 in ‘C’ GradeThe socio-economic survey has been carried out in 55 tanks.

The socio-economic survey has been done to assess the sample farmers across the project districts. Total 54 tanks tanks have been covered across 12 districts. To assess the family socio-economic conditions various parameters like, age, family size, sex ratio, occupation, landholding, housing, education, household items, income etc has been considered and presented findings.In the sample, 90 per cent of the sample constitutes marginal and small farmers in control tanks, whereas it is 78 percent in project tanks. Medium and large farmers together constitute 7% and 21% in control and sample tanks respectively. The details are given in the annexure 1. The Tank Development Plans (TDP)/Cascade Development Plans (CDP) preparation is in progress and planning process is facilitated by CADA.

Subcomponent A.2: Rehabilitation and Modernization of SSCBI systems

A2 outline: This chapter of the report covers tracking of physical progress of civil works in all 12 project districts, assessment of identified tanks for longitudinal benefit tracking LBT, which will continue for 6 years or till completion of the project, sample tanks and suggestion in form action points, action to be taken and by whom the action is to be taken.

Progress of work: During the second half year period (July-December 2019), no. of works grounded is 186. As part of the concurrent monitoring for the reported period, tracking on progress of 441 works for which administrative approval is accorded carried out and physical progress of construction in all 186 grounded works is done.

The progress is tabulated as the number of tanks with achievement above 50%, 25-49%, 10%-24% and below 10%. Progress is more than 50% in 41 works that consists of 10 works of Kurnool, 9 works of Chittoore, 8 works of Prakasham, 6 works of Anantapur, 5 works of Kurnool and 3 works each of East Godavari and East Godavari districts. There are 46 works in the category of 25% to 49%, 37 works in the category of 10% to24% and 44 works in the category of below 10%. Tanks where physical progress is below 10%, even after almost completion of around one year from the date of agreement is a serious cause of concern. In progress below 10% to know whether the agency is able to continue and take decision on need to cancel the agreements is suggested. The District wise progress of all works grounded is tracked and the physical progress up to 31st December 2019 is assessed and is presented as Annexures.

Reasons for delay: Achievement of physical progress above 90% is limited to 9 works in the entire state. Reasons for the slow progress are assessed during external monitoring are; (a) Election of the state assembly, (b) Filling of water in tanks in monsoon 2020, (c) Review process by the Government to take a policy decision on execution of works, (d) non- receipt of technical sanction, and (e) Delay in payment of bills.

Action to be taken: it is an important aspect of the report and is presented in a tabular format as the last section of this concurrent monitoring report for the second half year period. Suggestions put forward include; (a) Examining possibility of cancelling agreement for works which are not grounded or physical progress is below 10%, (b) Expediting issue of technical sanction, (c) Calling of tenders (d) Obtaining work plan from construction agencies for early completion of the works, (e) Minimization of delay in payment to agencies, (f) Selection sluices and tube wells for measurement of water release, and (g) Ground verification of ayacut receiving designed irrigation before rehabilitation and modernization.

Component A3.

This component is an integral part of the overall implementation and different PGM groups have been formed in the project locations or process is initiated to strength the existing ones. So far 316 PGM groups formed. The state level PGM activity progress on reconnoitery survey completed 50%, and piezometers drilling site identifications completed 117 tanks. Drilling of piezometers site permissions and granting’s are in progress from Head office. Till now 201 permissions are granted from head office for each district. Around 316 PGM groups are already formed in tank levels in 76 tanks trainings have been completed. These PGM groups more in Srikakulam, Krishna and Prakasam districts, and less in Kurnool, Anantapur, Chittoor, Visakhapatnam, East and West Godavari districts respectively

Component -B1 Climate Smart Agriculture Production

Implementation of Agriculture interventions at ground level gradually picking, but progressing is sub optimal. Many districts also so far have not received the reimbursement against the committed expenditure, hence, are not showing interest to take up activities under APIIATP. Committed expenditure towards training and capacity building programs is also not yet released in majority of the districts. Department officials have expressed that the meagre amount of budget releases is the issue in the implementation of the agriculture interventions. Further, lack of dedicated staff at district level (District Agriculture Coordinator), transfers of district/Mandal level department staff, no orientation to newly transferred staff are some of the reasons for the slow implementation of APIIATP. Some district nodal officers have also expressed thatpoor or no follow up from the Commissionerate of Agriculture office, absence of dedicated team/staff for the project at Commissionerate level are also the reasons for slow progress under the project. The team has observed that department staff is busy handling their own regular department programs, especially the flagship program of present state government, the “RhytuBharosa’ program. Officials have expressed their inability to spare time for APPIIATP due to the tight schedule.

Activities under Training & Capacity Building are completed by Agri. &Horti. Departments. Tank level orientation programs are still under progress in some of the tanks in the districts.

Certified seed production (paddy crop variety - MTU1121) under APIIATP was taken up only in Vizianagaram district in 19 tank villages, with a cost of Rs. 8.24 lakhs. Farmers expressed satisfaction over the 5-6 more bags of yield they obtained with MTU 1121, compare to the earlier grown samba masuri (1001). Block demonstrations were taken up only in Vizianagaram, Kadapa and Chittoor districts in 2019. Due to lack of budget, other inputs of paddy cultivation for demonstration purpose were not given to the demonstrating farmers, hence, field visit/crop cutting experiment was not organized. However, farmers practiced green manuring and got benefited saving on urea. Green manure seeds were distributed only in Vizianagaram and Kurnool districts among all the districts. Seeds of Diancha and Sunhemp were distributed @ 75% subsidy to the farmers

The implementation of project interventions has yet tocommence, measurement of indicators such as crop yields, area increased /decreased (Hectare) under paddy, pulses (redgram), oilseeds (pulses) and vegetable (chilli) will be taken up only after the project work is executed in 2020-21 (kharif&rabi season). The household survey data indicate that the main crop grown in the project tank villages during kharif season in 2019 is paddy to a large extent under tank ayacut. In the tank, tail end and in the tank influence zone, where the tanks are small in size, there groundnut crop is grown under rain- fed conditions. Vegetables are also grown to a small extent under assured bore well irrigation condition. The average paddy yield obtained in the project areas; with-out any project interventions is 5.09 MT/Ha against the state average of 5.17MT/Ha. The average groundnut yield obtained in the project tank area is 1.10 Mt/Ha and chilli crop yield is 2.12 Mt/Ha. No significant difference or trend is noticed between the yield data collected at LBT households/ sample households and control households, with respect to various parameters related to agriculture/horticulture.

The data indicate that the project area farmers are aware of the benefits and technical know-how of proposed agri./horti. An intervention which would help in bringing the APIIATP a great success in coming years. The data of LBT/sample tank/control tank indicates that, the farmers in the project area already have past experience in seed production activity for the last 7-8 years, however the activity was not consistent over the years. Seed production by farmer in the project areas is given prime importance under APIIATP inorder to encourage crop and varietal diversification in the project area and thereby increase crop production.

Along with agriculture, the project also supported horticultural activities in the project districts. Promotion of climate resilient practices in horticultural activities will be the cross-cutting area in the overall intervention.BarringSrikakulam, Krishna and Kurnool districts, in rest of the districts, good progress was observed under the Horticulture sector in 2018-19. After the interventions taken up in 2018-19, no further progress was reported in 2019-20, except orientation training programs, due to non-release of earlier spent amount in 2018-19. Department of Horticulture is also facing severe

shortage of Horticulture Officers, more so in Nellore district where only 50% HO posts are filled against the actuals.

Based on the observations during the field visit and looking at the progress of the APIIATP as assessed upto the fourth quarter, Suggestions as recommendations for smooth implementation of the project.

1. The services of VillageAgri Asst. /Village Horti. Asst.are of great help in smooth implementation of the project at ground level. There is a need to orient VASs/VHAs on APIIATP.

2. One of the major reasons noticed for the slow progress in project implementation is delayed in budget release and releasing of less amount against the proposed. This need to be taken as priority.

3. Delay in transferring of input subsidy to a beneficiary under DBT is not grounding in true spirit. Department staff is also finding difficulty in mobilizing the beneficiaries as the project share will be transferred to beneficiary account only on a reimbursement basis. The Farmer is borrowing money from private lenders and investing in activities in anticipation of an immediate reimbursement from the project. To address the issue, it is suggested to keep some budget at the disposal of district level implementing agency, so that the reimbursement of bills will be done fast.

4. Poor coordination is noticed between the district level implementation team of Dept. of Agri./Horti. and Support Organizations (as noticed in Vizianagaram district). A bi-monthly review meeting for assessment of work progresses with line departments may be coordinated at district level Agri/horti department offices.

5. Coordination between department of Agri./Horti. and Irrigation department appears to be weak need focus.

6. Input distribution just for the sake of reaching the targets may be avoided. Before making the project investments, through examination of the land is required. Farmers may be suggested and facilitated to go for soil testing to find out the soil suitability for a particular crop while promoting crop diversification. Team visited ChinnaSankarlapudi village in East Godavari district and observed that the soils are highly saline and difficult to cultivate crops other than paddy. In such cases, crop diversification may be promoted only after the amelioration of soil fertility. 7. 8. The team has noticed that, ayacut farmers are not differentiated as head reach, middle reach, tail end and influence zone categories based on the location of their lands within the ayacut area. Such differentiation is required for the monitoring team for the sampling purposes during the impact assessment study. It will also help to understand the crops and cropping system dynamics in relation to water availability within the ayacut area. An authentic and scientific method of reach wise differentiation of ayacut lands may be explored to make the project assessment study more scientific.

9. Department staff has expressed difficulty in communication and delivery of project benefits in tank villages where the WUA is absent, especially in cascade tanks where the WUA/ Committee is absent. There appears a need to frame the guidelines on Water User Committee formation in cascade tanks and implementation of the guidelines at earliest possible.

10. Few district nodal officers have expressed difficulty in visiting the project sites, especially when the villages are far away from headquarters. They don’t have access to vehicles for local travel.

Component- B2 Climate Smart Aquaculture Production

The under this component activities are in planning phase. The detailed planning has been done on various activities and budget estimations are also done for the following activities.  Establishment of fresh water fish Brood banks  Upgrading and modernisation of fish seed farms  Establishment of captive seed nurseries  Construction of fish landing centres  Providing equipment for aqua labs  Supply of fishing and post-harvest fishing inputs

The trainings have been organized in three districts, Ananathapur, East Godavari and Vizianagaram.

Component- C Post-Harvest Management, Market and Agri-Business Promotion: The Tank Development Plans (TDP)/Cascade Development Plans (CDP) preparation is in progress and planning process is facilitated by CADA. AOs/HOs of respective areas are also participating in the planning process. Monitoring team has interacted with the FPO members, other farmers and department officials to understand the reasons for slow progress in the implementation of project activities. While interacting with FPO members and other farmers, the team has noticed that the farmers are aware of the benefits of the proposed interventions and are looking forward for the project implementation in their villages. Monitoring team has also noticed that the orientation programs conducted at Mandal level and village level have created good awareness to FPO members, other farmers on the project interventions and implementation modalities. Implementation team is now focusing on identifying the Infrastructure requirements at FPO level.

MANAGE,GoI has been identified as ABSO for providing consultancy services for supply and value chain analysis, direct linkages with FPOs and providing market linkages. Also obtained approval from World bank, whereas, clearance from Govt. of Andhra Pradesh is pending. Expected to obtain state government clearance in a month.

In 2019-20, target was fixed to impart training to 18 FPOs, covering 905 FPO farmers in post-harvest management, market and agribusiness promotion. Against the target, so far, 415 farmers in 10FPOs were imparted training on marketing.of agriculture produce District level workshop on modernization of existing markets in to e-markets involving buyers & sellers is completed in 12 districts. Agri. Marketing department is coordinating in mapping the existing marketing infrastructure like gowdowns, cold storage warehouse, etc. Exposure visits to 180 progressive farmers to model FPOs

within the state are completed in 10 districts. These exposure visits were completed by Dept. of Agriculture with the support of respective district level Support Organizations (SOs).CIG formation is in progress. Monitoring team has been told that the farmer groups (CIGs) once formed will be taken to exposure visits as per the need & requirement.

It is proposed to supply 32 secondary processing units to CIG farmers, at the total cost of 320Lakhs.Empanelment of suppliers of secondary processing units is in progress by Dept. of Agriculture.

It is proposed to take up 21 nos. of rural godowns with an expenditure of 630 lakhs in the state. Site for rural godowns is identified, design finalized and estimations are drawn and submitted for administrative sanctions in Vizianagaram, Srikakulam, East Godavari and West Godavari, Krishna, Srikakulam, Anantapuramu and Kurnool. Administrative approvals for the same is accorded and technical sanction is under process and estimates are under scrutiny. The entire activity is taken care by the Dept. of Agriculture. There are 177 FPOs existing in the area of 228 tanks out of 651 project tanks. The FPOs are formed different agencies such as  NABARD- 21  SERP - 93  ICRISAT - 1  Dept. of Agri - 9  Dept. of Horti - 53 Line departments are requested to verify the status of FPOs and categorize them under working active/normal/dormant and also the infrastructure created with the FPOs. In the year 2019-20, it is proposed to further strengthen 18 FPOs in 7 districts at a cost of 42 Lakhs.As of now, 18 FPOs were identified and planning for training and exposure visits is in progress. Due to the budget constraint the progress is at a slow pace. Monitoring Team has been told that the training and capacity building program for the FPOs is expected to be complete by March 2020.

Component- D The procurement of key organisations/ institutes has been completed. Support organisations (SO), External M&E agency, APCFSS for MIS & GIS development and all the organisations are on their rolls. Out of 12 districts, the APDs have been provided office space in 9 DPUs. The computers and printers are available in six (6) districts and rest of the districts are permitted to buy but because of delay due to administrative procedures, the remaining districts are not able to procure these items. In seven (7) districts, the DPU office is located at district head quarter whereas in five (5) districts office is located at other than district Headquarters. The Project Management Unit (PMU) has conducted trainings/workshop/exposure visits to the project staff. Total of project staff trained is 2500 members, till June ending. At state level, the MIS and GIS software is in usage.

Results Framework

PDO Indicators by Objectives / Outcomes

Farmers reached with agricultural assets or services

IN00707892

►Farmers reached with agricultural assets or services (Number, Corporate)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

200,000.00 Value 0.00 0.00 18240.00

Date 19-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2019 31-Oct-2025 Project is at preparatory stage and execution of works at the tank level is yet to commence. Measurement of Indicators will be taken up only after work is executed. PDO level indicators to be mapped during mid-term and end-line assessment. After intervention it will be reported

IN00707896

Farmers reached with agricultural assets or services - Female (Number, Corporate Supplement)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target 0.00 Value 2764.00 50,000.00 000 Project is at preparatory stage and execution of works at the tank level is yet to commence. Measurement of Indicators will be taken up only after work is executed. PDO level indicators to be mapped during mid-term and end-line assessment.

Productivity of specific crops increased

IN00707891

►Productivity of specific crops increased (Metric ton, Custom)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Date 19-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2019 31-Oct-2025

This indicator measures the increased crop productivity for paddy, red gram, groundnut and chili crops at Comments: farm level in metric ton per hectare.

Project is at preparatory stage and execution of works at the tank level is yet to commence. Measurement of Indicators will be taken up only after work is executed. PDO level indicators to be mapped during mid-term and end-line assessment. Productivity mapping can be done only after a cropping season / cycle is completed (2019 Kharif and Rabi)

IN00707895

a. Paddy (Metric ton, Custom Supplement)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 5.00 5.00 5.09 5.50

IN00707898

b. Groundnut (Metric ton, Custom Supplement)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 1.14 1.14 1.10 1.43

IN00707900

c. Chilli (Metric ton, Custom Supplement)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 2.37 2.12 2.96

Farmer's household income increased

IN00707893

►Farmer's income increased (Text, Custom)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value INR 15,722.00 18555.00 INR 19,653.00

Date 19-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2019 31-Oct-2025

This indicator will track the annual farm income of project beneficiaries. It measures how the income of the Comments: farmers evolves with project activities, compared to the income of farmers that do not benefit from project interventions (Household income increases in INR).

Project is at preparatory stage and execution of works at the tank level is yet to commence. Measurement of Indicators will be taken up only after work is executed. PDO level indicators to be mapped during mid-term and end-line assessment. Assessment of Income of the farmers from agricultural activities can be done only after a cropping season / cycle is completed (2020 Kharif and Rabi).

Water Productivity Increased (kg/m3)

IN00707894

►Water Productivity Increased (Kg/m3) (Text, Custom)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

as given for each crop in as given for each crop (as given for each Value (as given for each crop) baseline value in baseline value crop)

Date 19-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2019 31-Oct-2025

This indicator will measure the annual increase in water productivity at tank command areas; it is Comments: expressed ratio of agriculture production in Kg over water consumed (in m3).

The project has taken up rehabilitation and modernization of SSCBI system. In the first phase, rehabilitation and modernization of 346 tanks have been taken up. As works are in progress, baseline situation still prevails. Secondly, as first cropping cycle will be taken up during 2019,.water productivity assessment will be done only after completion of tank rehabilitation and end of cropping season.

IN00707897

a. Paddy (Surface water) (Text, Custom Breakdown)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 0.33 kg/m3 0.33 kg/m3 0.33 kg/m3 0.42 kg/m3

Date 19-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2019 31-Oct-2025

IN00707899

b. Paddy (Surface + Groundwater) (Text, Custom Supplement)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 0.37 kg/m3 0.37 kg/m3 0.37 kg/m3 0.50 kg/m3

IN00707901

c. Groundnut (Surface + Groundwater) (Text, Custom Supplement)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 0.28 kg/m3 0.28 kg/m3 0.28 kg/m3 0.35 kg/m3

IN00707902

d. Chilli (Surface + Groundwater) (Text, Custom Supplement)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 0.30 kg/m3 0.30 kg/m3 0.30 kg/m3 0.38 kg/m3

Intermediate Results Indicators by Components

Component A: Improving Irrigated Agriculture Efficiency

IN00707904

►Satisfaction rate related to WUAs performance (Percentage, Custom)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 17.00 17.00 48.23 70.00

Date 19-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2019 31-Oct-2025

This indicator will measure the satisfaction rate related to WUAs performance, due to project intervention. Comments: This will be measured annually after the mid-term of the project.

Activities are planned to be implemented through WUA but as project is in inception stage, associated of WUA is very limited. Further, to strengthen WUAs, project planned measures are yet to be executed. Hence, WUA satisfaction rating can only be done once involvement of WUA comeas to a stage and major part of the planned activities are executed.

IN00707907

►Area provided with new/improved irrigation or drainage services (Hectare(Ha), Corporate)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 75,908.00

Date 19-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2019 31-Oct-2025

This indicator measures the total area of land provided with irrigation and drainage services under the Comments: project, including in (i) the area provided with new irrigation and drainage services, and (ii) the area provided with improved irrigation and drainage services, expressed in hectare (ha).

IN00707912

Area provided with new irrigation or drainage services (Hectare(Ha), Corporate Breakdown)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 0.00 90,000.00

Date 19-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2019 31-Oct-2025

The project has taken up rehabilitation and modernization of SSCBI system. In the first phase, rehabilitation and modernization of 346 tanks have been taken up. As works are in progress, irrigation coverage remains same to that of baseline situation. Once works are completed, gap ayacut is expected to get reduced and designed ayacut will be covered under irrigation..

IN00707915

Area provided with improved irrigation or drainage services (Hectare(Ha), Corporate Breakdown)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 46,000 46,000.00 46,000.00 90,000.00

Date 19-Mar-002018 30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2019 31-Oct-2025

The project has taken up rehabilitation and modernization of SSCBI system. In the first phase, rehabilitation and modernization of 346 tanks have been taken up. As works are in progress, irrigation coverage remains same to that of baseline situation. Once works are completed, gap ayacut is expected to get reduced and designed ayacut will be covered under irrigation.

Component B: Promoting Climate Smart Agriculture Practices

IN00707903

►Area increased/decreased in the Tank Command under Paddy, Pulses, Oil seeds and Vegetables (Hectare(Ha), Custom)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Date 19-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2019 31-Oct-2025

This indicator will measure the area increased/decreased (Hectare) in the Tank Command under paddy, Comments: red gram, groundnut and chilies, measured separately for individual crops (in Metric ton / Hectare).

Project support system for agriculture promotion will commence from 2020 Kharif season. Hence this indicator will be measured only after the

cropping season is over (Kharif / Rabi)

IN00707908

a. Paddy (Hectare(Ha), Custom Breakdown)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 95,908.00 95,9.8.00 95,908.00 75,908.00

Date 19-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2019 31-Oct-2025

IN00707910

b. Red Gram (Hectare(Ha), Custom Breakdown)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 2,052.00 2052.00 2,052.00 5,552.00

Date 19-Mar-2018 28-Mar-2019 30-Jun-2019 31-Oct-2025

IN00707914

c. Groundnut (Hectare(Ha), Custom Breakdown)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 4,982.00 4982.00 4,982.00 8,482.00

Date 19-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2019 31-Oct-2025

IN00707917

d. Chilli (Hectare(Ha), Custom Breakdown)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 627.00 627.00 687.00 4,777.00

Date 19-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2019 31-Oct-2025

IN00707918

►Area under fishery increased (Ha EWSA) at Full Tank Level (Percentage, Custom)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 33.00 33.00 33.00 41.00

Date 19-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2019 31-Oct-2025

This indicator will measure net fish cultivation area increased in tank water reservoir areas (Effective Water Comments: Spread Area for fishing) in percentage.

Project support system for aquaculture promotion will commence from 2020 monsoon season. Hence this indicator will be measured only after the first harvest is completed.

After intervention the figures will be indicated, as of now baseline figures will be remain same.

IN00707919

►Increment in Fish Productivity in short seasonal tanks (Tones/year, Custom)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.53

Date 19-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2019 31-Oct-2025

Comments: This indicator will measure net fish productivity per effective water spread area (tones/year).

Project support system for aquaculture promotion will commence from 2020 monsoon season. Hence this indicator will be measured only after the first harvest is completed.

Component C: Post-harvest Management, Market and Agribusiness Promotion

IN00707905

►Number of Farmers Having Access to Infrastructural Facilities Created (Number, Custom)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Date 19-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2019 31-Oct-2025

This indicator will measure the number of farmers having access to post-harvest infrastructural facilities Comments: (Storage Structures and Low Energy Cool Chambers) created under the project.

Agricultural Infrastructural facilities are to be created after detail feasibility assessment. Once such infrastructures are created, based on the assessment, accessibility parameter can be measured.

IN00707909

a. Storage Structures (Number, Custom Breakdown)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 6,000.00

Date 19-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2019 31-Oct-2025

IN00707911

b. Low Energy cool Chambers (Number, Custom Breakdown)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,000.00

30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2020 31-Oct-2025

IN00707913

►Number of FPO activities financed through business plans (Number, Custom)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00

Date 19-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2019 31-Oct-2025

This indicator represents number of business plans for FPO activities prepared and supported under the Comments: project (in absolute number) from year 3 onwards.

FPO promotion and strengthening process is at the preliminary stage. It is expected that FPOs will come to a stage to take up business only after they reach to that stage. This indicator can be measured only after FPOs takes up certain business activities, based on their business plan.

IN00707916

►Number of women represented in WUA and FPO (Percentage, Custom)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 0.00 0.00 6.38 30.00

Date 19-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2019 31-Oct-2025

This indicator will measure the percentage of women represented in WUAs and FPOs formation, and Comments: active participation in decision making process.

WUA promotion process has been initaited and the process is expected to completed in coming months. Once, the overall process is completed, this indicator will be mapped.

Component D: Project Management and Capacity Building

IN00707906

►Beneficiary (of which 50 percent women) satisfaction rate with quality of services provided by the project (Percentage, Custom)

Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target

Value 0.00 0.00 48.25 80.00

Date 19-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Dec-2019 31-Oct-2025

This indicator measures the percentage of beneficiaries who expressed satisfaction with the quality of Comments: services provided by the project based on formal surveys (of which 50 percent should be women).

Delivery of project framed service has been initiated, specifically capacity building. Beneficiary satisfaction can be mapped only after certain category of inputs are rendered and benefit is occurred / not occurred at the beneficiary level.

Chapter -1 About the APIIAT Project - Coverage

1.1 Introduction

The Project Development Objective is “to enhance agricultural productivity, profitability and resilience to climate variability in selected tank systems of Andhra Pradesh”. The components of the projects are

Component A has three sub-components: A.1: Institutional Strengthening and Capacity Building of WUAs; A.2: Rehabilitation and Modernization of the SSCBI systems; A.3: Improving Water Productivity and Efficiency; Component B has two sub components B.1: Climate Smart Crop Production and Diversification; B.2: Climate Smart Aquaculture Production. Component C: Post-harvest Management, Market and Agribusiness Promotion

Component D: Project Management and Capacity Building

1.2 Geographical Coverage

The proposed project will be implemented over a period of 6 years, providing benefits to 0.2million farming families directly covering about 90,000 Ha of agriculture land in 1,200 tank command areas. The project will cover entire state12 districts (except Guntur), in the state with an intensive focus on agricultural development in four north-coastal districts of AP (Srikakulam, Vizianagaram, Visakhapatnam areasofEastGodavari district

1.3 Project Beneficiary

The project will have a number of beneficiaries in different categories, i.e., farmers, tenants, fishers etc., based on the scope of the project and framed activities. While, overall selection and involvement of beneficiaries will be based on the existing guidelines of the Government, in order to make the intervention inclusive and result oriented.

1.4. Methodology

The project covers several aspects: Institutional Strengthening and Capacity Building of Water Users Associations to manage the tank systems and groundwater sources, and to improve land and water productivity through promotion of sustainable agriculture. Taking the multi-disciplinary nature of the project into account, tools of different disciplines have been developed for data collection and for assessment of the project interventions. Thus, the external monitoring and evaluation agency comprises a team with multi-disciplinary expertise to avail in its approach to the task. The concurrent monitoring has been conducted by a team of multi-disciplinary experts from relevant disciplines.

To realize the objectives of the assignment and the tasks involved a combination of different data collection methods were used. An important method with socio-anthropological dimensions used is based on a participatory observation and assessment. 1.4.1 Selection of Households and sample The systematic Random procedure was followed in selecting the householdsinthe project and control tanks. Accordingly, 15 households were randomly selected from each of the selected project and control tanks. Thus, a total of640 households were selected from project tanks and 162 households from control tanks. Further, from selected households, due care was taken to include the total households in the ratio of 5:5:5 from head, middle and tail end reaches of the ayacut from selected tanks.

As per the M&E design, a sample of 60 tanks wassupposedtobecovered during the half yearly period but the team able to conducted study across 54 tanks and 6 tanks are not covered due to Corona Pandemic. The team not able to cover five (5) tanks in Vishakhapatnam district and one (1) tank in Srikakulam.. The details of the visited tanks have been given in annexure- 1

1.4.2 Collection of data Schedules were prepared for capturing the required information at tank, WUA and household levels for primary and secondary levels of data. The interview schedule was pre-tested in the field before the survey by duly including PMU. For furnishing WUA, Tank Schedules, the data was collected through using PRA techniques like transect walks, FGDs, perusal of records and discussions with key informants.

1.4.3 Method of collection Minimum one or two members of the external M&E team visited each selected tank and collected data for Tank, WUA schedules through interview method and also verified the relevant records. 1.4.4 Survey Team Separate 4 teams were recruited for household survey (investigators) i.e one team for 3 districts (each team consist of 4 members) for collecting primary data with respect to household schedules. 1.4.5 Limitations The sample selected for these categories are based on intelligent perceptions of Tank Reach rather than any well-defined demarcation. Clear-cut demarcations of Head, Middle and Tail are not available at tank level as it is under Minor Irrigation. The control tanks are not exactly similar to project tanks as they are dry / non-functional tanks due to occurrence of drought for several years; In some places Pucca Revenue/Irrigation Records are not made available for cross verification of field data. Some farmers are not keen to inform their income and value of their assets while collecting data from respondents of Longitudinal Benefit Tracking (LBT).

Component – A1 Chapter -2

Institutional Strengthening & Capacity Building of WUAs

As per the Andhra Pradesh Farmers Management of Irrigation Systems (APFMIS) Act, there shall be a Water Users Association for every water user’s area, delineated on a hydraulic basis and in case of minor irrigation system, the entire command area may, as far as possible form a single water user’s area.

The goal of strengthening of WUAs is to ensure efficient and effective management of water resources and addressing climate variability impacts on agriculture and allied sectors by water conservation and its judicious allocation, along with promoting climate resilient technologies and practices. This can be fulfilled only when the WUAs take over the primary responsibilities such as Tank system improvement and its management, implementation of sectoral activities with community participation.

Guiding Principles of Institutional Strengthening:

The project has clearly written guiding principles that every member of WUA has to work towards them. These are the project beliefs and values which guide the WUA for high performance decision making. The following are the guiding principles set by the project: Water User Association (WUA) shall mobilize its members to participate in the implementation of all project activities such as tank system development, joint azmoish for water tax finalization and collection, auditing of WUA books, corpus mobilization and finally assuming responsibility for O&M of tanks. Supported by a para worker and facilitated by the Support Organization, WUA will motivate all tank system stakeholders to take advantage of all sectoral activities, such as, efficient water use, including crop-water budgeting, water sharing, climate resilient Agriculture, Horticulture, Fisheries, and Agri-business.1

As part of an institutional strengthening process, so as to assume the responsibility of tank system development and its management by WUAs, systematic enhancement of WUA capacities is crucial. To increase the capacities of WUAs for effective governance and functioning, there are several key instruments designed such as at least one monthly meeting of the WUA managing committee where the members discuss the activities that are happening around tank including project measures like climate resilient crop planning, water budgeting, water management etc., The General body meeting once in six months where review of plans, approval of plans, water governance/ management related issues are discussed. Besides these, participation in Tank Development (TDP) /Cascade Development Plans (CDP), working with fisheries/ farmers’ cooperatives and encouraging women’s participation in the project activities are other instrumental elements towards strengthening WUAs.

1 Source: APIIATP Project Implementation Plan – Guiding Principles of Institutional Strengthening

2.1WUA strengthening and Formation of New WUAs/ Re-delineation of existing WUAs:

Total Tanks and WUAs: By the end of the reporting period (December 2019), across 12 districts, there are 652 tanks approved under 3 TACs (TAC1, TAC2, TAC3). While 323are Independent tanks, there are 329 tanks under the cascade system; almost 50% under Independent and cascade tank systems. All the independent tanks have more than 100 acres ayacut. About 47% of the tanks under cascade system (155 tanks) have below 100 acres ayacut and the rest 53% of the tanks have above 100 acres ayacut (174 tanks2). Out of 323Independent tanks, 298 tanks (93 %) have WUAs and of these, 278 tanks (93 %) have Managing Committees (MC) and the rest 20 WUAs doesn’t have MCs. The major reason for the absence of MCs is the local political environment. Though the members are identified still the MC is not constituted because there was no consensus on who would be the President and Vice President. This situation still exists in Kurnool, Prakasam, West Godavari and Vizianagaram Districts.

Out of 329Cascade tanks, with greater or equal to 100 acres ayacut,93 % have WUAs and of these 84 % have Managing Committees (MC). The reasons for absence of MC in cascade WUAs are the same as with the committees where Independent Tanks don’t constitute MCs.

Formation of New WUAs& Re-delineation of WUAs:Based on the available information, it is evident that there is a need for the formation of new WUAs. In the cascade system, the tanks that are below 100 ac ayacut are not part of any WUA system. Formation of new WUAs wherever qualifies, and bringing in tanks with below 100 ac ayacut into the WUA system would be easier for managing the project and the project interventions expected to be more effective.

The District teams (APDs) know the information about the requirement of Re-Delineation of WUAs/ formation of new WUAs and are ready to be part of the exercises. APDs said that the process has to be driven by Government personnel. Further, they also said that before the process begins, it may also require training of APDs, SO teams and Para workers on Re- delineation of WUAs/ formation of new WUAs. 2.2 Institutional Aspects in tanks with below 100 acres ayacut area:

Out of 652 approved tanks, there is no single Independent tank with less than 100 ac ayacut. And, there are about 156 tanks in cascades with less than 100 ac ayacut. The district wise number of such tanks are given in the table below. In absence of WUA for the tanks greater than 100 ac ayacut there is an arrangement made by DPUs to work with the ayacut farmers. As per this arrangement the DPU and SO teams work with key farmers from ayacut and village along with the village sarpanch to take the project interventions to ayacut farmers; these are not fixed members. And it is also to be noted that there is no mandate to these members to attend the meeting arranged by project personnel. These members are consulted to take any project related decisions in a meeting arranged in the village.

2 In Krishna District, there are only 10 tanks with greater or equal to 100 ac ayacut in TAC 1, TAC2, TAC3 together, as per Gazette. But, as per DPR 11 tanks are being considered now in APIIATP. Similarly, In Kadapa District, Peddullapally Tank in B.KodurMandalayacut is shown as 16 acres which has actually more than 100 acres ayacut.

Table 2.1: District wise tanks with less than 100 ac ayacut District No of tanks with below District No of tanks with below 100 100 ac ayacut ac ayacut Anantapur 13 Nellore 0 Chittoor 17 Prakasam 15 East Godavari 4 Srikakulam 34 Kadapa 5 Vizianagaram 31 Krishna 4 Visakhapatnam 14 Kurnool 10 West Godavari 9

For effective implementation of the project and to involve communities in the project it was suggested by the state to form cascade committees/ re-delineation of WUAs wherever necessary. It was reported that it was not initiated, as there was no clarity on how to proceed. The district teams are expecting guidelines on this. Further, the district teams are also expecting training on formation of the cascade committee to move forward with clarity. If any intervention has to be initiated in such tanks, the APDs expressed that in absence of a cascade committee or any formal committee from a project point of view, they would consider SHG or any other local community-based organisation which can take up the activity.

Sub Committees: The APFMIS act proposes to constitute four sub committees for each of the WUA to ensure the effective tank system improvement and its management with ayacutfarmers active participation. The four sub committees are namely; 1. Works sub-committee 2. Finance and Resources sub committee 3. Water management sub-committee and 4. Monitoring, Evaluation and Training sub-committee. The act suggests 4 members in each of the sub-committee where the convener of each subcommittee is a MC member and the rest are ayacut farmers.

The sub-committee formation is initiated in the districts but not in all. These sub-committees wherever formed are not yet assumed their responsibilities; they are in their infancy stage. A training of sub-committees/ its members is required to perform their responsibilities. The sub-committee status in the project villages visited by M&E teams is as follows

Table 2.2: Status of Sub committees in the tanks visited Sub District committees Sub committees Not Total WUA status Formed formed Result Anantapuram WUA 4 4 Chittoor NON-WUA WUA 1 (Not applicable) 1 East Godavari WUA 3 3 6 Kadapa NON-WUA WUA 3(Not applicable) 3 Krishna WUA 4 4 NON-WUA 2(Not applicable) 2 Kurnool WUA 2 2 Nellore WUA 4 4 Prakasam WUA 2 2 Srikakulam WUA 4 4 Visakhapatnam WUA 6 6 Vizianagaram WUA 6 6 West Godavari WUA 4 4 Total 21 27 48

2.3 Capacity Building of WUAs:

The Water User Association (WUA) and their Managing and sub-committees are inclusive and are key in project implementation. The capacity building of these stakeholders besides others is crucial. Training of these stakeholders would increase the capacity to perform their roles to achieve the project objectives and goals. To achieve this, a capacity building plan for all kinds of stakeholders involved in the project is necessary. The PMU has suggested certain training themes to DPUs to be delivered at respective Districts. Based on the number of project tanks and their status (whether WUAs have been constituted, MCs are set up…etc.,) the SO and DPUs planned their CB activities for the entire year with Quarterly breakup. These plans were submitted for approval and are approved. During the time of visit to Districts in the month of December 2019, the SO and DPU teams were planning for the training and orientation programmes for paraworkers, WUA and MC members. However, it was brought to the team notice later that the training programmes for paraworkers as well as other training programmes proposed for WUA members are initiated in the districts which are proposed for the year. There is no register observed for recording training programmes at WUA level. Along with the existing registers maintenance of a training programmes register is also recommended at the WUA level. This keeps a record of all the training programmes and members attended those programmes. The following are the training programmes with target group and duration approved for the year 2019-20 as part of Capacity Building of WUAs

Table 2.3: Key training programmes Sl. Training Programme Target group Duration Place No. 1 Paraworker roles and responsibilities Para-workers 2 District level 2 Preparation of Tank Development Plan/ WUA members 1 Village/ Cascade Development Plan Tank level 3 Awareness generation on WUA members 1 Village/ implementation of APIIATP activities Tank level 4 Roles and Responsibilities of WUA WUA members 1 Village/ Tank level

2.4 WUA Office Infrastructure:

To perform the WUA responsibilities effectively and to give them institutional identity, the project has proposed to support WUAs for construction of office buildings in the project villages. As per the guidelines for construction of office buildings and its design communicated to DPUs, the progress of creating Office Infrastructure is as follows in different districts as of December 2019. Table 2.4. Status of Office Building infrastructure

Of the 50 tanks the M&E teams have visited, the office building related process is in progress in 2 tanks of East Godavari and 1 each in Krishna Visakhapatnam districts. The major issues observed in the process of creating WUA office infrastructure are:

 No unanimity among MC members on location  Getting land conversion/ land ownership certificate from Revenue Department is taking time  Conflict with other infrastructure proposed in the same tank village  Estimations were sent back to districts from head office for re-estimations with latest SSR

There are no exclusive offices noticed either in rented or in own buildings to perform the WUA activities and to deliver the functions. Whenever there is a needfor space for WUA related meetings/ gathering, the members prefer either at the panchayat buildings or the president’s house.

2.5 WUA Records and Maintenance: Set of Books recommended at Record maintenance is a crucial and important activity of WUAs. It is a systematic recording of transactions, WUA level events, decisions, etc., which ensures transparency and  Minutes Book provides answers to many questions at any stage of the  Ayacut members (WUA) project.  Cash Book There are 9 different books recommended by the project,  Crop Extent & Water Tax printed centrally and sent to DPUs at District level. The  Register books were distributed during April and May 2019  Works Sanctioned Register months by Support Organisations(SO) to WUAs in the  Stock Register districts.  Visitor Book  Special Fees Collection In all the districts, the record maintenance is initiated except Kadapa. Depending on the capability and initiative Water flow & Canal Gauge of SO team members and APDs, there is a variation in record managementRegister from district to district. While there is a district like Vizianagaram where only 1 register is being maintained in Krishna district there are 7 types of records maintained. The overall status of record maintenance is given in the table below. Table 2.5. Record maintenance status Sl. District Number Names of the record No. of Records 1 Ananthapuram Minutes, Visitors, Crop Extent & Water tax register (only 4 partial, ayacutdars list is written, crop extent and tax amount is not updated) 2 East Godavari Minutes, Visitors, WUA and other members, Sanctions register, Crop Extent & Water tax, register (only partial, 5 ayacutdars list is written, crop extent and tax amount is not updated) 3 Krishna Minutes, Ayacutdars book, Crop extent, Cash book, Visitors 7 book, WUA and other members, sanctions register 4 Kadapa - No books are being maintained 5 Kurnool 4 Minutes, Visitors, Crop Extent & Water tax register (only

partial, ayacutdars list is written, crop extent and tax amount is not updated) 6 Nellore Minutes, WUA other members register, in Musunur big tank 2 Sanctions register was also observed 7 Srikakulam 3 Minutes, Crop extent and Water tax, Visitors book 8 Visakhapatnam 2 2 books - Minutes, crops extent and water tax 9 Vizianagaram 1 Minutes book 10 West Godavari crop extent and water tax, WUA and other members, 3 Minutes

While on 3 books (Minutes book, Ayacut members book and Visitors book) doesn’t require special training the other books prescribed require training for both SO team and para workers. As part of the paraworkers training programme conducted on roles and responsibilities, the overview of books was given to the paraworkers which the paraworkers felt did not equip them enough to write books on their own. They may need hand-holding support till the time they write books on their own. There are other books (ex: water flow and canal gauge recording, cash book) for which the training programmes may be organised as and when the need arises. In addition to the existing books, the books such as Training register and PGM registers may be required at WUA level to keep the track of project interventions / activities. Further, as part of strengthening WUAs, the sub committees are also formed. The sub committees are also supposed to meet periodically to discuss respective project interventions. To record these discussions sub- committee meeting registers at WUA are also required to maintain. 2.6 Para workers:

To support the WUAs in their functions, a ‘para-worker’ support system is provided. Clear guidelines for identification of para workers are circulated among DPUs. The para worker identification was carried out in two phases till reporting period. Where the M & E teams have visited, except in north coastal districts the paraworkers exist in all the tanks with WUAs. It was found that paraworkersexist in Kadapa district for the tanks without WUA. The paraworkers are supporting SO teams and MCs in communicating project related information to WUA members, records maintenance, mobilising farmers for meetings and planning exercises being conducted in villages. As reported in the previous report, based on the current experience, finding para-workers for the next set of projects would be a difficult task as per the criteria set for identification of para-worker. Some relaxation may be given in educational qualification; instead of 10th standard candidates an educated person who can read and write with agriculture as the primary work may be selected. Again, as reported previously, there are two main issues observed related to paraworker payments, i.e., amount of payment made which is considered to be very nominal by them and secondly, delay in payment of their honorarium.

Out of 62 tanks the M & E teams have visited, 50 are project tanks. The status of para workers in these 50 tanks (District wise) is given in the table below. Table 2.6. Para-workers status in the project villages visited

Paraworker District WUA status Exists Anantapuram WUA 4 Chittoor WUA 1 East godavari WUA 4 NON-WUA 2 Kadapa WUA 1 Krishna WUA 4 Kurnool WUA 2 Nellore WUA 4 Prakasam WUA 2 Srikakulam WUA 2 Visakhapatnam WUA 3 Vizianagaram WUA 4 West Godavari WUA 4 TOTAL 37 Percent (%) 74.0

There are important issues to bring to notice with regard to paraworker’s acceptance by communities. In most of the districts, the identified para workers are not allowed for taking responsibility. The situation has aroused due to the changing political environment at the local level. The para-workers are also not daring to get involved in project activities with fear that hostile situations may happen. A decision on whether or not to continue with these paraworkers has to be taken at the earliest. 2.7 Social Audit and Public Disclosure:

Setting up/ Displaying Social Audit Boards (SAB) is one of the important aspects of transparency measures under the project. Beside transparency, the social audit boards help in bringing awareness among the community which may in turn lead to effectiveness of the project. The social audit boards are being set up in Ananthapur, Nellore and West Godavari districts and yet to be set up in remaining districts. However, wherever the boards are set up needs to be updated. Besides SAB, as part of awareness generation among communities, wall writings were taken up in project villages at initial stage of the project. In Vizianagaram, the wall writings were completed in 5 projects. The status of social audit boards set up in sample project villages visited is as follows

Table 2.7. Social Audit boards status in the project villages visited Social Audit Board District Available Not Observed Total Anantapuram 4 4 Chittoor 2 2 East Godavari 6 6 Kadapa 4 4 Krishna 4 4 Kurnool 4 4 Nellore 1 3 4 Prakasam 2 2 Srikakulam 4 4 Visakhapatnam 6 6 Vizianagaram 6 6 West Godavari 1 3 4 Total 6 44 50 Percent (%) 12.0 88.0 100.0

2.8 Water Tax & Corpus Collection:

The project envisages that the WUA has to conduct joint azmoish along with agriculture, water resources and revenue department to assess the cropping area under the tank. Accordingly, tax will be levied and collected from individual farmers. The major responsibility of tax collection is with the Revenue department. There is no event of joint azmoish is observed or reported in the field during the reporting period or agriculture season prior to the visit. The involvement of WUA in tax collection is also not reported in any of the project villages. In all the districts (except in East Godavari), the staff felt that collection of water tax details from the revenue department is a tiresome job. There were several requests (formal in few cases) and visits to the revenue department that were turned out as failures. Besides information gathering, getting WUAs’ share of water tax/ plough back is also not happening/ not observed in any district during the year. The staff also expressed that the process of getting WUAs’ share is also complicated and needs to be simplified. Water tax collection and plough back are crucial steps in empowering WUAs. There must be an action plan towards initiating the process. And this action plan must be monitored at all levels periodically. Unless the farmers pay the tax and get their share as plough back, the WUAsmay not get the required resources to discharge their functions. 2.9 Support Organisations:

The NGOs who have relevant experience, local presence and who have proven experience in Community Mobilisation, Agriculture Development and Trainings etc., were identified and selected as Support Organisations to facilitate the implementation of the project interventions through Water User Associations (WUA).

The key roles of SOs are to facilitate project implementation process, coordination with line departments who are part of project implementation, community mobilisation and creating awareness at community level, support in building capacities of communities / WUAs, preparing project completion reports and its submission. By the end of the reporting period, there are 16 number of SOssupporting the project activities, except in Kadapa district. In all the districts the Support Organisations are working with their full teams in the districts/ projects the team has visited. OrganisingWUA/ MC meetings, books updation, hand holding para-workers, basic data collection, sub-committee formation, preparatory work for TDP/ CDP and facilitating the same are the works taken up by the SO teams till date. In all the districts during the visits, the SO teams were found to be active in their roles. However, it was observed that the staff are different than those mentioned earlier in the agreement (ex: Nellore) due to staff turnover. The system of rating of SOs is adopted to assess the performance of SOs which in turn will increase the effectiveness of the project implementation. There are several indicators based on the functions/ role of SOs for rating. These indicators are divided into 5 categories, namely Institutional Sustainability, Technical Sustainability, Climate Smart Agriculture, Financial Sustainability, NGO Administration and Monitoring & Evaluation. The rating frequency is on a monthly basis. As all the project interventions are not introduced at the project villages, certain parameters are excluded from the rating chart as these are not relevant at this point of time. Thus, the rating is reduced to eligible parameters only. The following is the summary of SO rating for the period Oct to Dec 2019 submitted to PMU by respective districts. Table 2.8. Summary of SO rating for the period Oct-Dec 2019

Score Score (%) & Grade

S. District SO October November December No Gr Oct Nov Dec Score Grade Score Grade Score ade Srikakulam 1 BREDS 47 47 47 68 B+ 68 B+ 68 B+ 2 YCB 46 51 50 67 B+ 74 A 72 A Anantapur 3 JCRDS 28 31 47 41 C 45 C 68 B+ 4 PRERANA 29 30 27 42 C 43 C 39 C Nellore 5 ASYARD 30 22 20 43 C 32 C 29 C Prakasam 6 EFFORT 44 45 49 64 B+ 65 B+ 71 A 7 SARDS 44 45 49 64 B+ 65 B+ 71 A Kurnool 8 SYA 35 35 37 51 B 51 B 54 B East Godavri 9 VMSAS(ASDS) 38 38 38 55 B 55 B 55 B West Godvari 10 SERVICE 27 27 30 39 C 39 C 43 C Krishna 11 Ramky Foundation 30 31 32 43 C 45 C 46 C Chittoor 12 RIPE 20 24 26 29 C 35 C 38 C Vizg 13 SVDS 28 26 31 41 C 38 C 45 C 14 VGSSP 26 29 31 38 C 42 C 45 C Vizianagram 15 IRPWA 47 46 43 68 B+ 67 B+ 62 B+ 16 RHGBMSS 49 49 50 71 A 71 A 72 A

The above table reveals that by the end of December 2019, there are 4 SOs in Grade ‘A’, 3 in ‘B+’, 2 in ‘B’ and 7 in ‘C’ Grade. The SOs in ‘B’ and ‘C’ gradesare continuous to be in the same grade for the last 3 months while few others have improved their performance. The SO orgsnied broadly 4 types of trainings,  Para workers’ functions Roles and Responsibilities  Tank/Cascade level workshop on preparation of CDP/TDP  Awareness generation on Implementation of APIIATP project activities  Roles and Responsibilities of WUAs

The district wise and SO training details are as follows

Table 2.8A. APIIATP - SO WISE PROGRESS TOTAL (In Batches) T A No. of members Attended M F T batches 1 Anantapuramu JCRDS 55 54 3382 202 3584 98 4 Prakasam SARDS 47 45 2718 657 3375 96 2 Kurnool SYA 48 39 2416 307 2723 81 6 Srikakulam YCB 13 10 764 134 898 77 7 Srikakulam BREDS 13 9 624 115 739 69 14 Nellore PRERANA 70 46 2227 371 2598 66 5 Prakasam EFFORT 45 29 1678 497 2175 64 9 SVDS 34 20 1340 91 1431 59 Vishakapatnam 8 VGSSP 37 18 1074 59 1133 49 3 Krishna Ramky 51 20 1195 161 1356 39 12 West G SERVICE 39 13 624 238 862 33 13 Chittoor Ripe 37 11 435 215 650 30 15 Nellore ASYARD 44 10 461 75 536 23 16 East Godavari VMSAS 49 10 642 167 809 20 10 RHGBMSS 25 4 290 30 320 16 Vizianagaram 11 IRPWA 27 3 180 25 205 11 17 Kadapa 26 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 660 341 20050 3344 23394 52 Note; As there is no SO in Kadapa, no trainings are organized. Source; MIS PMU 2.10 WUA Self-Rating

The project envisages that there are about 15 types of key activities to be monitored by WUA on their own. The key elements of self-monitoring include:  Participation and Dialogue,  Performance,  Self-management and  Innovation & Technology Adoption.

This event has to be exercised on quarterly basis and this exercise has to be facilitated by paraworkers and SO team members. The rating of projects the M & E teams have visited are consolidated in the table below.

Table 2.9. Summary of WUA self-rating for the period Oct-Dec 2019 Not Done/ Not District B Grade C Grade Applicable Total Result Anantapuram 3 1 4 Chittoor 2 2 East godavari 4 2 6 Kadapa 4 4 Krishna 3 1 4 Kurnool 1 1 2 4 Nellore 4 4 Prakasam 2 2 Srikakulam 3 1 4 Visakhapatnam 1 5 6 Vizianagaram 6 6 West godavari 4 4 Total 23 19 8 50 Percentage(%) 55 45

In Kadapa, no rating exercise was carried out as there is no Support Organisation (SO) to facilitate. The exercise was not conducted (Not applicable) where there is no WUA. Out of 50 tanks visited 23 WUAs (55%) are in B grade and 19 tanks (45%) are in C grade by the end of Dec 2019. The impact of WUA rating exercise has not seen uniformity on WUAs across districts. A training of SO teams and para-workers who are the facilitators of the WUA self-rating exercises would result in good impact on WUA functioning. Had they been trained on this tool and process, they could have facilitated more efficiently. The training of Para workers and SO team on ‘facilitating WUA self-rating’ could be one of the priority items. A poster to facilitate WUA self-rating could be not only of much use but it will take the message to the community more efficiently. It was observed that not all the WUAs are recording the proceedings of WUA self-rating exercise in their books. It has to be ensured that these exercises must be recorded in WUA books.

2.11 Cascade Development Plans & Tank Development Plans:

Cascade Development plan is one of the important activities of the project implementation. This is also one of the means of strengthening WUAs where the members of it participate to restore the traditional irrigation tanks which are connected. The Tank Development Plans (TDP) are just initiated in the project. As part of TDP/CDP, PMU has organised training of DPU teams, SOs and WUA members on Tank Development Planning (TDP) process. There were 4 training programmes planned to organise, one each in each region/ cluster. Two training programmes, one for Krishna, East Godavari and West Godavari partners and the other one for Kadapa, Kurnool, Ananthapur district partners were organised. Participatory methodologies, Participatory methods for collecting information, delineation of tank command area is key content of the training. The trainings planned in other districts were not able to organize due to pre and post-election situations. The process of TDP/ CDP was initiated in the project districts during the reporting period. The TDP/ CDP process is being carried out for 5-6 days in each of the project villages. This entire process involves collection of socio economic, cropping pattern, land use, groundwater use, tank irrigation systems, issues related to tank development, marketing information etc., The PRA exercise is one of the key processes observed in the entire activity where the villagers had scope for collective participation to discuss their tank development plans. Social mapping and Resource mapping exercises were found common in all the TDP/ CDP processes across villages. Of the two PRA exercises, Resource mapping was found to be interesting for all as this facilitated the discussion on issues related to tank development and appropriate interventions. The personnel from line departments also participated in most of the districts. The following is the status of CDP/ TDP exercises in the villages the M &E teams visited. Table 2.10. Summary of CDP/ TDP exercises in the visited villages

Documentation Field Exercises District Done Done Progress Submitted

Anantapur 4 3 3

Chittoor

East godavari 4 4

Kadapa

Krishna 4 4

Kurnool 4 4

Nellore

Prakasam 2 2

Documentation Field Exercises District Done Done Progress Submitted

Srikakulam 3 1 2 1

Visakhapatnam 5 1 4 1

Vizianagaram

West godavari 2 2 1

TOTAL 28 2 25 6

2.13 Analysis of WUA Data

There were 62 WUAs surveyed during the reporting period. Of these 62 tanks 50 are Project tanks and the rest 12 are non-project (control) tanks. Out of 62 tanks 54 tanks have WUAs and the rest 8 tanks don't have WUAs (non-WUA tanks). Of the 8 tanks which doesn’t have WUAs 6 belongs to the project and the rest 2 tanks are control tanks. The details are presented in the following table. Table 2.11. Summary of tanks visited

Total WUA status District Control Project Result Chittoor 1 1 Kadapa 1 3 4 NON-WUA Kurnool 1 2 3 NON-WUA Sub Total 2 6 8 WUA Anantapuram 1 4 5 Chittoor 1 1 2 East godavari 1 6 7 Kadapa 1 1 Krishna 1 4 5 Kurnool 2 2 Nellore 1 4 5 Prakasam 1 2 3 Srikakulam 1 4 5 Visakhapatnam 1 6 7

Total WUA status District Control Project Result Vizianagaram 1 6 7 West godavari 1 4 5 WUA Sub Total 10 44 54 Total 12 50 62

Note: The Social expert covered two sample tanks extra during the study 2.13.1 Ayacutdars:

At every WUA level, as part of book keeping a WUA has to maintain a set of books. Ayacut members register is one of the prescribed registers which gives authentic information about ayacutdars and the extent. It is not fully updated in most of the tanks visited. Based on the data from WUA registers, information available with APDs and in APIIATP website for 50 project tanks, it was observed that while there are about 75% of ayacutdars are male and the rest 25% are female ayacutdars. In case of control tanks, data for sex wise land holding is not available. The details of ayacutdars by district are given in annexure 2.1 2.13.2 Tank Uses and Users: The major uses of tanks are irrigation and groundwater recharge. Apart from these, the tanks are also being used for other purposes such as drinking water, cattle grazing, domestic purpose etc., Keeping aside the irrigation and groundwater users, of the 62 tanks visited, the majority of the tanks are being used for cattle grazing (40%) followed by Fisheries (35%). The dependency on the tanks by villagers is a bit different from percent of tank uses; about 76% of the population/ households depend on tanks for cattle grazing followed by GP/Municipality (11%). The details are given in annexure 2.2 While comparing Control and Project tanks, cattle grazing appears to be a popular use in project tanks. This is followed by Fishery, washer men and drinking water (by Grama Panchayat). In control tanks fishery activity is observed in 50% of tanks followed by cattle grazing in 42% of the tanks.

Table 2.12. Various uses of tanks and its users

CONTROL PROJECT Total

No of No of No of % of % Use Users Users Users Tanks Tanks Tanks uses users Domestic 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 GP / 0 2 2600 2 2600 2 11 Muncipality Fishermen 6 155 26 1962 32 2117 35 9 Washermen 1 20 12 873 13 893 14 4 cattle gazers 5 1300 32 16895 37 18195 40 76

CONTROL PROJECT Total

No of No of No of % of % Use Users Users Users Tanks Tanks Tanks uses users Potters 0 3 18 3 18 3 0 Brick making 0 1 10 1 10 1 0 Others 0 3 3 3 3 3 0 TOTAL 1475 80 22362 92 23837 100 100

2.13.3 Presence of Lascar and Neeruganti:

The Neeruganti and Lascar system is observed in some of the tanks visited. The district wise details are given in annexure 2.3 and 2.4 Table 2.13.Laskar availability in tanks

% of % of Number of Number of tanks No of tanks Project/Control tanks Lascar tanks Lascar Lascar Tanks Lascar Available Not Available Not Available Available CONTROL 12 1 11 8 92 Total PROJECT Total 50 4 46 8 92 Grand Total 62 5 57 8 92

Table 2.14.Neeruganti availability in tanks

Number of Number of % of tanks tanks % of tanks tanks Total Neeruganti Total Project/Control Neeruganti Neeruganti Neeruganti Tanks Not % Not Available Available Availabale Availabale CONTROL Total 3 9 12 25 75 100 PROJECT Total 19 31 50 38 62 100 Grand Total 22 40 62

It is observed that the lascar system exists in 8% of both control and project tanks. Regarding the Neeruganti system, from the data, in 25% of control tanks the neeruganti system exists whereas it is 38% in project tanks. It is reported that in 58% of project tanks, the neeruganti is paid by WUAs, whereas the farmers are paying in 32% of the tanks. In control tanks, in 67% of the tanks the farmers are paying neerugantis’. While the cash mode of payment to neeruganti is observed as 63% in project tanks it is 100% in control tanks. In about 37% of the tanks the neerugantis are paid in the form of cash.

2.13.4 Irrigation to Tail End Farmers:

Whenever water is available sufficiently for the season, it is observed that in only 40% of the tanks, the tail end farmers are receiving irrigation. In about 38% of cases the tail end farmers are receiving irrigation in project tanks whereas it is 50% in case of control tanks. It is observed that the sluices are closed permanently in 17% and 2% of control and project tanks respectively. Lack of maintenance of field channels is the main reason for the tail enders not getting water. The lack of maintenance is also linked to series of droughts and also for the reason the operation and maintenance (O&M) is absent in the tanks. The district wise details are given in annexure 2.5 Table 2.15. Water to tail end farmers

Number Number % of of tanks % of of tanks Number of tanks – – Tail tanks – % of tanks – – Tail tanks – Tail End Project End Total Tail End Sluices Total End Sluices farmers farmers Tanks farmers closed % /Control farmers closed not not receiving permanently receiving permanently receiving receiving water water water water CONTROL 6 4 2 12 50 33 17 100 PROJECT 19 30 1 50 38 60 2 100 Grand 25 34 3 62 40 55 5 100 Total

Table 2.16. Water to tail end farmers WUA and Non-WUA comparison

Number of Number of % of tanks – % of tanks – tanks – Tail tanks – Tail Number of Tail End Tail End % of tanks – End farmers End farmers tanks –Sluices farmers farmers not Sluices WUA Non receiving not receiving closed Total receiving receiving closed WUA water water permanently Tanks water water permanently Total % 4 1 1 6 67 17 17 100 NON-WUA WUA 15 29 44 34 66 0 100

Grand Total 19 30 1 50 38 60 2 100

Within the project tanks, the tanks with WUAs when compared to Non-WUA tanks it is observed that in 67% of non WUA tanks the tail ender farmers are receiving water. Also, it can be observed from the above table that all the tanks where the sluices are closed permanently are non-WUA tanks.

2.13.5 Drought & Shortfall years:

About 71% of the tanks suffered drought and shortfall in the last five years. About 35% of tanks suffered 2 shortfalls in the last five years followed by 5 and 4 shortfalls in 15% of tanks. The table given below explains the drought scenario in the project areas as well as control tanks.

Table 2.17 Number of shortfalls in control and project tanks

No Project/Control% 1 Yr 2 Yrs 3 Yrs 4 Yrs 5 Yrs Shortfalls Total

CONTROL 17 33 0 33 8 8 100

PROJECT 2 36 2 10 16 34 100

Total 5 35 2 15 15 29 100

It was observed that the majority of the project tanks (36%) had 2 shortfalls in the last 5 years. It was noticed that about 8% and 34% of tanks in Control and Project areas respectively did not suffer any shortfalls. Details in annexure 2.6 2.13.6 Assessment and Allocation of Water:

It was reported that in about 32% of cases there is informal understanding among farmers with allocation to head reach farmers only. While in about 44% of cases there is no assessment and allocation made. In about 5% cases this situation has not arisen as the sluices closed permanently. And, in 2% of tanks it was reported that the WUA has formal understanding and record. The table below shows the picture of allocation of water in both control and project tanks.

Table 2.18Assessment and allocation of water in control and project tanks

Informal Informal understanding No understanding among farmers WUA has a Control / assessment among farmers with rotation formal Sluices Project or allocation with allocation to (warabandi) of understanding Closed (% of tanks) made only head reach ayacut and record Permanently Total Tanks 25 42 17 0 17 100 Control Project 48 30 18 2 2 100

Grand Total 44 32 18 2 5 100

When compared to control and project Tanks, it was observed that ‘No assessment water allocation’ is more in project tanks; when it is 25% in control tanks, it is 48% in project Tanks. It noticed that informal understanding among head reach farmers is more in control tank farmers (42%) compared to project tanks (30%). It is also noticeable that in 2% of the tanks, WUA has formal understanding and record in project areas whereas it is not observed in control tanks.

Table 2.19Assessment and allocation of water with in project tanks (% of tanks)

Informal Informal understanding understanding No among farmers among farmers WUA has a assessment with allocation with rotation formal Sluices or allocation to only head (warabandi) of understanding Closed made reach ayacut and record Permanently Total Tanks 67 17 0 0 17 100 NON-WUA WUA 45 32 20 2 0 100

Total 48 30 18 2 2 100

Within the project group, when Non WUA and WUA tanks are compared, in about 67% of Non WUA tanks no assessment and allocation is made whereas it is 45% in the WUA tanks group. Informal understanding among head reach farmers is more (32%) in WUA tanks compared to non- WUA tanks (17%). Various scenarios existing in the project tanks can be observed in the table above. District wise details are enclosed in annexure 2.7 2.13.7 Crop planning before season:

It was reported that, in about 52% of cases there is no crop planning made for any agriculture seasons (both the control and project tanks). However, it was reported that in about 24% of cases an informal understanding on wet crops only exists whereas it is 18% in the case of informal understanding on wet and ID crops. Further, in about 5% of cases, there is no scope for allocation of tank water as the sluices are closed permanently. Table 2.20Crop planning before season

% of tanks

Informal Informal Informal WUA has a No crop understanding understanding understanding formal Sluices planning on only wet on wet and ID on ID crops understanding closed Grand Project/Control made crops crops only and record permanently Total CONTROL 25 25 33 0 0 17 100 Total PROJECT Total 50 24 14 0 2 2 100

Grand Total 52 24 18 0 2 5 100

When control and project Tanks are compared, no crop planning is observed in 50% of project tanks while it is 25% in control tanks. Informal understanding on both ID and wet crops is observed more in control tanks (33%) compared to project tanks (14%). Informal understanding on only wet crops is almost the same(25% & 24%) in both control and project tanks. District wise details are given in Annexure 2.8 Table 2.21Crop planning before season - WUA and Non WUA comparison

% of tanks

Informal Informal Informal WUA has a No crop understanding understanding understanding formal Sluices WUA planning on only wet on wet and ID on ID crops understanding closed Grand status made crops crops only and record permanently Total NON- WUA 83 0 0 0 0 17 100 WUA 55 27 16 0 2 0 100 TOTAL 58 24 14 0 2 2 100

Within the project group, when Non WUA and WUA tanks are compared, in about 83% of Non WUA tanks no crop planning is observed whereas it is 55% in WUA tanks. There is about 27% of WUA tanks there is informal understanding on only wet crops which is not observed in non WUA tanks. Similarly, in about 16% of the WUA tanks informal understanding wet and ID crops is observed while it is not there in non-WUA tanks. Details can be seen in the above table. 2.13.8 Water schedule and release:

In about 50% of the tanks there is no scheduling is noticed while it is almost in equal (48%) number of tanks informal scheduling among farmers is happening. when project and control tanks are compared, in control tanks, no schedule and informal schedule for water release is observed 42% each. It is 50% and 48% respectively in project tanks. This doesn’t apply for 7% of tanks where the sluices are closed permanently. District wise details are given in annexure 2.9 Table 2.22Water schedule - Control and Project tanks comparison (% of tanks)

No Informal WUA has a Scheduling Sluices scheduling scheduling plan scheduling plan adhered to closed Grand Project/Control plan among farmers and record at least 75% permanently Total 42 42 0 0 17 100 CONTROL Total PROJECT Total 50 48 0 0 2 100

Grand Total 48 47 0 0 5 100

Within the project tanks when Non WUA and WUA tanks are compared, no scheduling of water release is noticed as 67% in non WUA tanks whereas it is 48% in tanks with WUA. Informal scheduling among farmers is observed more (52% of the tanks) in WUA tanks. Table 2.23Water schedule - WUA and Non WUA tanks comparison

% of tanks

Informal WUA has a No scheduling scheduling Scheduling Sluices scheduling plan among plan and adhered to closed WUA Status plan farmers record at least 75% permanently Grand Total

NON-WUA 67 17 0 0 17 100

WUA 48 52 0 0 0 100

TOTAL 50 48 0 0 2 100

2.13.9 Mode of water distribution:

It was reported that in about 52% of tanks the water distribution is continuous without rotation followed by continuous with rotation (34%). Regulated water supply (daytime) with rotation and without rotation is reported as 5% each. And, the rest of the tanks have no sluices (sluices closed permanently).

Table 2.24Mode of water distribution - control and project tanks comparison % of tanks regulated Regulated Project/Control (only (only continuous continuous daytime) daytime) Sluices without with without with closed Grand rotation rotation rotation rotation permanently Total 58 25 0 0 17 100 CONTROL PROJECT 50 36 6 6 2 100

TOTAL 52 34 5 5 5 100

When control and project tanks are compared, it is observed that Continuous without rotation is predominant in both control (58%) and in project (50%) tanks. The distribution of water ‘continuous with rotation’ is observed as 25% and 36% in control and project tanks. District wise details are given in annexure 2.10

Table 2.25 Mode of water distribution - WUA and non WUA tanks comparison

% of tanks

regulated Regulated WUA status (only (only continuous continuous daytime) daytime) Sluices without with without with closed Grand rotation rotation rotation rotation permanently Total 17 67 0 0 17 100 NON-WUA WUA 48 39 7 7 0 100

TOTAL 44 42 6 6 2 100

Within the project tanks, the distribution of water without rotation is 17% and 48% in Non WUA and WUA tanks respectively. Continuous without rotation is observed in 67% of the non WUA tanks while it is 39% in tanks with WUA. 2.13.10 Meetings:

General body meetings: The general body meetings are observed in 10 WUAs from 4 districts (Ananthapuram, East Godavari, Krishna and Chittor) which is 20% of tanks. It was reported that the general body meetings are held in the project villages but the proceedings not recorded.

Managing Committee meetings: Managing Committee (MC) meetings are being organized in the project villages where the M&E teams visited. The average attendance of MC members found to be varied from district to district which is in the range of 2 to 6. The average attendance of MC members in Anantapur, East Godavari and Kurnool is 2, in Nellore, Srikakulam and Vizianagaram districts it is 3, in West Godavari district it is observed as 4 and in Visakhapatnam and Krishna districts the average attendance is observed as 6 which is maximum.

The things that get the most attention at the meetings in order of preference are (highest to lowest) works, planning, maintenance of works, collection of water charges, functioning of sub committees, and WUA accounts. 2.14 Others:

2.14.1 Disputes with regard to Water Distribution:

Nowhere the disputes related to water distribution are reported except in one case in Krishna District which was resolved by WUA.

2.14.2 Adoption of Water saving technologies:

It was observed that the water saving technologies are adopted in project villages in non- command area/ rain fed areas. Except in one tank in Krishna District the adoption of water saving technologies is not reported anywhere in the projects visited.

2.15 Key observation & Suggestions  It was observed that not all the WUAs are recording the proceedings of WUA self- rating exercise in their books. It has to be ensured that these exercises must be recorded in WUA books.

 As part of strengthening the WUAs, preparation of an action plan towards initiating the water tax collection process and implementation of the same is very important. And this action plan must be monitored at all levels periodically.

 In most of the districts, the identified para workers are not allowed for taking responsibility, due to local political environment. The paraworkers are also not daring to get involved in project activities due to fear factor.. A decision may be taken about the continuation of existing Paraworkers, This kind of situation prevailed especially Nellore, Srikakulam, East Godavari, Vizianagaram, Krishna districts.

 In addition to the existing books, the books such as Training register and PGM registers may be required at WUA level to keep the track of project interventions, activities.

 As part of strengthening WUAs, the sub committees are also formed. The sub committees are also supposed to meet periodically to discuss respective project interventions. To record these discussions subcommittee meeting registers at WUA are also required to maintain.  In 60% of the project tanks, the tail end farmers are getting water. One of the situations is because of lack of maintenance of field channels for years. Operation and maintenance plans have to be put in place to improve the situation.

 Social audit boards have to be set up on priority basis in all the project villages where the plans for carrying out physical works are approved/ sanctioned.

Component – A2

Chapter – 3 Rehabilitation and Modernization of SSCBI System

3.1 Introduction

Sub-Component on Rehabilitation and Modernization of SSCBI systems (with total provision of US$133.5 million, Rs 868 Crores is to be being spentin all 12 districts under APIIATP(World Bank). This subcomponent has the objective to modernize the irrigation infrastructure of about 1,000 tank systems located in 178 cascades (485 tanks) and 515 independent tanks by adopting a competitive approach to financing the investments. Total area to be covered is about 90,000 ha. Important works to be executed by Water Resources Department (WRD) through its irrigation Divisions include (i) modernizing control structures (diversion weirs), supply channels, and cross-regulation structures; (ii) de-silting feeder and supply channels; (iii) strengthening and upgrading tank bunds, earthen dams, spillways, distribution canals, field channels, and drainage line treatment within the cascade; (iv) installing flow measurement devices in selected irrigation canal/field channel, (v) using modern quality-testing devices to determine soil compaction and the quality and durability of concrete structure. Focus of the report is on the process of execution of different items/ components of works for which contracts are signed with contractors. Before formulating the report, the engineering expert has studied the activities taken up after signing of agreement between the Government and the World Bank as well as before signing the agreement. All observations and suggestions put forward are aimed at timely completion of the works needed for rehabilitation of independent tanks and tank cascades for with assured quality.

This report is outcome of the external monitoring taken up for APIIATP for the period (July- December 2020). In the approved methodology for External Monitoring, there are 24 LBT tanks and 24 sample tanks. Status of activities in these LBT tanks and sample tanks are discussed. District wise progress of works in different tanks where some civil construction activities are undertaken is presented in tables. Actions to be taken for accelerating the progress of civil works are presented at the end of this chapter.

3.2. Progress of Civil works in independent tanks and tank cascades 3.2.1 No. of works grounded by the end of December 2019 A Number of works grounded till the end of first half yearly period, i.e., end of June 2019 is 179. During six months period i.e. from July to December 2019, some more works are grounded in Nellore and Prakasham district. Thus, total no. of works grounded in 12 APIIATP project district has gone up to 186 (Table 4.1).

3.2.2 Progress of civil works during current half yearly monitoring period Progresses of civil works till 31st December 2019 for each of 12 districts are monitored. It is found that out of 186 works grounded around March 2019, progress above 50% has been achieved in 38tanks(Table-1).

3.2.3 Process of construction The process followed in the construction of concrete works, earth work, turfing, and revetment was assessed duringthe monitoring. Dismantling of old structures and preparation of foundation level was found to be done properly (Fig-1). Preparation of concrete mix, laying of concrete, compaction of concrete was done (Fig-2 and Fig-3)

Figure 1 Photo sowing layout and compacted base for construction of Sluice in Ura tank of West Godavari district

Figure 2 Photo shows laying of concrete with proper mix and compaction in Ura tank in West Godavari district to make it desirable quality

Figure 3 Photo of shuttering and laying of concrete in Ura tank in West Godavari district 3.2.4 Reasons for slow progress Some valid reasons for slow progress as per field assessment are:

 During the elections for the state assembly, there was impact of code of conduct. Works are not carried out for about three months from the date of announcement on dates of election and effective date of application of code of conduct till completion of the election process.  Onset of Kharif season, resulting into irrigation from tanks and filling up of tanks with water that obviously caused interruption in work execution.  Formation of new Government headed by a new Chief Minister. This Government made a review about the execution of works under the sub-component of rehabilitation and modernization of SSCBI system to take certain policy decisions. Works were not carried out till such policy decision is communicated to the tendering authority and the DPDs.  Government policy regarding cost of sand and its collection was changed  Because of all of the reasons and constraints on the availability of finance at state level, there was deferral in payment of bills which has further resulted in slowing down of the progress of civil works.  Technical sanctions are not issued for many works, even though administrative approvals are accorded.

Table 3.1 District wise number of works grounded and physical progress above 50%, 25%-49%, 10%-24% and below 10% 2Sl. District No. of No. of No. of No. of No. of No Works works in works in works in works in grounded which which which which progress progress is progress is progress is is above 25% to 10% to below 10 % 50% by 49% by 24% by by 31st 31st 31st 31st December December December December 1 Ananthpur 12 6 3 1 2 2 Chittore 14 9 5 Nil Nil 3 East Godavari 12 3 5 Nil 4 4 Kadapa 3 Nil 2 1 Nil 5 Krishna 17 Nil 2 15 Nil 6 Kurnool 19 5 14 Nil Nil 7 Nellore 33 10 8 9 6 8 Prakasam 24 8 7 5 4 9 Srikakulum 5 Nil 2 Nil 3 10 Vishakhapatanam 20 Nil 4 Nil 16 11 Viziyanagaram 17 Nil 8 3 6 12 West Godavari 10 3 1 3 3 Total works 186 44 61 37 44

From the table above, it is seen that achievement of progress is above 50 % in 44 works. Few of these works are expected to be completed within March 2020 or within the initial agreement period. There will be need for giving time extension for the rest of the works. In the category 25% to 49%, the progress is hampered due to the need of acceptance and approval of deviations those have been identified during work execution at site and other reasons mentioned in subsequent sections. 3.2.5 State and district wise analysis on progress of works Critical analysis of physical progress in 12 project districts is made to present state wise and district wise picture of progress in different category brackets viz. above 50%, 25-49% and below 25%.

3.2.5.1 State level analysis

Out of186 tanks in 12 districts, 44 tanks have progress more than 50% covering 7 districts, 61 tanks have progress between 25% to 49% covering all 12 districts and 81 tanks with dismal progress of below 24%. (Fig.). Percentage of tanks with progress more than 50% is 24 percent (44 works) , 24% to 49% is 33 percent (61 works) and below 25% is 43% (37 works). Thus, the progress in the state after end of 2019 after almost one year of commence of work executions can to be said to be very good. In the year 2020, most of the constraints like election, review of policy by new State Government etc will not be there. Hence collective effort by all concerned with work execution may be taken to improve the level of performance/progress in the state.

3.2.5.2 District level analysis

Out of 12 districts, 2 districts namely Chittore, Nellore and Ananathapurare able to complete the work greater than 50 percent, in the grounded tanks. The progress in these three districts are good mainly because, these districts have less rainfall and the working days available during January to December 2019 is more. This indicates good performance in these two districts.

In 4 districts, namely Kurnool, East Godavari, West Godavari andPrakasham, there are some tanks where the physical progress is more than 50%. In Kurnool there are no tanks with progress less than 25% which is depicted in the graph as no red colour is seen. The performance of Kurnol district with 19 tanks is good. The reason for this achievement is found to be the mobilisation of work force in these tanks by the construction agencies. Also 2 districts are in the less rainfall zone except East Godavari and West Godavari.

In the remaining 5 districts namely Kadapa, Srikakulam, Viziyanagaram, Visakhpatanam and Krishna district the progress is not greater than 50% in even single tank except Kadapa. These districts are in north eastern zone and tribal area which are in comparatively high rainfall zone. The work is not even carried out after June till December in many tanks. Due to these constraints and other reasons like state elections, confusion regarding cost of sand rates to be revised, contractors unwilling to work etc.

3.2.5.3 Cascade/Tank level analysis

Data on physical progress for all cascades/tanks where works are in progress are tracked. Tank rehabilitation and modernization is carried by awarding works to construction agencies through proper tendering process. The list of works as tendered and awarded to construction agencies consists of two categories viz. (i) tank cascades and (ii) independent tanks. The physical progress of works is monitored. The progress is tabulated in 4 categories such as (a) above 50%,(b) 25 to 49%, (c) 10% to 24% and below 10%. Some of the works which have reached progress up to 80% and above are likely to be completed with physical progress reaching 100%. Works in the two categories 25 to 49%, (c) 10% to 24% may pick up progress in the year 2000. PMU should be concerned for those works where progress is below 10% and in many cases like 2%, 5% and direct the DPUs to critically review by calling representatives of construction agencies. If the tendering authority after review comes to the conclusion that the works cannot pick up progress in 2020, then these works may need to be retendered by following due process of cancellation of agreement made almost 10 months back particularly for works having physical progress below 10%. The cascade or independent tank wise physical progress up to end of December 2019 for all 12 project districts are given in annexure 4.1 to 4.12.

3.2.6 Sand related issue

The Present Government has changed the policy on procurement of sand for construction activities in the state. While the DPRs as well as estimates were formulated, the cost of sand was taken as Rs.90. 00. A revised rate based on the new policy is Rs.510.00 as was reported by one DEE Visakhapatnam district. Implication on the total cost due to the hike in cost of sand consequent to policy revision is an issue. An analysis was made and calculation for 20 works of Visakhapatnam district is given as Annexure-4.13 for illustration.

3.3. Assessment in LBT Tanks

As per the approved methodology, 24 tanks are selected for longitudinal benefit tracking (LBT) as sample where improvements taking place in irrigation service will be assessed from the beneficiary household. The sample of household is already selected. Concurrent monitoring made for these tanks covered collection of status as whether works under subcomponent rehabilitation and modernization of CBSSI system has been undertaken and if undertaken, then what works are carried out. Assessment made with a time line as 31st December 2019 is presented in this section. Singanmala and Y.T.Cherevu tanks are selected in Anantapur district. Singanmala tank in Anantpur district In this tank, the achievement of progress of civil works is 75%. Main works related to modernization is construction of concrete distributary canals. The following Fig-13 to fig 16, modernization activities are elucidated with pictures on the condition before, during and after completion of civil works as part of modernization of the tank system.

Work has not been initiated in the LBT tank namely Y.T.Cherevu tank. This tank is one of the tanks included in Mamuduru MI tank, cascade 02 in Mamaduru (Village) in Gooty (Mandal) in Ananthapuramu district. Veeraka Nellore Big Tank Nalla and VenkatayaGariPalli tank are selected as LBT tanks in Chittore district. Civil works are not commenced in these two tanks GollavanniCheruvu and MutyalammaCheruvu tanks are selected as LBT tanks in East Godavari districts. Civil works are not commenced in these two tanks. Chenampalli andNarasimhaPuram tanks are selected as LBT tanks in Kadapa district. Civil works are not commenced in these two tanks. Peddha Tank and Borragudem Tank are selected as LBT tanks in Krishna district. In Peddha tank civil works are not commenced where as in Borragudem construction work is in progress.

Figure 13 View of distributary canal in Singanmala tank (LBT) in Anatpur district before modernization

Figure 14 View of distributary of Singanmala tank (LBT(during construction

Figure 15 View of concreting in distributary canal of Singanmala tank (LBT) in Anantpur district

Figure 16 Post modernization photo of distributary canal in Singanmalatank(LBT) in Anantpur district

Figure 17 Surplus weir under construction in Rajupallem tank (LBT) in Prakasham district The sample tanks are selected as LBT tanks in Kurnool district. In VavilaPerurCheruvu the physical progress is 70% whereas works are not commenced in Gangiraddy Pr. Cheruvu. Rajupallem tank (fig-17) and Kondepi tank are selected as LBT tanks in Prakasham district. Works are commenced in both the tanks. Physical Progress is 50% in Rajupallem tank and 10% in Kondepi tank. In Pedda tank and Singanna tank are LBT tanks in Srikakulum district. Works are not commenced in both the tanks. For Pedda tank tenders are to be invited Similigooda tank and Dattapucheruvu tank are LBT tanks in Visakahapatanam district. Works are not commenced in both the tanks. Kirandal reservoir are LBT tanks in Viziyanagaram district works are not commenced VenkatadhriCheruvu and GollavanniCheruvu are LBT tanks in West Godavari district. Works are not commenced in both the tanks. Kothapalli and Ananthasagaram Tank are selected as LBT tanks in Nellore district. Physical progress of works in Ananthasagaram tank is 13% whereas works are not commenced in Kathapalli tank. .Physical progress of civil works in LBT tanks where works are commenced is given in fig. 18

Figure 18 Physical progress of civil works in LBT tanks in the State

3.4. Assessment in Sample tanks Peddha tank in Krishna district is a sample tank photoof is given (Fig-19). In this tank, sluices are properly working. Construction works under APIIATP has not yet commenced. For tracking the crop yield in Kharif 2020, arrangement should be made in consultation with the WUAand other stakeholders.

Uracherevu tank (Fig-20) is a sample tank in Prakasham district. Surplus weir has been constructed. Length of this structure is 50 meters. Tank bund strengthening work has also been taken up in Ura tank. Tank bund strengthening in Ura tank (Fig-21) in PrakashamdistrictPrakasham district. In Kesavraju tank(Fig-22) in Prakasham district work has not yet commenced. (Fig-22)

3.5 Monitoring of Environmental and Social Safeguards Management in component A-2

Nearly 65 percent of the tanks to be developed under APIIATP have been surveyed, DPRs prepared and approved for implementation. Bid documents prepared for execution of works on rehabilitation and modernization contains EMP templates. Field assessment made during external monitoring revealed that an additional 1 percent bank guarantee is taken by the DPD/Executive Engineer against compliance with EMF. The social safeguards for this project are largely related to: the inclusive approach adopted by the project; any likely encroachments in tank bed area (if there is any); and the benefit-sharing mechanism adopted by the project.

Figure 19 View of Peddha tank ( Sample) in Krishna district

Figure 20 Surplus weir during construction in Uracherevu tank (Sample) Prakasham district

Figure 21 View of tank bund strengthening in Ura tank (sample) in Prakasham district

Figure 22 View of tank Kesavraju tank (Sample) in Prakasham district Environment management Plans under preparation in most of the districts covers the following points.  Project details  Key issues related to cascade/tank  Components of works as per the bid document

 Activities in pre-construction stage and environmental mitigation measures  Potential environmental impact and mitigation measures Some important mitigation measures, public safety and occupational health and safety are mentioned below  The area should be kept free from water logging  Passage ways, walk ways, ramps should be kept free from materials, scraps and obstruction  Measures for accidental spill of oil and lubricants  Disposal and waste water disposal  On completion of works, all temporary structures may be cleared away, all rubbish disposed, excreta and disposal pits and trenches be filled and effectively sealed off and the whole site will be in good condition before handing over the site by the contractor.

Implementation responsibility, frequency of monitoring and monitoring responsibility is provided in the Environment Management framework. As per this framework implementation of environment activities is the responsibility of the contractor except identification of site for disposal of silt and permission for tree cutting for which implementation responsibility is conferred with the DPU/Engineer in charge. Following Environment management plans prepared by the agency concerned and submitted to to DPUs were verified.

 EMP for Malludora tank (Independent), East Laksmipuram village, Yelleswaram mandal, East Godavari district prepared by by SIRI Constructions.  EMP for Perumala tank (Independent), Lingampathy village, Yelleswaram mandal, East Godavari district prepared by SIRI Constructions.  EMP for Kotha Tank Cascade No 5 in Kuppili Village in Etcherla Mandal in Srikakulam district prepared by Sri G.V.Ramanaidu.

It is observed that there is need to modify the EMPs to cover all environmental parameters which are covered by the concerned guidelines of World Bank. For Example; a) The EMP should describe about the disposal of construction debris and state that it is not done in on farmland, water courses etc. resulting in blocking natural drainage. b) The EMP should include statement that compliance with national Act on child labour and minimum wage Act c) The EMP should state that first aid and medical support at labour camps and hygiene is ensured by proper waste disposal etc. d) The EMP should incorporate that silt from tank bed is not removed and hence there is environmental concern on account of silt frm tank bed or irrigation channels, feeder channels. e) The EMP should contain information on closing of canals during cropping season when irrigation is required. If the canal is closed during the cropping season when irrigation is required, then it has been done after consultation.

f) The EMP should state that proper monitoring of debris disposal was under taken and the debris disposal has not led to any environmental consequences. g) The EMP should make a mention that there was no complain received by DPU regarding adverse environmental impact due to civil construction in the tank/tank cascde.

It is suggested that DPUs may be given instruction to prepare Quarterly environmental monitoring/compliance reports for all quarters after the construction works has been commenced incorporating proper description/information on environmental concerns some which are described above.

3.6. Actions to be taken Issues pertaining to execution of rehabilitation and modernization of tank systems are identified and actions to be taken are presented in table-3

Table 3.2 Issues and suggested action to be taken for expediting execution of reahbilitation and modernization work

Sl. Issue Actions suggested By whom actions are to be taken No 1. Agencies have signed If the period of agreement SPD may give generalized agreements and have viz.12 months, 16 months instructions to all DPDs. The not started work at site. if already over, the tendering authority may examine Not grounded. agreements may be whether the agency is capable to terminated/cancelled take up the work and if they are satisfied that work cannot be initiated under the contract made, then action for cancellation may be initiated. 2 Tanks in which works Critical review may be From PMU. Specific instructions are not carried out after taken up by the tendering may be given whether to monsoon till December authority cancel/terminate the works warded 2019 and the physical after obtaining feedback from DPUs progress is below 10% 4 Technical sanction Out of 441 works Concerned DPDs and SEs take accorded administrative prompt action to issue technical approval, technical sanction. sanction is not issued in Letter may be issued from PMU many works giving dead line 5 Calling Tenders Wherever the bid DPD/SE documents are ready, tenders may be called 6 Expediting progress of Obtaining a construction DPD/DEE/AEE works plan/bar chart when different components will be completed by agency 7 Undue delay in payment When the physical DPD/DEE/AEE progress is achieved,

Sl. Issue Actions suggested By whom actions are to be taken No running bills/part bills be prepared 8 Reducing time lag Required action at the SPD/DPD between between level of different officers finalization of bill and concerned with CFMS for uploading in CFMS which facilitation support may be provided by PMU 9 Construction of Cut- In all tanks, where DPD/DEE/AEE Throat Flumes (CTF) progress is above 50 % CTFs should be constructed 10 Selection of Sluices for Sluices may be selected AEE/SO/WUA/ PGM groups water release and their command areas measurement in CTF be realistically assessed. with following category of crops and sources of irrigation.

A. Only Paddy with surface water B. Only paddy with surface water and ground water C. Groundnut with surface water and ground water D. Chilly with surface water and ground water 11 Water measurement Wherever CTFs are SO/AEE/WUA through CTF constructed, water flow measurement may be initiated. 12 Measurement of water Taking advice from Ground water Department/ So/ pumped from wells Ground water department, PGM Groups/ WUA having command area water release data to be with paddy recorded 13 Measurement of water Taking advice from Ground water Department/ So/ pumped from wells Ground water department, PGM Groups/ WUA having command water release data to be area with Groundnut recorded and Chilly 14 Area actually irrigated Ground verification as per AEE/WUA/SO and other as per before rehabilitation and the procedure of irrigation procedure of verification by modernization department be conducted Government where the progress is above 50%

3.7 Action to be taken suggested in the 1st half yearly report

Table 3.3:In the 1st Half yearly report certain actions are suggested. Few of them are summerised below.

Sl. Issue Actions suggested By whom actions No are to be taken

1 Cascade Development SOs and Line departments should SO/DPD plan and Tank collect all possible data. DPD may call Development Plan monthly meetings for reviewing the progress of CDP/TDP

2 Deviation of quantity EE/DPD should prepare deviation EE/DPD and SE in different items as statements and get them approved for per the estimate different on-going works

3 Manpower at Contractors should deploy adequate JEE/AEE/DEE construction site in number of Masons, skilled labourers many tanks is less and unskilled labourers to speed up leading slow progress construction activities in the tanks

4 Crop Plans Crop plans are required for planning SO/Agriculture measurement of water productivity. It Department/WUA should be prepared by WUA/SO/Agriculture

3.8. Change in Key Indicators For every half yearly report, status of key indicators is compiled by obtaining feedback from District Project Units. The status at the end of 2ndhalf yearly period is presented in table below.

Table 3.4: Key indicators status

Name of Findings Base line End line Status as on outcome 31stDecember indicator 2019 Reduction in At end of December 19, Target upto June 90000 ha Not reported by Gap ayacut reduction of gap 2019 is nil DPDs ayacuthas not been reported by the DPDs. Increase of Measurement of water Paddy Paddy No change. Same Water release has not been taken surface water 0.33 surface water as base line productivity. up by the concerned kg/cum 0.42 kg/cum JE/AE/AEE Surface + ground Surface + water- 0.37 ground water- Ground nut 0.50 Surface + ground Ground nut water-0.28 Surface + Chilly ground water-

Name of Findings Base line End line Status as on outcome 31stDecember indicator 2019 Surface + ground 0.35 water-0.30 Red gram Surface + ground water- 0.30

Area provided Assessment has not been 0 90000 ha 0 with made tank wise by AEE new/improved irrigation or drainage services Area provided Assessment has not been 40000 ha 90000ha 40000 ha with improved made tank wise by AEE irrigation or drainage services

COMPONENT - A3

Chpater.4 Improving Water Productivity and Efficiency

4.1 Introduction:

The objective of this sub component A3 is to support in achieving greater irrigation coverage in the tank command are in terms of area coverage by minimizing the gap ayacut. Conjunctive use of surface area water and ground water will be coordinated with crop planning and water budgeting and water sharing will be encouraged through implementing participatory groundwater management. It will be helpful to irrigate more acers in the tank command area, directly benefitting other water users or farmers.

The main aim of this PGM activity is not only improving the water efficiency and productivity but also to promote conjunctive use of both surface water and groundwater in the tank command areas and its zone of influence. Objectively, it looks at maximizing irrigation coverage and minimizing the gap ayacut during deficient rainfall along with promoting water use efficiency. As per the information, the project districts are now having 316 PGM groups and formation of new groups is also in process.

As an external Monitoring and Evaluation, experts’ team of CTRAN have visited the districts of Srikakulam, Vizianagaram, Visakhapatnam, East Godavari, West Godavari, Krishna, Kurnool, Prakasam, and Anantapur from July to December 2019 as a part of quarterly monitoring.

4.2 State Level PGM Activity Implementation Progress:

Year 2019-2020 planned with allotted budget of Rs 2,20,00,000/- under PGM activity. Till now the sanctioned budget is only Rs 83,28,693/- (37.85%) remaining budget of Rs 1,36,71,307 (62.15%) is due from head office to project districts. In this connection, 4th Quarter PGM activities were planned to be implemented as per the overall project framework. Based on the budget, piezometers drilling sites are 309, but for only 117 sites, technical sanctions have been approved from head office remaining 192 sites need to get approvals from head office. This process is in progress between district offices and head office. For this drilling of piezometer sites, each district submitted quotations and get approval as per below mentioned table No 5.1.

Table 4.1: State Level Progress onPGM Activity

The total number of project tanks is 1000 in 12 districts. These project tanks are high in number (142) in Nellore and less number (47) in East Godavari districts respectively. Out of these 1000 tanks, approved tanks are 651 based on reconnoitery surveys and Geophysical surveys completed statewide. The main reason for delay on approval is due to drilling points changed from one place to another. Still, some relocation and resurveys are in progress in state level.

Around 316 PGM groups are already formed at tank level, remaining groups’ formation and training on PGM implementations are in progress at district levels. These PGM groups are more in Srikakulam, Krishna and Prakasam districts, and less in Kurnool, Anantapuram, Chittoor, Visakhapatnam, East and West Godavari districts. The main reason for less groups formation in these districts is due to unavailability of bore well within the ayacut zone area. If more bore wells available within the ayacut zone area, chances to form more groups. And also, departmental guidelines were changed on this PGM activity state wide more often. Some districts have formed a lesser number of PGM groups because, the APD team worked initially on formation of PGM groups at only the tanks where technical sanction have been issued. For example, in Kurnool, till December technical sanction has been given to only 4 tanks out of 46 tanks. The lesser number of PGM groups formation is not as an indicator for APD performance. At the end of December 2019, trainings for PGM groups are completed 65% state level out of 116 programme planned, 76 trainings are completed.

Drilling of piezometers points is completed only 7.69% namely in Srikakulam district 5 points Prakasam district 2 points and Chittoor district 2 points respectively. Remaining points, drilling works are in progress at state level.

4.3 Training/ Awareness programs for PGM Groups:

These training programs on participatory groundwater management (PGM) and it is imparted to group members to create basic awareness on how to achieve objectives of A3 Component. Under this component sub topics covered like

 Zone of influence delineation  Hydrological monitoring  Jalachakram  How to function and strengthen PGM

The trainings have been conducted at tank level, in each training event about 80 – 100 participants have been involved. For each training 19-20 thousand rupees have been sanctioned. The key resource persons for the training are Geologists, Agriculture offices, NGO representative and PGM experts. Most of the trainings are in participatory mode. The trainings have been imparted by developing material at district level by the APDs and NGOs, but there are no standard training modules used for the training. All the APD – PGMs are keen on modules for training. The PMU needs to work out the plan to conduct a workshop to develop modules. During the trainings, the following topics have been covered.  Ground water estimation,  Crop plans,  Crop water requirement,  Crop water budgeting,  Water sharing  New bore wells usage, and  Conjunctive use of surface and groundwater etc. to create an additional area for irrigation to promote crop diversification in Rabi crops from December 2019 onwards. Now the members have basic awareness and understanding on the importance of the PGM objective of this project. However, the project has planned to develop their capacity further in terms of water management, crop water budgeting and water sharing.

PHM data collection equipment supply, PHM data display, workshops of crop water budgeting, field days (at the end of hydrological year) and groundwater sharing between WUAs willing, farmers willing, sharing completions for additional farmers benefit and also additional area acres proposed for irrigation during Kharif & Rabi season need to be implemented at district levels

The training module on awareness programs to WUA group members and PGM group members for the year 2019-20 has been planned and 76 trainings were conducted by Dept

Groundwater & Water Audit Department and Water Resource officers and APDs in all project district levels so far. Till the end of Dec 2019, 316 PGM groups are formed at the state level. Now, the members are supposed to have basic awareness and understanding on the importance of PGM. However, the project has planned to develop their capacity further in terms of water management, crop water budgeting and water sharing. In Kadapa district these trainings are not yet started due to no SO in the district.

4.4 Project Tanks visited:

As per the Monitoring and Evaluation framework of the project, CTRAN experts’ team carried out field visit from 19th to 28th December 2019 in the districts of Srikakulam, Vizianagaram, Visakhapatnam, East Godavari, West Godavari, Krishna, Kurnool, Prakasam, and Anantapur for September to December 2019. Quarterly monitoring report purpose, line department staff and WUA formers have visited tank villages for both independent and cascade tank villages in project districts on implementing the project activities.

In the field trip, the CTRAN team members interacted with WUA group members and departmental staff farmers etc. The daily newspaper cuttings and brochure are presented:

Visakhapatnam – District

Interaction with WUA Group Members – Srikakulam District

Brochure on Ground water Interaction WUA group in Visakhapatnam

4.5 Findings of Willing/ Non-Willing Water Sharing’s Between Adjacent Farmers:

The concept of conjunctive use and water sharing supports in achieving greater productivity and in minimizing gap ayacut. The water shortage led to tension between bore well and non- bore well owning farmers, even cultivation of water to intensive crops continued.

It is observed in each district that groundwater buying’s / selling’s occurred between adjacent farmers for their crop water needs (those who share their bore well excess water) during that cropping season for last crop year 2019-20. As per the data from the farmers through field visits, 96.9% farmers are not willing to share their bore well water, only 3.1% farmers are willing to sell their excess water for others for a last crop year. This situation observed is that, the bore well pumping reaches its peak levels due to little or no rainfall. The farmers need motivation and awareness from the project staff. The groundwater selling / buying price in general per hour / per acre is approximately between Rs 500 to 600/. This situation depends on Kharif /Rabi/ seasons for different crops.

4.6 Suggestions

 Promotion of the Community Bore wells. Farmers are keen to have it  Modules need to be developed at the state level for trainings and circulated  A workshop need to be organized for all APDPGMs to share experience and cross learnings.

The Sub-component B1

Chapter–5 Climate Smart Crop Production and Diversification

5.0 Introduction

The Sub-component B1 aims at increasing farm productivity by reducing ‘input’ costs and enhancing ‘output’ from farming systems on a sustainable basis in irrigated command areas of the project as well as the rain-fed areas in the project villages and cascades. The focused objectives under the sub-component are;

(i) Enhance resilience of agriculture production system through technological options; (ii) Improve productivity; (iii) Reduce the cost of production by bringing input efficiency; (iv) Develop capacity of farmers in production technologies; and (v) Improve farmers’ income.

Sampling details of household survey In the year 2019, though there were low rainfall events in the beginning up to the third week of July, however, the rainfall situation improved from the last week of July and continued till October month that boosted agriculture production.

Seed production by farmers in the project areas is given prime importance under APIIATP inorder to encourage crop and varietal diversification and thereby increase crop production. The SOs have already initiated the process of identification of seed villages and seed farmers in selected project districts. The work is in progress as expected. Seed production activity is expected to initiate once project budget is released to districts. Further, the project area farmers are also aware of many improved crop production practices such as chemical seed treatment, green manuring, soil application of Nutrient Solubilizing Bacteria/biofertilizers, participating in the technology demonstration, Pulses intercropping in crops such as groundnut, cotton, maize, foxtail millet (korra), pearl millet (bajra) etc., Redgram planting on field bunds, various water conservation techniques(deep ploughing by sub- soilers/conservation furrows/micro irrigation/etc.) etc. However, the house-hold survey data also states that, in spite of good awareness about the improved crop production techniques, the adoption levels of the same is relatively very poor, especially in Srikakulam, Vizianagaram and Visakhapatnam districts. Non availability of some of the crop production inputs, timely unavailability of inputs, lack of money, lack of technical know-how for practicing the improved crop management practices etc could be few reasons for low adoption of the improved crop management techniques.

As there is no field level implementation of agriculture and horticulture activities under APIIATP in the current assessment period (July to December 2019), monitoring team has interacted with the farmers and department officials to understand the reasons for low progress in the implementation of proposed project activities. While interacting with farmers, team has noticed that the farmers are aware of the benefits of the proposed interventions and are looking forward for the project implementation in their villages. Monitoring team has also noticed that the orientation programs conducted at Mandallevel and village level have created good awareness to farmers on the project interventions and implementation modalities.

Implementation Status of Agriculture Interventions Implementation of Agriculture interventions at ground level is progressing very slowly. In Nellore district, the team had been told that not a single project intervention, including training and capacity building programs were taken up by Agriculture or Horticulture department in the present monitoring period due to lack of funds and staff crunch.Many other districts also so far have not received the reimbursement against the committed expenditure, hence, are not showing interest to take up activities under APIIATP. Committed expenditure towards training and capacity building programs is also not yet released in majority of the districts. Department officials have expressed that the meager amount of budget releases is the issue in implementation of the agriculture interventions. Further, lack of dedicated staff at district level (District Agriculture Coordinator), transfers of district/mandal level department staff, no orientation to newly transferred staff are some of the reasons for the slow implementation of activities under APIIATP. Some district nodal officers have also expressed that poor or no follow up from the Commissionerate of Agriculture office, absence of dedicated team/staff for the project at Commissionerate level are also the reasons for slow progress under the project. The team has observed that department staff is busy handling their own regular department programs, especially the flagship program of the government like, “RhytuBharosa’ program. Officials have expressed their inability to spare time for APIIATP due to the tight schedule.

CTRAN team, while discussing with the concerned officer in-charge of APIIATP in Vizianagaram district came to know that, few project interventions proposed in the action plan are not relevant to this district. The farmers’ actual requirements are not listed in the Action Plan. For example, Seed production activity is not in the demand in West Godavari district as the new and improved varieties are already saturated in their district. Farmers in the West Godavari district are demanding oil mills. The officers have suggested to have provisions to choose the interventions as per the local requirements.

Monitoring team interacting with the farmers during the field visit in Vadisaleru village and Polavaram village in East Godavari district is depicted below as photo 1 and photo 2

Photo 1:Monitoring Team interacting with farmers of WUA and department officials in Vadisaleru village in East Godavari district.

Photo 2: Monitoring Team in a stake holder meeting in Polavaram village in East Godavari district.

As very few activities were taken up in one or two districts, it is not appropriate to analyze the household data to assess the project benefits over the baseline data, across 12 districts.

5.1. Preparation of Annual Action Plan for the Agriculture/Horticulture Components for FY 2019-20

State Level Action Plan for 2019-20 is already in place. The plan has district wise and intervention wise targets. All the districts have also prepared district level Action Plan 2019- 20 based on the targets proposed at the state level. Each district has planned Mandal wise and tank wise targets.

The Tank Development Plans (TDP)/Cascade Development Plans (CDP) preparation is in progress, planning process is facilitated by CADA. AOs/HOs of respective areas are also participating in the planning process. During the field visit, CTRAN team was present while the TDP preparation in Chinnadoddigallu village in Visakhapatnam district. PRA techniques were followed in the planning process. It is observed that 30-40% WUA farmers have attended the TDP planning event. Further, it is noticed that, the TDP/CDP is focusing more on tank rehabilitation works and less weightage has been given to Agriculture/Horticulture requirements at tank level. Interventions are implemented as per the budget releases. Department officers have complained shortfall of budget releases and delay in money transfer to beneficiary accounts under Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT). Department officers are finding it inconvenient to face the beneficiaries, hence, are not keen to take up the activities under APIIATP.

Further, Action Plan 2019-20 kept on changing to match with the budget releases every time. Monitoring team is finding difficulty in assessing the progress of the project against the planned targets. It is also observed that the implementation is lagging behind against the targets.

5.2.Trainings(Orientation Programs/Workshops)

Activities under Training & Capacity Building are completed by Agriculture&Horticulture Departments. Approx. 80% - 90% orientation training program on APIIATP at State level, District level and Mandal level to the respective field functionaries are completed by both Agriculture and Horticulture departments. Tank level orientation programs to WUA/ farmers is completed in few tanks only. Tank level orientation programs are still under progress in some of the tanks in the districts.

Srikakulam, Vizianagaram, Visakhapatnam, Chittoor, Kadapa, Kurnool, Nellore and Prakasam districts have reported receipt of training expenditure. Other districts have submitted the expenditure bills, and amount is yet to be credited to their district account.

Atthestate level, convergence workshop was organized in the very beginning of the project, involving all the line department staff. Orientation on APIIATPintervention wise guidelines to be followed for implementation of the proposed interventions were also communicated to district level officials of Dept. of Agriculture and Dept. of Horticulture Apart from fewer budget releases & delay in budget releases, transfers of district/ Mandal level officers who were earlier, oriented on APIIATP is also causing delay in project implementation, as the newly transferred officers are unaware of the APIIATP modalities. In Ananthapuramu and Visakhapatnam districts, the impact of transferring the officials is quite apparent.

Recently, Govt. of AP has recruited Village Agri. Assistants (VAAs) and Village Horticulture Assistants (VHAs) for over 1000Ha/ cluster of villages, these staff members come under Dept. of Agriculture. The services of VAA/VHA are of great help for the smooth

implementation of the project at ground level. There is a need to orient VAAs/VHAs on APIIATP. They are the functionaries working at tank level.

5.3. Exposure visits (within the state)

Exposure visits were organized for a few districts and farmers were taken to exposure visits. Four groups in East Godavari and two groups in Chittoor districts were taken to exposure visits in 2019-20. Four exposure events (within the state) and 16 training programs in East Godavari district were reported with a budget of Rs. 8.651 lakhs. The bills for the same were submitted to the treasury, however, the amount is not yet credited to the district account. Two exposure visits were organized by Agriculture Department for farmers in Chittoor district. One group of farmers was taken to Almatti Dam Back Waters (Out-side the state) to show ‘Efficient Water Management Practices’ and the other group was taken to Rayachoti (within the state) to show ‘Natural Farming Practices’. Farmers expressed that the visits were very useful to them and that they learnt many new natural farming practices and water management practices. Three to four farmers have also started adopting the natural farming practices they learnt there.

Commodity Interest Groups (CIG) formation has not yet taken place in any of the districts the team had visited. Agri. Officers are planning for the CIG formation in the village. Monitoring team has been told thatonce the farmer groups (CIGs) are formed, they will be taken to exposure visits as per the need & requirement.

5.4. Implementation Status of Agriculture Production Interventions 5.4.1 Certified Seed Production Certified seed production under APIIATP was taken-up only in Vizianagaram district in2019. Certified seeds of paddy crop (variety - MTU1121) was supplied to farmers in 19 tank villages in Vizianagaram district at a cost of Rs. 8.24 lakhs. CTRAN team visited one of the seed produced villages viz., KG Pudi village and interacted with the farmers. At the time of the visit, the crop was already harvested. Farmers expressed satisfaction over the 5-6 more bags of yield they obtained with MTU 1121, compare to the earlier grown samba masuri (1001). The only drawback with the new variety (MTU 1121) is quick germination even with a single rainfall at the time of harvest as this variety has no seed dormancy.Monitoring team interacting with the farmer seed producing farmers in KG Pudi village in Vizianagaram is shown in photo 3.

5.4.2 Block Demonstration Block demonstrations were taken up in Vizianagaram, Kadapa and Chittoor districts in2019. Under demonstration on crop diversification & Intensification, green manure seed was supplied at 100% subsidy for demonstration purpose in 21 tank villages in Vizianagaram district. Total green manure seed supplied was 84.70q Diancha (20 villages) and 36.70 q of Sunhemp (18 villages) for demonstration purpose, with a cost of 7.03 Lakhs. In Chittoor district, 108 block demos with 3.55Lakhs and in Kadapa district with1.60 Lakhs were reportedly spent. CTRAN team has visited one of the villages in Vizianagaram district and interacted with the beneficiary farmers. By the time of the visit, crop was already harvested. While interacting with the farmers in the village, it is perceived that green manure seeds were distributed at free of cost. Due to lack of budget, other inputs of paddy cultivation for demonstration purpose were not given to the demonstrating farmers, hence, field visit/crop cutting experiment was not organized. However, farmers practiced green manuring and got benefited saving on urea.

5.4.3. Distribution of Green Manure Seeds Green manure seeds were distributed only in Vizianagaram and Kurnool districts among all the districts. Seeds of Diancha and Sunhemp were distributed @ 75% subsidy to the farmers. In Vizianagaram district alone, a total of 68q of Diancha (in 13 tank villages) and 7q Sunhemp (in 4 villages) were distributed with an expenditure of Rs. 3.06Lakhs. In Kurnool, the expenditure incurred was Rs. 11.30 laks. CTRAN team has visited one of the villages in Vizianagaram district and interacted with beneficiary farmers. By the time of the visit, the crop was already harvested. Beneficiary farmers in the KG Pudi village have expressed that there is a clear cut down in ½ to 1 bag urea/acre. No basal dose of Urea was applied in fields where green manuring is done, in these fields only ½ bag urea was applied at 30-35 days after transplanting. Earlier they used to apply 2bags of Urea, one as basal dose at 10-15 DAT and top dressing at 30-45 days after transplanting. Photo 4 is showing the monitoring team interacting with the beneficiary farmers of green manuring intervention under APIIATP promoted in KG Pudi village in Vizianagaram district.

5.5. Implementation Status of Horticulture Interventions Dept. of Horticulture has implemented project interventions in the year 2018-19. Some of the grounded interventions under Horticulture werevisited during the current reporting period. Observations of the field visit are presented below. After the interventions taken up in 2018- 19, no further progress was reported in 2019-20 due to non-release of earlier spent amount in 2018-19. Department of Horticulture is also facing severe shortage of Horticulture Officers, more so in Nellore district where only 50% HO posts are filled against the actuals. Moreover, the newly recruited VHAs/VAAs are also reporting to Agriculture department, hence, their services for Horticulture activities are difficult to explore. Unlike present VHA/VAA system, earlier there used to be MPEOs, exclusively working under Horticulture department as expressed by the ADH, Atmakur in Nellore district.

Barring Srikakulam, Krishna and Kurnool districts, in rest of the districts, good progress was observed under the Horticulture sector in 2018-19. Interventions that were grounded include: area expansion of horticulture crops (AEP), canopy management, rejuvenation of old orchards, Integrated Nutrient Management, distribution of water-soluble nutrients, training & demos related to interventions, exposure visits etc. As suggested in the PIP, MIDH guidelines were followed in implementation of horticulture interventions, including beneficiary selection. Horticulture area being small compare to agriculture and mostly located away from the tanks, all the horticulture interventions were open to all the farmers considering village as a unit for implementation unlike agriculture interventions considering only ayacut farmers for input delivery.

5.5.1. Vegetable Cultivation on Permanent Pandals

In Polavaram village in East Godavari district, permanent pandals for vegetable production were promoted under APIIATP. Monitoring team along with the concerned Horticulture Officer visited the beneficiary farmer’s field and interacted with the farmer (photo 5).Traditional vegetable growing farmers, irrespective of social status, those having assured irrigation facility and those who are able to bear 25% cost for erecting permanent pedals were selected as beneficiaries. Beneficiaries were selected in WUA meeting. Selected farmers were taken to exposure visit to Koyyalagudem village where vegetable cultivation with the support of permanent pandals is already in practice. As suggested by Horticulture Officer, improved varieties of ridge guard, bottle guard, bitter guards were grown with the support of concrete pandals, while, tomatoes, brinjal, okra (bhendi) etc. were grown as intercrops. Farmers who have adopted this practice are quite happy with the benefits they realized in terms of increased production and income. Further, farmers have observed other benefits such as vegetables in good shape, less diseases, ease of weeding operations, more number of pickings etc. Farmers have reported approx. Rs.12,000 – Rs.15000 more income per acre with vegetable cultivation with the support of permanent pandals when compare to traditional practice. However, beneficiary farmers were disappointed for non-reimbursement of subsidy amount even after 1 year after submission of bills. Farmers in anticipation of project subsidy

have spent between 1lakh to 4 lakhs for erecting permanent pandals. Under such delayed budget release situations, Horticulture Officers are finding difficulty in meeting the project targets.

Horticultural interventions – Permanent pandalsinPolavaram -West Godavari district

5.5.2. Integrated Nutrient Management in Horticulture Crops

Horticulture Officers are also conducting sensitization programs and demos about the inputs they are distributing under the project. Monitoring Team was present inSarabhavaram village in Pattipadu mandal in East Godavari district during the input distribution under INM in horticulture crops(Photo 6). Each INM package given to farmers has 6 different types of biofertilizers/ soil fertility enhancers worth of Rs. 12,000 per farmer, up to a maximum of 1

Ha plantation (Mango/ Cashew). Total 105 farmers were covered in 53 Ha land, irrespective of social category. Procurement of the products is at district level against the indent submitted by Asst. Director of Horticulture (ADH). Before distributing the INM inputs, Horticulture Officer has delivered the importance and usage of these products in fruit crops and vegetables. Canopy management is also promoted in the same village, benefiting 39 farmers in total 22 Ha. Farmers have practiced canopy management in their plantations after attending the demo conducted by Horticulture Officer. Farmers have expressed satisfaction over the project inputs.

5.5.3. Orientation on Horticulture Interventions under APIIATP and Training & Demonstration on Canopy Management Monitoring team was also present in the APIIATP orientation program in the Veerabhadrapuram village in Vizianagaram district, organized by Assist. Director, Horticulture (ADH) (Photo 7& 8). Dr. Madhavilatha, Scientists from Research Station at Anakapalli in Visakhapatnam district were the resource persons for the session on improving crop management practices in fruit crops, followed by a field demo on canopy management. Implements for canopy management were also distributed after the field demo. Training cum demo program was highly interactive. Farmers’ interaction with scientists is well and thoroughly understood the practice of canopy management with effective live field demo.

5.5.4. Distribution of Water-Soluble Fertilizers During the field visit, Monitoring Team also visited KG Pudi village in Vizianagaram district and interacted with a farmer beneficiary of water-soluble fertilizers (Photo 9). The Farmer has received 11 different types of water-soluble fertilizer mixture packets, which also include micro nutrients. He received Rs.5000 worth water-soluble fertilizers for his papaya plantation. He has applied the water-soluble fertilizers through fertigation technique. Unfortunately, he lost the entire plantation due to the recent heavy wind storms. In the same village,the team has also met a tomato farmer, who is a beneficiary of project intervention - Area Expansion of Horticulture crops. He has grown tomato in rice fallows with the inputs supported by the project. He complained that the amount Rs, 22,500 towards input subsidy is not being transferred to his account till date.

5.5.5. Area Expansion under Horticulture Crops On visiting a beneficiary field, under area expansion under horticulture in Kothali village in Visakhapatnam district (Photo 10). Tomato crop was promoted by 18 farmers in 3 adjacent villages. Subsidy through the project was provided for hybrid seeds, sprayer, other inputs (against self-declaration by the farmers), all together accounting to Rs.15,000/acre. Beneficiary selection is apt, the soils are red soils suitable for vegetable crops supported with irrigation.

Component – B2

Chapter 6 Climate Smart Aquaculture

6.1. Objective

The objective of the component is to improve fish productivity and profitability in the project tanks and ponds which offer high economic opportunities and benefits. The project will facilitate suitable linkages for better access to markets, and support measures for maintaining hygienic conditions throughout the fish value chain.

Table No.6.1 Annual Action Plan 2019-20- Project activities

S.No. Annual Action Plan -Activity No. of Cost. Districts (Rs. in lakhs) 1 Civil works: Establishment of Fresh water fish Brood 1 250.00 bank.1, Unit cost Rs.250.00 lakhs Assistance - 100% 2 Civil works: 5 125.00 Upgrading / modernization of fish seed farms- 5 Unit cost – Rs.25.00 lakhs Assistance - 100% 3 Civil works: Construction of Captive Fish seed 10 325.00 nurseries –55 captive nurseries Unit cost – Rs.6.00 lakhs Assistance - 100% Allocation 2019-20 Rs.325.00 lakhs 4 Civil works: Construction of Fish Landing centres – 5 5 50.00 landing centres Unit cost – Rs.10.00 lakhs Assistance - 100% 5 Providing equipment for Aqua lab 1 15.00 6 Supply of Post-harvest fishing inputs- Establishment of 7 54.69 Fish vending kiosks (fish retail outlets)-7,Unit cost – Rs.10.00 lakhs, Assistance - 75% 7 Capacity Building- Imparting training to fishermen and All Districts 32.75 staff, field visits. Assistance - 100% 8 Study to assess the potential of fisheries in different State 7.50 types of tanks Assistance - 100% level activity 9 Project Management Assistance - 100% All Districts TOTAL 906.60

The district wise details are given in annexure 6.1

6.2 Activity- wise progress achieved- Observations. Out of 364 project tanks, 112 minor irrigation tanks were identified as suitable to take up fish culture during 2019-20. The details of retention period of water,i.e.,whether they are perennial/ long seasonal or short seasonal, the sourceofwater supply to the tanks, details of fishermen cooperative societies existing having the tank under it’s area of operation, members in the society etc., was collected. The collection of information on water retention period was mentioned in the Aide Memoire of the World Bank task team June, 2019. During this year, one more fishermen cooperative society was organized for Venkatapuramtank in Chittoor district which is a selected project tank. A. Civil works: The execution of four types of civil works with an outlay of Rs.750.00 lakhs has been taken up by Water Resource Department, under the technical supervision of the Dept.of Fisheries.

1. Establishment of Fresh water fish Brood bank at B.Matham, YSR Kadapa: The Dept.of Fisheries has identified the existing department fish seed farm site at B.Matham reservoir. The farm has assured water supply. Based on the ongoing brood bank taken up by the Department at Badampudi, West Godavari district and basing on local requirements,thedistrict authorities have furnished estimates, then further revised the estimates and furnished drawings for Rs.250 lakhs.

2. Upgrading and modernisation of fish seed farms: The Estimates for five fish seed farms at a cost of Rs.124 lakhs were received. The Department has changed 2 farms from Somasila to Kavali in PSRNeloore district; Rajampeta to Mylavaram in YSR Kadapa district and estimates were revised and furnished. PMU has called for certain engineering details for Kavali and Vetlapalem farms. The details of fish seed production for justification of the investments are called for.

3. Establishment of Captive seed nurseries: The Annual action plan is to establish 55 captive fish seed nurseries and Rs.325 lakhwasallocated this year. The unit cost is Rs.6 lakhs and this includes the provision for fish seed procured for rearing and cost of feed during the rearing period.They will be managed by the Fishermen Cooperative Society, after completion. After scrutiny of the estimates received, 25 Administrative approvals were accorded up to December, 2019. The estimates prepared for 4 units in Srikakulam district are being revised to be located at the project tanks identified by the Dept. of Fisheries, The preparation of estimates for remaining units is under progress in Vizianagaram and Krishna districts. The details are given in table No6. 2

Table No.6.2 District wise status on Captive seed nurseries

No targets are given to West Godvari and Prakasham districts.

4. Construction of Fish landing centres: The fish landing centre is for hygienic handling of fish harvested at the tank site.The unit cost is Rs.10 lakhs to be provided as 100% assistance.Similar component was implemented earlier under CBTM Project. The DD Fisheries,Anantapur has informed that estimate prepared earlier is being revised as per latest SSR. Others are under preparation.

5. Providing equipment for aqua lab: The unit cost is Rs.20 lakhs and the assistance proposed this year is Rs.15 lakhs as 100% assistance. The Dept.of Fisheries has constructed the required building at govt. fish seed farm in Vizianagaram town. The detailed proposals with specification of equipment are to be furnished.

6. Post-harvest fishing inputs- Establishment of Fish vending kiosks (Fish Retail Outlets): 90% assistance is being provided for the supply of fishery inputs. Rs. 54.69 lakh is provided this year to take up fish vending kiosks (fish retail outlets) by providing an assistance of Rs.9 lakhs each. The units are allocated district-wise. The identification of the society and suitable site is under process.

7. Capacity Building- 100% assistance is being provided for training and exposure visits to staff of Fisheries department and fishermen at a total cost of Rs.32.75 lakhs. The orientation trainings were organized by the Department

of Fisheries in 3 districts covering 7 districts, duly organizing the sessions as planned and taking assistance of the Support Organisations. The participants include two to four members from each fisherman cooperative society. The fishermen orientation training was conducted at Vizianagaram on 23.7.2019 for fishermen of Srikakulam, Vizianagaram and Visakhapatnam, at Kurnool on 26.7.2019 for fishermen of Kurnool district and at Anantapuram on 16.8.2019 for fishermen from three districts of Ananatapuram, YSRKadapa and Chittoor, The trainings were conducted with participation of District project Director concerned , Department of Fisheries officers and line departments.

8. Production of short film: The fisheries activities were taken shot at the tank and farm-sites in Visakhapatnam and Vizianagaram districts to produce the short film.It will be used to impart training to stakeholders of APIIATP.Infact, the Department of Fisheries has initiated an overseas exposure visit to fishermen and staff to visit eminent freshwater fisheries institute in Vietnam but was postponed due to administrative reasons.

Orientation Training held at Anantapuram on 16.8.2019 for fishermen of 3 districts

6.3 Study on assessing the potential of fisheries in different types of tanks: Rs.7.50 lakhs is provided to take up a study to find out the potential of different types of irrigation tanks (Perennial, long seasonal and short seasonal) and suggest suitable fish culture strategies. The College of Fisheries, Muthukuru, Andhra Pradesh was requested on their willingness. The study is expected to be taken up recently.

6.4 Suggestions for expediting the implementation of the project.

Civil works –Establishment of Freshwater fish Brood Bank: As estimates are already prepared and further revised by the district authorities, a team with

officers from PMU, Dept.of Fisheries and Central Institute of Freshwater Aquaculture may visit the site and approval may be accorded based on their recommendations.

Civil works-Modernisation/ upgrading of Fish seed farms: As estimates are already prepared for all 5 farms and also revised for Mylavaram, Nandyal and Vetlapalem, further corrections / changes may be discussed and approvals accorded.

 Civil works- Establishment of Captive fish seed Nurseries: (a) Calling tenders:Out of 55, nearly 50% of the units i.e., 25 were accorded Administrative approvals. Action may be taken by the District Project Directors to club more than one work, finalise the tender format and call for the tenders. Calling of tenders has to be expedited for completion of the works before the fish seed production season in June. (b) Expediting Approvals:As estimates are already prepared and resolutions of Fishermen Cooperative Societies are received for 17 more units in four districts of Visakhapatnam, Kurnool, YSR Kadapa and Chittoor, further corrections / changes may be discussed and approvals accorded. (c) Revision of unit cost: The dimensions of captive fish seed nursery, borewell for water supply and cost of seed & feed are included in the model design prepared in consultation with a field officer in October,2018. The Fishermen Cooperative societies are requesting for upside revision of the unit cost, mainly due to the provision of Rs.0.50 lakhs for bore well which seems to be not adequate. This may have to be examined in consultation with the Department of Fisheries, Ground water department and the World Bank. (d) Coordination in preparation of estimates: As estimates are under preparation in Srikakulam, Vizianagaram and Krishna districts, the concerned district authorities may be requested to expedite the preparation of estimates and also furnish resolutions of fishermen cooperative societies to expedite the administrative approvals. (e) Civil works- Establishment of Fish Landing Centres: The District authorities in Ananatapuram have to revise the estimate furnished earlier, based on latest SSR. The concerned district authorities in all these five districts may be requested to expedite the preparation of estimates and also furnish resolutions of fishermen cooperative societies to expedite the administrative approvals.  Providing equipment to Aqua lab: The RCC building constructed by the Department of Fisheries is quite spacious and centrally located in the fish seed farm premises in Vizianagaram town. The equipment and its specifications were finalised. The building was visited by the World Bank Task Team in June,2019 and gave specific suggestions to maintain quality of testing fish seed and fish for consumption. This can also be utilized for imparting training

to the fishermen.The equipment required is for Rs.15 lakhs . This process may be expedited.  Establishment of Fish vending kiosks (Fish Retail Outlets): The establishment of 7 fish vending kiosks in urban areas is taken up at a cost of Rs.54.69 lakhs for hygienic handling of fish and to increase the consumption of fish. The detailed proposal along with the resolution of the Fishermen Cooperative Society have to be furnished to the APIIATP. The concerned district authorities in all these seven districts may be requested to expedite the proposals and also furnish resolutions of fishermen cooperative societies.  Capacity Building: The trainings have commenced in 7 districts, but need to be expedited covering all districts and societies along with organizing the study tours.  Study to assess the potential of different types of tanks for fish culture practices: For taking up the study on fisheries potential in different types of MI tanks i.e., Perennial, Long seasonal and Short seasonal and the type of fish culture methods to be adopted etc., the institution, the terms and conditions of the study are to be finalized.  Filling up of the posts sanctioned: One post of Senior Fisheries Expert was sanctioned in the office of the Commissioner of Fisheries and one post of senior fisheries expert in PMU have to be filled urgently to have regular monitoring of the activities in the district. The Department of Fisheries may be requested to depute the Deputy Director of Fisheries.The Department of Fisheries has to utilize the provision given for computers, etc.,

 Pursue sanction of additional funds requested: The Department of Fisheries has sought an additional amount of Rs.520.70 lakhs for implementation of the project activities taking in to consideration the seasonality of the activities and time left out etc.The APIIATP have submitted proposals seeking additional funds to the Government of Andhra Pradesh and sanction is anticipated shortly.

 Preparing Fisheries profile of the tanks: The data on the fisheries profile of the tank has to be collected for all tanks identified for taking up fisheries. The project activities have to be extended to cover all 650 tanks (for which administrative approval was given so far) for taking up fisheries activities in 2020-21.

Key Outcomes: The Key outcomes expected are 47% increase in fish productivity in tanks. The important input is stocking of quality fish seed. The project envisaged that captive fish seed nurseries and improvements to fish seed farms will be in place for stocking fish seed in the season commencing in June month. The Department of Fisheries has proposed in 2019-20 to take up stocking of quality fish seed in fingerlings stage in all minor irrigation tanks including the tanks selected under the project.

The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh has issued orders fixing the rules for lease of fishing rights in the minor irrigation tanks and the fixation of the lease amount. One of the conditions of the lease of the MI tank is the concerned fishermen cooperative society has to stock the required fish seed in adequate numbers. Enquiry during the field visits revealed that some of the fishermen cooperative societies have stocked fish seed in the tanks leased to them. The details of fish seed stocked, lease amount collected, 50% share of lease amount to be given to the Concerned WUA, fish production etc., effective water spread area of the tank during the year have to be collected.

Component C Chapter 7

Post-Harvest Management, Market and Agri-Business Promotion

7.1 Introduction.

This component aims to enhance the profitability for the farmers by improving their access to markets through bringing-in producers and consumers closer for locally produced goods by enhancing market penetration and developing alternate marketing channels which improve farm level post-harvest management and value addition. The project will utilize the FPOs, wherever feasible, at the village and/or cluster of villages and/or at a super-cluster at cascade level. This component will help the farmers to realize a greater return to their products through value chain improvement and supply chain management.

The specific objectives of promoting agribusiness are;

 Improve market linkage through collectivization and product aggregation;  To improve the return to farmers and its organisation (FPO) through value addition;  Improve accessibility of farmer’s collectives to agribusiness services;  Strengthen post-harvest management and supply chain through infrastructures, facility and services At district level, the M&Eteam interacted with district level officers of Dept. of Agri. and Dept. of Horti. to discuss the project implementation status under the component C and to understand the underlying issues with respect tothe project implementation if any. During the field visit to the tank villages, interaction was held with the concerned Horticulture Officers (HOs), Agriculture Officers (AOs) and APDs. At village level, meetings were organised to assess the project benefits at the farmers level as well as to understand the process and the underlying issues if any at their end.

Sampling details of house-hold survey The CTRAN team has also carried out household survey in both APIIATP tank villages and control tank villages (non-project villages). Within the project villages, household survey was carried out with LBT (Longitudinal Benefit Tracking) households and Sample Tank households.

As there is not much field level implementation of project interventions/infrastructure other than orientation programs, capacity building programs and Tank Development Planning under component C of APIIATin the current assessment period (July to December 2019), monitoring team has interacted with the FPO members, other farmers and department officials to understand the reasons for slow progress in the implementation of project activities. While interacting with FPO members and other farmers, team has noticed that the

farmers are aware of the benefits of the proposed interventions and are looking forward for the project implementation in their villages. Monitoring team has also noticed that the orientation programs conducted at mandal level and village level have created good awareness at FPO members level and also amongotherfarmers on the project interventions and implementation modalities.

7.2 Implementation Status of Agribusiness Activities

The progress of project implementation under this component is progressing at a slow pace. Only preliminary works related to proposed interventions have been taken up in a few districts. As very few activities were taken up in one or two districts, it is not appropriate to analyze the household data to assess the project benefits over the baseline data across the 12 districts.

Apart from less budget releases & delay in budget releases, transfers of district/ mandal level officers who were earlier oriented on APIIATP is also causing delay in project implementation, as the newly transferred officers are less aware of the APIIATP modalities. Absence of exclusive staff for project execution is also a reason for slow progress. Recently appointed Village Agri. Assistants (VAAs) and Village Horticulture Assistants (VHAs) are of great help for the smooth implementation of the project at ground level. They are the functionaries working at tank level. However, there is a need to orient VAAs/VHAs on APIIATP.

The progresss of Component C as observed during the field visits of project tank villages between July to December 2019 are discussed here under;

7.2.1. Preparation of Annual Action Plan for Agribusiness Components for FY 2019-20 The Tank Development Plans (TDP)/Cascade Development Plans (CDP) preparation is in progress and planning process is facilitated by CADA. AOs/HOs of respective areas are also participating in the planning process. During the field visit, CTRAN team was present in the TDP preparation in Chinnadoddigallu village in Visakhapatnam district. PRA techniques were followed in the planning process. It is observed that 30-40% WUA farmers and FPO members (at present the FPO is not active) have attended the TDP planning event. Further, it is noticed that, the TDP/CDP is focusing more on tank rehabilitation works and less weightage has been given to planning for Agribusiness requirements at tank level. As far as Agribusiness activities are concerned, identification of FPOs in the districts is in progress. Implementation team is now focusing on identifying the Infrastructure requirements at FPO level. Types of interventions to be implemented at field level under this component and the intervention wise targets are fixed at the state level and were percolated down to the field level.

7.2.2Trainings & Capacity Building & Workshops

For the financial year 2019-20, target was fixed to impart training to 18 FPOs, covering 905 FPO farmers in post-harvest management, market and agribusiness promotion. Against the target, sofar, 415 farmers in 10FPOs have been imparted training on produce marketing.

District level workshop on modernization of existing markets in to e-markets involving buyers & sellers is completed in 12 districts. Agri. Marketing department is coordinating in mapping the existing marketing infrastructure like gowdowns, cold storage warehouse etc.

7.2.3 Exposure visits (within the state) Exposure visits to 180 progressive farmers to model FPOs within the state are completed in 10 districts. These exposure visits were completed by Dept. of Agriculture with the support of respective district level Support Organizations (SOs). However, the monitoring team has not come across any of such benefited FPOs in the tank villages between July to December 2019. Monitoring team has been told that the farmer groups (CIGs) once formed will be taken to exposure visits as per the need & requirement.

7.2.4 Appointment of ABSO (Agribusiness Support Organization) MANAGE, GoIhas been identified as ABSO for providing consultancy services for supply and value chain analysis, direct linkages with FPOs and providing market linkages. Also obtained approval from the World bank, whereas, clearance from Govt. of Andhra Pradesh is pending. It is expected that state government clearance will be available in a month. During this period, till the ABSOis entrusted with the work, the project may prepare the ground and complete certain activities like (a) production mapping by project specific commodities, (b) cluster identification, (c) value chain and supply chain assessment (project supported commodities), (d) assessment of current market mechanisms, (e) assessment of marketable surplus etc.

7.2.5 Supply of secondary processing units to CIG farmers It is proposed to supply 32 secondary processing units to CIG farmers, at the total cost of 320Lakhs. CIG formation has not yet taken place in any of the districts the team has visited. Agri. Officers are planning for the CIG formation in the villages and the process is expected to be completed by March 2020. Monitoring team has been told that, the farmer groups (CIGs) once formed will be provided with secondary processing units. Empanelment of suppliers of secondary processing units is in progress by Dept. of Agriculture. It is worth to note that after the formation of CIG, they cannot take up post-harvest activities like secondary processing collectively on immediate basis. Capacity building, business orientation, product aggregation mechanism, business planning for secondary processing unit etc. need to be done before hand. So, it is expected that a minimum of 6 month is required to prepare the ground and strengthen the CIGs to take up this activity. Each such unit should

have a business plan, standard operating procedures and management plan before its installation.

7.2.6 Construction of Rural Godowns It is proposed to take up 21 nos of rural godowns with an expenditure of 630 lakhs in the state. Site for rural godowns is identified, design finalized and estimations are drawn and submitted for administrative sanctions in Vizianagaram, Srikakulam, East Godavari and West Godavari, Krishna, Srikakulam, Anantapuramu and Kurnool. Administrative approvals for the same is accorded and technical sanction is under process and estimates are under scrutiny. The entire activity is taken care of by the Dept. of Agriculture. Members of WUA, where the rural godowns are planned, are eagerly waiting for the same for reaping the benefit. Due to the budget constraints, WUAs in all the districts have been informed to take up either rural godown or WUA office building or threshing floor in a tank village. Looking objectively, rural storage structures were planned to help farmers to manage the supply chain, improve the shelf life of the produces and minimize distress sale of commodities. Secondly, these storage structures could have been taken up as a business model where WUA / FPO can earn an income by lending storage space and sustain the management of the structure. Making it an optional activity may not serve these purposes, unless additional resources are mobilized from existing other schemes / programs and such structures are constructed in a convergence mode.

7.2.7 Formation & Strengthening of FPOs This activity is looked upon by Dept. of Horticulture. There are 177 FPOs existing in the area of 228 tanks out of 651 project tanks. The FPOs are formed by different agencies such as NABARD (21 nos), SERP (93 nos), ICRISAT (1 no), Dept. of Agri. (9 nos) and Dept. of Horti. (53 nos). Line departments are requested to verify the status of FPOs and categorize them as active/normal/dormant etc., based on certain parameters and also the infrastructure created with the FPOs. In the year 2019-20, it is proposed to further strengthen 18 FPOs in 7 districts at a cost of 42 Lakhs. As of now, 18 FPOs have been identified and planning for training and exposure visits is in progress. Due to the budget constraint the progress is at a slow pace. Monitoring Team has been told that the training and capacity building program for the FPOs is expected to be complete by March 2020.

7.3 Suggestions & Recommendations

Based on the observations during the field visit and looking at the progress of the APIIATP, as assessed up to the fourth quarter, Monitoring Team would like to place key issues and recommendations for smooth implementation of the project.

 Recently, Govt. of AP has recruited Village Agri. Assistants (VAS) and Village Horticulture Assistants (VHA) for every 1000Ha/ cluster of villages, reporting to Panchayats. The services of VAA/VHA are of great help in smooth implementation of

the project at ground level. There is a need to orient VASs/VHAs on APIIATP and involve them to the possible extent. As they are the ground force working at tank level, project can utilize their services to cater to the need of the target mass.

 One of the major reasons noticed for the slow progress in project implementation is delayed in budget release and releasing of lesser amounts against the actual proposal. Implementing agencies are requested to consider this aspect of the project with utmost seriousness and address the same on priority basis.

 Delay in transferring of input subsidy to a beneficiary through DBT has been a concern. Farmers are losing confidence on the project and are hesitating to participate in project activities. Department staff is also finding difficulty in mobilizing the beneficiaries as the project share will be transferred to beneficiary account only on a reimbursement basis. The Farmers as reported, are borrowing money from private lenders and investing in activities in anticipation of an immediate reimbursement from the project. To address the issue, it is suggested to have some budgetary provision at the disposal of district level implementing agency, for the reimbursement of bills on immediate basis. Expediting the DBT process would also be helpful to ensure that farmers get their dues on time.

 As per the current practice, support organizations receive fund on reimbursement basis. As observed, Support Organizations are usually having low financial resources and are finding difficulty in incurring expenses from their own sources for executing project activities. Coupled with this, as reported, there has been delay in reimbursement of expenses incurred by the SOs towards executing different project activities. Hence, SOs are unable to pay the salaries to their staff and finding difficulty in retaining the staff with them. The project may think of either immediate reimbursement of bills/vouchers submitted by SOs or to provide some advances to keep the works in progress. This is also one of the reasons for delay in conducting training programs. The SOs are supposed to facilitate training programs and submit the bills / vouchers for reimbursement.

 Poor coordination is noticed between the district level implementation team of Dept. of Agri./Horti. and Support Organizations (as noticed in Vizianagaram district). A bi- monthly review meeting for assessment of work progresses with line departments may be coordinated at district level Agri/horti department offices.

 Similarly, coordination between department of Agri./Horti. and Irrigation department appears to be weak. It is an utmost important to work on convergence and coordination among these agencies at district level. Review meeting/ sharing of work progress at regular intervals between dept. of Agri./Horti and Irrigation department eases some of the obstacles in smooth functioning of the project.

 Appointment of Para workers and retaining them throughout the project period is becoming an issue, as availability of persons with min. 10th qualification is difficult in the present village situations. Those who are passed out 10th standard is going to cities for higher education. Some relaxation with regards to minimum educational qualification for the appointment of para workers may be considered and/or monthly honorarium may be adjusted based on their minimum expectation for retention.

 In some villages, farmers have requested for desilting of tanks and incorporation of the same in their fields. Farmers are also ready to bear the cost of transport and cost of incorporation of the same in their fields. Requesting to support the excavation cost. The tank silt application is a highly recommended practices to improve soil health and to increase yields. As such, desilting is not a listed activity under APIIATP as it is expected to be taken up under MGNREGS. However, it is learnt that in many villages the activity is not being taken up under MGNREGS. Looking at the benefits of tank silt application to soil, on case to case basis, after a thorough assessment, desilting activity may be taken up in project villages.

 Before making the project investments, through examination of the land is required. Farmers may be suggested and facilitated to go for soil testing to find out the soil suitability for a particular crop while promoting crop diversification. It is observed in ChinnaSankarlapudi village in East Godavari district that the soils are highly saline and difficult to cultivate crops other than paddy. In such cases, crop diversification may be promoted only after the amelioration of soil salinity. In another case, it is noticed that, under area expansion of horticulture intervention subsidy was given to a traditional tomato farmer. He has been growing tomato in rice fallows since years. Providing subsidy to him is not going to add additional acreage under area expansion of vegetable crop. Project subsidy is simply adding to his investment. As much as possible, non- traditional vegetable farmers may be motivated to grow vegetables in rice fallow in Rabi season.

 The team has noticed that, ayacut farmers are not differentiated as head reach, middle reach, tail end and influence zone categories based on the location of their lands within the ayacut area. Such differentiation is required for the monitoring team for the sampling purposes during the impact assessment study. It will also help to understand the crops and cropping system dynamics in relation to water availability within the ayacut area. An authentic and scientific method of reach wise differentiation of ayacut lands may be explored to make the project assessment study more scientific. The GIS platform can be used by the GIS and MIS cell of the PMU to demarcate the cultivated area by farmer in different tank reaches.

 Department staff has expressed difficulty in communication and delivery of project benefits in tank villages where the WUA is absent, especially in cascade tanks where the WUA/ Committee is absent. There appears a need to frame the guidelines on

Water User Committee formation in cascade tanks and implementation of the guidelines at earliest possible.

 Few district nodal officers have expressed difficulty in executing the activities planned under the project, especially in the villages that are far from headquarters. They don’t have access to vehicles for local travel. Requested to consider the vehicle provision on hire basis at least 15 days in a month.

Component – D. Chapter -8 Project Management and Capacity Building

8.1 Institutional arrangements

The services of the TFA are stopped based on poor performance and new organisation need to be replaced, it is under process.

In all 12 districts logistics have been arranged, like office space for the APDs. Computers Out of 12 districts, in 7 districts the DPU office is located in the district headquarter whereas in 5 districts other than district HQ. Some project tanks in Kurnool and Anantapuram are located quite far, i.e., about 150-180 km. away from district headquarters. No project district is having vehicle facility for field movement of APDs so far. Few trainings have been organized at the state level from July 2019 to Dec 2019. Workshop cum Hands-on Training Program on MIS & GIS Applications for APIIATP was conducted at 3 different regions. Table No. 8.1 Key training events organized

S.No Date Training topic Venue Districts covered

1 5.9.2019 Farmer Training Krishna, Guntur, Centre (FTC), Prakasam, West

Vijayawada Godavari

2 12.9.2019 Department of Geo- East Godavari, Engineering, Andhra Visakhapatnam, University, Vizianagaram, Application of various Vishakhapatnam Srikakulam features of GIS and MIS portals/Applications developed for APIIATP 3 19.9.2019 Hotel Bliss Nellore, Chittoor, International, Tirupati Kadapa, Kurnool, Anantapur

Fig No.8.1 Training programme in Vishakapatnam.

Table No 8.2 Publications/videos during the half yearly period

S. No Subject Category MIS User Manual User Manual for APIIATP MIS

2 Mobile App Manual User Manual for APIIATP Mobile App 3 VIDEO-01APIIATP over view VIDEO-01 APIIATP over view 4 VIDEO-02 APIIATPWUAvidhulu VIDEO-02 APIIATPWUAvidhulu (duties) 5 VIDEO-03 APIIATPPGM VIDEO-03 APIIATPPGM 6 VIDEO-04 APIIATPagri marketing VIDEO-04 APIIATPagri marketing 7 APFIMS roles and responsibility of WUA Publication 8 WUA self rating Publication

9 Finance Management and resource Publication Mobilization to WUA

8.2 Geographical Information System.

APIIATP uses GIS tools and techniques extensively for capturing data, analysis of data, presentation and interpretation for management decision making. The portal enables PMU and other users to view details of assets grouped by Tanks, Agriculture, Horticulture, Fisheries and Groundwater. It is a login enabled portal which provides capabilities to view shape files of Catchment Area, Borewells available in the Tank Command Area, Tank Water Spread Area, Drainage network, Intercepted Tanks, Ayacut

(Irrigated and Gap), Cadastral Maps with details of the dominant crop in the respective survey numbers. These details can be viewed on clicking a specific tank of interest. In addition to shape files, the portal integrates the Geotagged images captured from the field using the Mobile App and displays them on the map near the tank.

The name of web portal :http://68.183.88.46:8080 The dash board web portal.

The mobile app manual has been using widely for the internal monitoring. It was observed that APDs are using wisely. The app is being useful to record all subject’s data as well as geo tagging of images. Fig.Mobile APP.

Chapter -9

Socio-Economic Profile of sample households

9.0 Introduction

The present chapter primarily deals with the socioeconomic profile of sample households in the project area duly comparing with control areas. The main emphasis was on socioeconomic features, such as class and community composition of the sample households, literacy, employment position, income from different sources, expenditure, asset possession both agriculture and livestock, status of living and finally the level of indebtedness of the project vis-à-vis control households in the surveyed tanks. This would help to assess the project impact on the profile of the stakeholders at different phases in the study region under the following sub heads.

9.1 Selected sample farmers in the study area

As already pointed in the methodology chapter No-1, the total selected sample farmers from 54 tanks spread over 11 districts constitute 802 households in the study area. The data is collected as per the approved study tools. The data is tabulated in excel sheet and the analysis is carried out as per the objectives. Similarly, the households selected from control area were 162 from 11 non-project tanks which form the basis for comparison of different socio- economic characteristics with that of project situations. The sample 802 households, details are given in annexure -1. The classification of the sample has been given in the following graph. 9.2 Classification of sample farmers according to landholdings status

The sample households, thus, selected are classified according to the economic groups as marginal, small, medium and large farmers based on size of the land holdings and are presented in Table .2.1. Table No 9.1 : Classification of Sample Farmers According to Landholdings Status S. No Category % control Project % Acres %Control %Project 1 0-1 38 18 Marginal 70 40 1-2 32 22 2 2-3 13 12 Small 23 38 3-4 7 13 4-5 3 13 3 5-6 2 4 Medium 5 12 6-7 1 2 7-8 1 2

100

S. No Category % control Project % Acres %Control %Project 8-9 0 1 9-10 1 2 4 Large 2 9 10 Above 2 9 A perusal of Table 2.1 shows that more than 90 per cent of the sample constitutes marginal and small farmers in control tanks whereas it is 78 percent in project tanks. Medium and large farmers together constitute 7% and 21% in control and sample tanks respectively. Details are given in annexure 2.2 9.3 Classification of household according to social categories

As indicated in Table 9.2, the project has 5% ST population while there is only 1% ST population in the control group. With the SC population, the control group and project group has a 8% and 9% respectively. The backward caste population is around40% in both the project group and in control group. While the percentage of forward caste is 45% of total sample in the project group it is 50% in the control group. The representation of SC and ST population is observed as low in the project group. The details are given in annexure 9.3. Table No. 9.2. Distribution of Sample Respondents According to their Caste Group Category %SC %ST %BC %Others Control 9 1 40 50 Project 8 5 42 45

9.4 Demographics of the Households

9.4.1 Respondents gender

Of the 802 respondents, including both control and project, the male respondents were more accessible during the discussions, i.e., 91% where as women are limited to 9 percent. In the control group, the women respondents were more, i.e., 14 percent while in the project the women respondents were limited to 8%. The following graph indicates respondents’ Gender(sample).

101

Graph No. 9.3. Distribution of Sample Respondents According to their Gender

9.4.2 Family size.

The average household size of the sample is 3.7. There is a slight variation between project and control. The average family of state is 3.9 and sample also near to state average. The male population outnumbered the females in project as well as control areas. The ratio of female to male in both project and control areas was 846 and 937 respectively which is indicating less than the state average. The details are given in the table No. 2.3.1

Table No. 9.3.1 Household members’ gender

SN Particulars Total Project Control

1 No of households 802 640 162

2 Males 1591 697 164

3 Females 1374 1039 263

4 Total population 2965 1736 427

5 Average household size 3.7 3.8 3.6

6 Sex ratio 863 846 937

9.4.3 Respondents’ age

A large part of the respondents fell in the age groups of 40-59 and they are 38% and age between 20-39 group is with 27% in the control group. Similarly, a major share of the project respondents also fell in the age groups of 40-59 with 50% and 20-39 age with 24 %.

102

Table 9.3.2 Summary of Respondents age in both control and project tanks Project/Control Total Percentage Total <20 20-39 40-59 60-79 80-100 CONTROL 162 14 27 38 20 1 100 PROJECT 640 12 24 50 13 1 100

9.4.4 Household members’ age

In the households of the respondents, however, a major share of household members are children and young adults in both the control and project households. In the control group, 0- 20 years population group formed about 33% of the population and in the project households, members of the same age group formed about 34% of the population. In both the control and project group 40-59 age group population occupies second position with 27 and 30 percent respectively.

Table 9.3.3 Summary of Respondents age in both control and project tanks Percentage (%) Category Total <20 20-39 40-59 60-79 80-100 Control 33 22 27 16 1 100 Project 34 21 30 14 1 100

2.4.5 Literacy status of sample households

The literacy levels of the respondents are presented in the table below. More than 70 percent of the respondents in both control and project tanks have primary education. Respondents with secondary education in control and project tanks are 17 and 20 percent respectively. And the rest have tertiary education.

]

103

Table/Graph 9.3.4 Summary of Respondents literacy levels

60 53 50 44 40 2830 30 25 20 20

0 Prim ary S econdary Tertiary Percentage Coming to the percentage of education levels among households of respondents, data indicate very different trends between control and project groups.In project area, the level of education is more.As most of the respondents are adults & middle aged and their education level is quite low whereas other household membersfall under different age groups, especially most of the younger people are educated as indicated below. Table/Graph 9.3.5 Summary of literacy levels of sample households 60 53 50 44 40 2830 30 25 20 20

0 Prim ary S econdary Tertiary Percentage

9.5 Employment status of sample respondents and household members

It is observed from the below graph that the primary occupation of majority of respondents is agriculture with 93 and 91 percent in control and project tanks respectively. The rest of the respondents have other occupations such as agriculture labour, fisheries etc.,

104

9.5.1 Employment status of household members.

The primary occupation of the household members of control and project group is agriculture with 55% and 50% respectively followed by others such as wage labour and agrilabour etc., It is noticed that the primary occupations of the household members are similar in both control and project tanks with variation in percentage of occupations.

105

Table -9.3.6 Primary Occupation of the Household members

Percentage (%)

Category Agri Cultivation Livestock Labour Service Housewife Student Others Total labour Control 55 5 1 9 2 8 14 5 100 Project 50 5 1 9 2 10 18 3 100

9.6 Asset possession of households

Asset possession of households is one of the indices considered while evaluating the economic status. In the present study, an attempt has been made to assess the assets owned. Majority of households i.e., 97% each in control and project group possessed pucca houses. The share of Kutcha houses is quite low within the range of 1% to 2%, which is a positive indicator towards development. Average value of house possessed by control group is Rs. 4,52,056 which is slightly lower than the project group where the average stood at Rs. 4,77,343. In the state, housing data is projecting healthy results, 88 percentage of the households are having pucca houses (permanent structure) though the farm size is less, it is not having impact on housing. It was reported that marginal and small farmers benefited from govt housing schemes. In Anantapur, no kutcha or semi pucca houses are reported, it is because of Govt and NGOs interventions in the district are quite reachable to the needy. Negligible number of semi pucca(24) and Kutcha houses(8) have been witnessed predominantly in the project area of Vizainagaram, Kurnool, Kadapa, Chittore districts.District wise possession of house details are given in annexure 2.4 The summary of landholding wise possession of types houses are given in the table below Table No. 9.4 :Landholding wise and housing type - %

Percentage (%) Total Type of Total Large Category Houses Marginal Small Medium house Houses (10 and (%) (upto 2) (2-5) (5-10) above) Pucca 157 97 70 24 4 2 Semi CONTROL 1 1 0 0 100 0 Pucca Kutcha 4 2 75 25 0 0 CONTROL Total 162 100 70 23 5 2 Pucca 621 97 53 30 10 7 Semi PROJECT 13 2 54 31 15 0 Pucca Kutcha 6 1 50 33 17 0 PROJECT Total 640 100 53 30 10 6

106

Asset possession of households is one of the indices considered while evaluating the economic status. In the present study, an attempt has been made to assess the assets owned by different categories of households such as marginal, small, medium and large farmers. There is a variation in possessions of household articles such as TV and phones by project and control group. On an average, each house hold has one or more cell phones and each household has TV. It is observed that the marginal farmers in both the control and project areas own more household articles. It has also been observed that project group owned more computers and internet connections than control group.

Table No 9.5. Household items

Percentage (%) CONTROL PROJECT Item Large Large Marginal Small Medium Marginal Small Medium (10 and Total (10 and Total (upto 2) (2-5) (5-10) (upto 2) (2-5) (5-10) above) above) Telephone / 68 21 8 3 100 52 22 18 8 100 Cellphone Television 67 21 9 3 100 51 22 19 8 100 Computer / 0 0 50 50 100 22 11 44 22 100 Laptop Internet 0 0 0 100 100 0 0 50 50 100 connection Refrigerator 63 16 16 5 100 37 27 22 15 100 Washing 63 0 38 0 100 28 35 28 9 100 Machine Bicycle 61 30 5 5 100 45 24 22 10 100 Two- 70 17 9 4 100 43 24 22 11 100 wheeler Four- 0 0 0 100 100 42 17 33 8 100 wheeler Others 0 0 0 0 0 33 50 0 17 100

9.7 Possession of agriculture assets

The data reveals that the possession of agricultural assets such as tractor, power tiller, plough, bullock carts, oil engines, cultivators, sprayers are most popular in both control and project areas. The high value (in terms of money) implements such as tractors, power tillers, cultivators are owned by all categories of farmers. The district wise household assets are given in Annexure 2.6 A,B.

107

Table No. 9.6 : Agriculture implements

Percentage (%) Agri Control PROJECT S.No Implement Up-to 10 Up-to Above 2-5 5-10 Total 2-5 5-10 Total 2 Above 2 10 1 Tractor 13 50 13 25 100 30 23 23 23 100 2 Power Triller 33 33 33 0 100 27 33 40 0 100 3 Bullock cart 100 0 0 0 100 31 31 23 15 100 4 Plough 40 40 20 0 100 39 39 14 9 100 5 Seed Drill 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 50 25 100 6 Pudler 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 67 100 7 Weeder 0 0 0 0 0 50 0 50 0 100 8 Cultivator 50 25 0 25 100 13 25 25 38 100 9 Sprayer 56 44 0 0 100 28 41 17 14 100 10 Oil Engine 0 33 33 33 100 13 50 19 19 100

9.8 Possession of milch animals

While 21% of households in control area possess livestock, it is 28% in project area. The data reveals that there are no hybrid breed in control tanks and more than 90% of the milch animal in project areas is native breed. The district wise details are given in Annexure 2.7 9.9 Household income Having analysed per household income in the surveyed areas, it is worthwhile to assess the per capita income. The main source of income is agriculture in both control and project tanks which is followed by wages in project tank and service sector in control tanks. The dairy also supplements the household income which is almost equal in both project tanks and control tanks. The summary is given in the following table. The details are given in Annexure 2.8 Table 9.7 Percentage of Income sources in control and project areas

Percentage (%) Gross Income Category Control Project Agriculture - from Ayacut and Influence zone area 62 45 Wages 8 12 Agriculture - from NonAyacut area 7 21 Dairy 6 5 Animals/ Poultry 1 0 Leasing out land 0 1 Service(Govt/ Private) 13 10 Petty Business 0 2 Artisan 1 0

108

Percentage (%) Gross Income Category Control Project Other Income 3 4 Total 100 100

9.10 Consumption pattern (Expenditure)

The data on annual per household expenditure is presented in the following table, while major expenditure in project areas is on education and in control area it is interest charges on loans. The next major expenditure in project areas is on food grains, health, interest on loans and events & festival. The same trend can be seen in control areas. In both control and project areas the percentage of expenditure is same on events & festivals. Following table gives comparative summary of percentage expenditure in both control and project areas. The district wise details are given in annexure-2.9 Table No. 9.8: Expenditure status %

Other Events Housing / Food Edu- Fuel Elect- Interest Category food Clothing Health Transport and Total rental Grains cation wood ricity charges items festivals Control 0 14 12 11 9 14 7 4 4 15 10 100 Project 1 12 10 23 8 11 9 3 2 10 10 100

9.11 Borrowings

The data on source-wise borrowings by households presented in the table shows that percentage of borrowings from the bank is 57 and 48 in control and project areas respectively. The second major source of borrowings is SHG followed by friends in both control and project areas. The cooperatives are also lending money to its member farmers, it is relatively more in project area but percentage wise it is less extent. Money lenders and traders are also lending money. It was observed that no one is borrowing from micro finance. The following table summarizes the sources of borrowings in control and project areas as a comparison. The district wise details are given in Annexure 9.10

Table 9.9: Percentage- Source of borrowings

Percentage (%) sources of borrowing Category Cooperative Money Micro Banks SHGs Friends Traders Others Total societies lenders finance Control 57 5 15 15 7 1 0 1 100 Project 48 7 25 13 5 1 0 1 100

109

Annexure -1 Field visit - Districts - investigators team and Subject specialist team field visit for 60 tanks Feb 2020 Visits Name of investigators S supervisor of District Mandal Village TankName Category Field visit HH survay No Specialist Team member/s investigator dates dates Team Dr. Vanaja, M. Pavan Kumar, Guntakal Y.T.Cheruvu Y.T.Cheruvu LBT 5.2.2020 5th Feb2020 Dr. Patra Dr. Vanaja, M. Pavan Kumar, Singanamala Singanamala Singanamala Tank LBT 5.2.2020 6th Feb2020 Dr. Patra P D Chandra Obuladevara Obuladevara Dr. Vanaja, M. Pavan Kumar, 1 Anantapuramu Sample 5.2.2020 Shekar 4 7th Feb2020 cheruvu cheruvu Obuladevara cheruvu Dr. Patra members team Dr. Vanaja, M. Pavan Kumar, Sample 6.2.2020 8th Feb2020 Kudair Kammuru Aravakuru cheruvu Dr. Patra Dr. Vanaja, M. Pavan Kumar, Roddam Shesapuram Shesapuram Tank Control 6.2.2021 9th Feb2020 Dr. Patra Dr. Vanaja, M. Pavan Kumar, Badvel Chennampalli Chennampalli LBT 7.2.2020 6th Feb2020 Dr. Patra M. Dr. Vanaja, M. Pavan Kumar, B. Kodur M.Narasimhapuram Tank LBT 7.2.2021 7th Feb2020 Narsimhapuram Dr. Patra Dr. Vanaja, M. Pavan Kumar, M. Siva Kumar Sample 7.2.2022 8th Feb2020 6 Kadapa B. Koduru Munnepalli Gunthapalle Tank Dr. Patra Prasad 4 members team Dr. Vanaja, M. Pavan Kumar, Sample 8.2.2020 9th Feb2020 B. Koduru Prabhalaveedu Tangellapudi MI Tank Dr. Patra Badvel Venkatasettipalli Venkatasettipalli Control Dr. Vanaja, M. Pavan Kumar, 8.2.2020 Dr. Patra 10th Feb 2020

Rudravaram Chandaluru Gangireddy PR tank LBT Dr. Vanaja, M. Pavan Kumar, 9.2.2020 6th Feb2020 Dr. Patra

Rudravaram Vavilala Vavilala PR tank LBT Dr. Vanaja, M. Pavan Kumar, 9.2.2020 7th Feb2020 Dr. Patra M. Raju 4 11 Kurnool members team Sample Dr. Vanaja, M. Pavan Kumar, 9.2.2020 8th Feb2020 Chagalamarri Mutyalapadu Mutyalapadu MI Tank Dr. Patra Sample Dr. Vanaja, M. Pavan Kumar, 10.2.2020 9th Feb2020 Uyyalawada Rupanagudi Rupanagudi MI Tank Dr. Patra

Rudravaram Chilakaluru Chennareddy Kunta Control Dr. Vanaja, M. Pavan Kumar, 10.2.2020 Dr. Patra 10th Feb 2020 Pathapatnam RL puram Pedda tank LBT 17.2.2020 6th Feb2020 Pavan, Dr Patra Burja Singannapalem Singanna tank LBT 17.2.2020 7th Feb2020 Pavan, Dr Patra Surya Bhaskar4 16 Srikakulam Sample 17.2.2020 8th Feb2020 Burja PL Devi Peta Laxmi Tank Pavan, Dr Patra members team Sample 9.2.2020 9th Feb2020 Amadalavalasa Amadalavalasa Ponakala Tank Dr. John Etacharla Ura Tank Control 10.2.2020 10th Feb2020 Kuppili Dr. John Dwaraka Tirumala Tirumala palem Gollavani tank LBT Pavan & Dr Vanaja 18.2.2020 5th Feb2020

Dwaraka Tirumala Timmapuram Venkatadri tank LBT 18.2.2020 6th Feb2020 Pavan & Dr Vanaja Vijaya Nirmala 4 21 West godavari Dwaraka Tirumala Kommugudem ( Singasamudram Sample Dr. John 7.2.2020 members team 7th Feb2020 Sample 8.2.2020 8th Feb2020 Jeelugumilli Jeelugumilli Ura Tank Dr. John Line Dwaraka tirumala Jammi Cheruvu Control 9th Feb2020 Goppalapuram VSN Murthy 23.2.2020 Martur Rajupallem Rajupallem Tank LBT VSN Murthy 23.2.2020 Kondapi Kattavaripallem Kondepi Tank LBT PD 19.2.2020 on 26 Prakasam VSN Murthy 24.2.2020 Chandrashekaar Kondapi Petleru Ura Cheruvu MI Tank Sample wards 4 members team VSN Murthy 24.2.2021 Ballikuruva Gorrepadu Gorrepadu MI Tank Sample

Tangutur Valluru Valluru Tank Control

Dr John 18.2.2020 Vizianagaram Gunkalam Peddha Tank LBT

Dr John 18.2.2020 G L Puram Dumangi Kirandal Reservear LBT Surya Bhaskar4 21.3.2020 on 31 Vizianagaram Dr. Patra and pavan 19.2.2020 Gantyada Lakhidam Bhagiradharaju Tank Sample members team wards

Dr. Patra and pavan 19.2.2020 Seetha Nagaram Burja Tumba Raju Tank Sample

Dr. Patra and pavan 19.2.2020 Gurla Gurla Muppanabanda Control

Yeleswaram Yerravaram Nallatammayyacheruvu LBT

Dr Patra, Vanaja & Pavan 18.2.2020 Jaggampeta Ramavaram Mutyalamma Cheruvu LBT 18.2.2020 36 East Godavari Dr Patra, Vanaja & Pavan 18.2.2020 Vijayanirmala Yeleswaram Tirumali Perumala Raju Tank Sample onwards

Dr Patra, Vanaja & Pavan 18.2.2020 Rangampeta Rangampeta Jaggaraju Tank Sample

Jaggampeta Narendrapatnam Venkateswara Cheruvu Control

G. D Nellore Veeraka Nellore Veeraka Nellore Big Tank LBT Nallavenkataya Nalla Venkataya Gari Dr Vanaja & Pavan 24.2.2020 Chittoor Garri Palli Palli Tank LBT Msk Prasad 4 20.2.2020 41 Chittoor members team onwards Dr Vanaja & Pavan 24.2.2020 Bangarupalem Gollapalli Veerappanayuni Cheruvu Sample Bangarupalem Jambuvaripalle Diguva Kichanna cheruvu Sample Dr Vanaja & Pavan 24.2.2020

Dr Patra, Vanaja & Pavan 19.3.2020 Ananthasagaram Ananthasagaram Ananthasagaram Tank LBT PD 12.3.2020 on 51 Spsr Nellore Dr Patra, Vanaja & Pavan 20.3.2020 Chandrashekaar wards Kavali Musunuru Musunuru Big Tank Sample 4 members team Dr Patra, Vanaja & Pavan 19.3.2020 Ananthasagaram Lakkarajupalli Lakkarajupalli Tank Sample Dr Patra, Vanaja & Pavan 20.3.2020 Kavali Budama Kunta Budama Kunta Tank Control

VSN Murthy & Ratnamachary 26.3.2020 Reddigudem Rudravaram Peddha Tank LBT MSK Prasad 4 12.3.2020 on 56 Krishna VSN Murthy & Ratnamachary 27.3.2020 members team wards Mylavaram Borragudem Borragudem Tank LBT VSN Murthy & Ratnamachary, Dr 27.3.2020 Reddigudem Reddigudem Kesavaraju Tank Sample John

Annexure 2.1 Ayacutdars District wise

Total Land Land owning Land owning % of Male % of Female District owning ayacutdars_Male ayacutdars_Female Owners Owners farmers

Anantapuram 2542 936 3478 73 27

Chittoor 398 107 505 79 21

East godavari 961 551 1512 64 36

Kadapa 1021 220 1241 82 18

Krishna 1110 200 1310 85 15

Kurnool 1180 221 1401 84 16

Nellore 4486 1640 6126 73 27

Prakasam 650 214 864 75 25

Srikakulam 508 134 642 79 21

Visakhapatnam 898 172 1070 84 16

Vizianagaram 198 74 272 73 27

West Godavari 1041 537 1578 66 34

Grand Total 14993 5006 19999 75 25

Annexure 2.2 Various Uses of Tanks and Number of Users

CONTROL PROJECT Total CONTROL PROJECT Total

No of No of No of % % % % % of % Use Users Users Users Tanks Tanks Tanks Tanks Users Tanks Users Tanks users

Domestic 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0

GP / Muncipality 0 2 2600 2 2600 0 0 3 12 2 11

Fishermen 6 155 26 1962 32 2117 50 11 33 9 35 9

Washermen 1 20 12 873 13 893 8 1 15 4 14 4 cattle gazers 5 1300 32 16895 37 18195 42 88 40 76 40 76

Potters 0 3 18 3 18 0 0 4 0 3 0

Brick making 0 1 10 1 10 0 0 1 0 1 0

Others 0 3 3 3 3 0 0 4 0 3 0

TOTAL 12 1475 80 22362 92 23837 100 100 100 100 100 100

Annexure 2.3 District wise - Lascar availability in Tanks

Number of Number of tanks tanks Neeruganti % of tanks % of tanks Neeruganti Not Total Neeruganti Neeruganti Not Project/Control District Available Availabale Tanks Available Availabale Total % East Godavari 0 1 1 0 100 100 CONTROL Kadapa 0 1 1 0 100 100

Kurnool 1 0 1 100 0 100

Nellore 0 1 1 0 100 100

Srikakulam 0 1 1 0 100 100

Visakhapatnam 0 1 1 0 100 100

Vizianagaram 0 1 1 0 100 100

West godavari 0 1 1 0 100 100

Anantapur 1 0 1 100 0 100

Chittoor 0 1 1 0 100 100

Krishna 0 1 1 0 100 100

Prakasam 1 0 1 100 0 100

CONTROL Total 3 9 12 25 75 100

PROJECT Anatapuram 4 0 4 100 0 100

East Godavari 3 3 6 50 50 100

Kadapa 0 4 4 0 100 100

Krishna 2 2 4 50 50 100

Kurnool 2 2 4 50 50 100

Nellore 2 2 4 50 50 100

Srikakulam 0 4 4 0 100 100

Visakhapatnam 1 5 6 17 83 100

Vizianagaram 1 5 6 17 83 100

West godavari 1 3 4 25 75 100

Chittoor 1 1 2 50 50 100

Prakasam 2 0 2 100 0 100

PROJECT Total 19 31 50 38 62 100

Grand Total 22 40 62 35 65 100

Annexure 2.4 District wise - Neeruganti availability in Tanks

Number of Number of tanks % of tanks tanks Neeruganti % of tanks Neeruganti Neeruganti Not Total Neeruganti Not Total Project/Control District Available Availabale Tanks Available Availabale %

CONTROL East godavari 0 1 1 0 100 100

Kadapa 0 1 1 0 100 100

Kurnool 1 0 1 100 0 100

Nellore 0 1 1 0 100 100

Srikakulam 0 1 1 0 100 100

Visakhapatnam 0 1 1 0 100 100

Vizianagaram 0 1 1 0 100 100

West godavari 0 1 1 0 100 100

Anantapur 1 0 1 100 0 100

Chittoor 0 1 1 0 100 100

Krishna 0 1 1 0 100 100

Prakasam 1 0 1 100 0 100

CONTROL Total 3 9 12 25 75 100

PROJECT Anatapuram 4 0 4 100 0 100

East godavari 3 3 6 50 50 100

Kadapa 0 4 4 0 100 100

Krishna 2 2 4 50 50 100

Kurnool 2 2 4 50 50 100

Nellore 2 2 4 50 50 100

Srikakulam 0 4 4 0 100 100

Visakhapatnam 1 5 6 17 83 100

Vizianagaram 1 5 6 17 83 100

West godavari 1 3 4 25 75 100

Chittoor 1 1 2 50 50 100

Prakasam 2 0 2 100 0 100

PROJECT Total 19 31 50 38 62 100

Grand Total 22 40 62 35 65 100

Annexure 2.5 Water to Tail End farmers - District wise

Number Number of tanks % of of tanks – Tail % of tanks – – Tail End Number of tanks – Tail End End farmers tanks – Tail End farmers % of tanks – farmers not Sluices farmers not Sluices receiving receiving closed Total receiving receiving closed Total Project/Control District water water permanently Tanks water water permanently %

CONTROL East Godavari 1 1 0 100 0 100

Kadapa 1 1 0 0 100 100

Kurnool 1 1 100 0 0 100

Nellore 1 1 100 0 0 100

Srikakulam 1 1 0 100 0 100

Visakhapatnam 1 1 0 100 0 100

Vizianagaram 1 1 0 100 0 100

West Godavari 1 1 100 0 0 100

Anantapuram 1 1 100 0 0 100

Chittoor 1 1 0 0 100 100

Krishna 1 1 100 0 0 100

Prakasam 1 1 100 0 0 100

CONTROL Total 6 4 2 12 50 33 17 100

PROJECT Anatapuram 1 3 4 25 75 0 100

East Godavari 3 3 6 50 50 0 100

Kadapa 2 2 4 50 50 0 100

Krishna 2 2 4 50 50 0 100

Kurnool 3 1 4 75 25 0 100

Nellore 2 2 4 50 50 0 100

Srikakulam 4 4 0 100 0 100

Visakhapatnam 6 6 0 100 0 100

Vizianagaram 1 5 6 17 83 0 100

West Godavari 2 2 4 50 50 0 100

Chittoor 1 1 2 50 0 50 100

Prakasam 2 2 100 0 0 100

PROJECT Total 19 30 1 50 38 60 2 100

Grand Total 25 34 3 62 40 55 5 100

Annexure 2.6 Number of Shortfalls in Last Five Years - Control Vs Project tanks comparison- District wise

No Project/Control District 1 Yr 2 Yrs 3 Yrs 4 Yrs 5 Yrs Shortfalls Total

CONTROL East godavari 1 1

Kadapa 1 1

Kurnool 1 1

Nellore 1 1

Srikakulam 1 1

Visakhapatnam 1 1

Vizianagaram 1 1

West godavari 1 1

Anantapuram 1 1

Chittoor 1 1

Krishna 1 1

Prakasam 1 1

CONTROL 2 4 0 4 1 1 12

PROJECT Anantapuram 1 1 1 1 4

East godavari 1 5 6

Kadapa 1 3 4

Krishna 2 2 4

Kurnool 2 2 4

Nellore 1 1 2 4

Srikakulam 4 4

Visakhapatnam 1 4 1 6

Vizianagaram 4 2 6

West godavari 1 1 2 4

Chittoor 1 1 2

Prakasam 2 2

PROJECT Total 1 18 1 5 8 17 50

Grand Total 3 22 1 9 9 18 62

Annexure 2.7 Assessment and Allocation of Water Before Season – Control Vs Project tanks comparison – District wise

Number of tanks % of tanks

Informal Informal understan understa ding nding among Informal Sluice among Informal Sluice Control / District No farmers understanding WUA has s farmers understanding s Project assess with among a formal Close No with among Close ment or allocation farmers with understa d assessment allocatio farmers with WUA has a d allocati to only rotation nding Perm or n to only rotation formal Perm on head reach (warabandi) and anentl Total allocation head (warabandi) understanding anent Total made – 2 of ayacut – 3 record - 4 y Tanks made reach – 2 of ayacut – 3 and record - 4 ly Tanks

CONTROL East Godavri 1 1 0 0 100 0 0 100 Kadapa 1 1 0 0 0 0 100 100 Kurnool 1 1 100 0 0 0 0 100 Nellore 1 1 0 100 0 0 0 100 Srikakulam 1 1 0 100 0 0 0 100 Visakhapatnm 1 1 0 100 0 0 0 100 Vizianagaram 1 1 0 100 0 0 0 100 West Godavari 1 1 0 100 0 0 0 100 Anatapuram 1 1 0 0 100 0 0 100 Chittor 1 1 0 0 0 0 100 100 Krishna 1 1 100 0 0 0 0 100 Prakasam 1 1 100 0 0 0 0 100 CONTROL Total 3 5 2 0 2 12 25 42 17 0 17 100 PROJECT Anatapuram 2 2 4 50 0 50 0 0 100

Number of tanks % of tanks

East godavari 3 1 2 6 50 17 33 0 0 100 Kadapa 3 1 4 75 25 0 0 0 100 Krishna 3 1 4 0 0 75 25 0 100 Kurnool 2 2 4 50 50 0 0 0 100 Nellore 3 1 4 75 0 25 0 0 100 Srikakulam 1 3 4 25 75 0 0 0 100 Visakhapatnam 1 4 1 6 17 67 17 0 0 100 Vizianagaram 2 4 6 33 67 0 0 0 100 West godavari 4 4 100 0 0 0 0 100 Chittor 1 1 2 50 0 0 0 50 100 Prakasam 2 2 100 0 0 0 0 100 PROJECT Total 24 15 9 1 1 50 48 30 18 2 2 100

Grand Total 27 20 11 1 3 62 44 32 18 2 5 100

Annexure 2.8 Crop Planning Before Season – Control Vs Project comparison- District wise

CONTROL East Godavri 1 1 0 100 0 0 0 0 100 Kadapa 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 100 100 Kurnool 1 1 100 0 0 0 0 0 100 Nellore 1 1 0 100 0 0 0 0 100 Srikakulam 1 1 0 100 0 0 0 0 100 Visakhapatnam 1 1 0 0 100 0 0 0 100 Vizianagaram 1 1 100 0 0 0 0 0 100

West godavari 1 1 100 0 0 0 0 0 100 Anantapuram 1 1 0 0 100 0 0 0 100 Chittoor 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 100 100 Krishna 1 1 0 0 100 0 0 0 100 Prakasam 1 1 0 0 100 0 0 0 100

CONTROL Total 3 3 4 0 0 2 12 25 25 33 0 0 17 100 PROJECT Anatapuram 2 2 4 50 50 0 0 0 0 100 East godavri 5 1 6 83 17 0 0 0 0 100

Number of tanks % of tanks Sluice s Informal Informal Informal WUA has a Informal Informal close understan understan understa formal Sluices Informal understa understa WUA has a d No crop ding on ding on nding on understan closed No crop understanding nding on nding on formal perm planning only wet wet and ID ID crops ding and permane Grand planning on only wet wet and ID crops understanding anent Grand Project/Control District made crops crops only record ntly Total made crops ID crops only and record ly Total Kadapa 3 1 4 75 25 0 0 0 0 100 Krishna 2 1 1 4 50 25 0 0 25 0 100 Kurnool 2 2 4 50 50 0 0 0 0 100 Nellore 1 3 4 25 75 0 0 0 0 100 Srikakulam 1 3 4 25 0 75 0 0 0 100 Visakhapatnam 3 3 6 50 0 50 0 0 0 100 Vizianagaram 6 6 100 0 0 0 0 0 100

West godavari 2 2 4 50 50 0 0 0 0 100 Chittoor 1 1 2 50 0 0 0 0 50 100 Prakasam 1 1 2 50 0 50 0 0 0 100

PROJECT Total 29 12 7 0 1 1 50 58 24 14 0 2 2 100 Grand Total 32 15 11 0 1 3 62 52 24 18 0 2 5 100

Annexure 2.9 Water Scheduling and Release – Control Vs Project tanks comparison - District Wise

Number of tanks % of tanks WUA has Informal WUA has a Scheduling Informal a Scheduling No scheduling scheduling adhered Sluices No scheduling scheduling adhered to Sluices Project/ scheduling plan among plan and to at least closed Grand scheduling plan among plan and at least closed Grand Control District plan farmers record 75% permanently Total plan farmers record 75% permanently Total CONTROL East godavari 1 1 0 100 0 0 0 100 Kadapa 1 1 0 0 0 0 100 100 Kurnool 1 1 100 0 0 0 0 100 Nellore 1 1 0 100 0 0 0 100 Srikakulam 1 1 0 100 0 0 0 100 Visakhapatnam 1 1 100 0 0 0 0 100 Vizianagaram 1 1 100 0 0 0 0 100 West godavari 1 1 100 0 0 0 0 100 Anantapuram 1 1 0 100 0 0 0 100 Chittoor 1 1 0 0 0 0 100 100 krishna 1 1 100 0 0 0 0 100 Prakasam 1 1 0 100 0 0 0 100 CONTROL Total 5 5 0 0 2 12 42 42 0 0 17 100 PROJECT Anatapuram 4 4 0 100 0 0 0 100 East godavari 2 4 6 33 67 0 0 0 100 Kadapa 4 4 100 0 0 0 0 100 Krishna 4 4 0 100 0 0 0 100 Kurnool 1 3 4 25 75 0 0 0 100 Nellore 4 4 0 100 0 0 0 100 Srikakulam 4 4 100 0 0 0 0 100 Visakhapatnam 4 2 6 67 33 0 0 0 100

Annexure 2.10 Mode of Water Distribution – Control Vs Project tanks comparison - District wise

No of Tanks % of tanks

regul regul ated Regul ated Regul Project/ (only ated (only ated District Control conti dayti (only conti dayti (only nuous conti me) dayti Gr nuous conti me) dayti Gr witho nuous with me) Sluices an witho nuous with me) Sluices an ut with out with closed d ut with out with closed d rotati rotati rotat rotati perma Tot rotati rotati rotat rotati perma Tot on on ion on nently al on on ion on nently al East CONTRO godavari 1 1 0 100 0 0 0 100 L Kadapa 1 1 0 0 0 0 100 100

Kurnool 1 1 100 0 0 0 0 100

Nellore 1 1 0 100 0 0 0 100

Srikakula m 1 1 0 100 0 0 0 100

Visakhap atnam 1 1 100 0 0 0 0 100

Vizianag aram 1 1 100 0 0 0 0 100

West godavari 1 1 100 0 0 0 0 100

Anantap uram 1 1 100 0 0 0 0 100

Chittoor 1 1 0 0 0 0 100 100

Krishna 1 1 100 0 0 0 0 100

Prakasa m 1 1 100 0 0 0 0 100

CONTRO L Total 7 3 0 0 2 12 58 25 0 0 17 100

Anatapu PROJECT ram 1 2 1 4 0 25 50 25 0 100

East godavari 1 5 6 17 83 0 0 0 100

Kadapa 4 4 100 0 0 0 0 100

Krishna 3 1 4 0 75 25 0 0 100

Kurnool 1 3 4 25 75 0 0 0 100

Nellore 4 4 0 100 0 0 0 100

No of Tanks % of tanks

Visakhap atnam 5 1 6 83 0 0 17 0 100

Vizianag aram 5 1 6 83 0 0 17 0 100

West godavari 4 4 100 0 0 0 0 100

Chittoor 1 1 2 0 50 0 0 50 100

Prakasa m 1 1 2 50 50 0 0 0 100

PROJECT Total 25 18 3 3 1 50 50 36 6 6 2 100

Grand Total 32 21 3 3 3 62 52 34 5 5 5 100

Annexure 3-1: Progress of civil works in Anatapur district

Name of Work Progress as on 31.12.19 in %

Rehabilitaion of Gondireddypalli tank and Bommeparthy tank Cascade no:3 in Gondireddypalli (V) in Rapthadu (M) in 5.00 Anantahpur District Rehabilitaion of Aravakuru tank (Independent) in Kammuru (V) in Kudair (M) in Anantapur District 70.00 Rehabilitation of Kaggallu M.I. tank Cascade No.04 in Kaggallu (V) in Hindupur (M) in Ananthapur (Dist) 6.00 Rehabilitation of Beerepalli tank Cascade.N0.8 in Beerepalli (V) in Hindupur (M) in Ananthapur (Dist) 48.00 Rehabiulitation of Chalivendala Agraharam tank Cascade No.10 in Chalivendala (V) in Hindupur (M) in Ananthapur (Dist) 8.00 Rehabilitaion of Santhebidanur tank (Independent) in Santhebidanur (V) in Hindudpur (M) in Anantapur District 15.00

Rehabilitaion of Rachipalli tank (Independent) in Rachipalli (V) in Hindudpur (M) in AnanthapurDistrict 30.00 Rehabilitation of Marukuntapalli Cascade No.9 in Marukuntapalli (V) in Somandepalli (M) in Ananthapur (Dist) 95.00

Rehabilitation of Singanamala tank Independent in Singanamala (V) in Singanamala (M) in Ananthapur District 75.00

Rehabilitation of Obuladevara Cheruvu (Independent) in Obuladevara Cheruvu (V) in Obuladevara Cheruvu Mandal in 92.00 Ananthapur District Rehabilitation of Mallapalli tank Cascade No.16 in Mallapalli (V) in Obuladevara Cheruvu (M) in Ananthapur (Dist) 45.00 Rehabilitaion of Sirivaram Manepalli tank (Independent) in Sirivaram (V) in Lepakshi (M) in Anantapur District 50.00

Rehabilitation of Rapthadu tank (Independent) Rapthadu (V) in Rapthadu (M) in Ananthapuramu District 95.00

Annexure 3.2: Progress of civil works in Chittore district

Name of Work Progress as on 31.12.19 in % Rehabilitation of Doddagani cheruvu (Independent) in Dommandlapalli(V) in Puthalapattu (M) in Chittoor District 75%

Rehabilitation of Panduru Big tank (Independent) in Panduru village in Varadaiahpalem (M) in Chi ttoor District 50%

Rehabilitation of P.V.Puram tank (Independent) in P.V.Puram village in Sathyavedu (M) in Chittoor District 90%

Rehabilitation of Rajagopalapuram tank (Independent) in Rajagopalapuram village in Sathyavedu (M) in Chittoor District 80%

Rehabilitation of Siranambudur tank(Independent) in Sirinambudur village in Sathyavedu (M) in Chittoor District 35%

Rehabilitation of Madanajeri tank (Independent) in Madanajeri village in Sathyavedu (M) in Chittoor District 35%

Rehabilitation of Nangamangalam tank (Independent) in Nangamangalam village in Gudipala (M) in Chittoor District 40%

Rehabilitation of Thondambattu Big tank (Independent) in Thondambattu village in Varadaiahpalem (M) in Chittoor 50% District

Rehabilitation of Kambakam Big tank (Independent) in Kambakam village in Varadaiahpalem (M) in Chittoor District 80%

Rehabilitation of Madanambedu tank Cascade No.12 in Madanambedu village in Sathyavedu (M) in Chittoor District 40%

Rehabilitation of VeerappanayuniCheruvu (Independent) in 170 Gollapalle village in Bangarupalem (M) in Chittoor District 50%

Rehabilitation of Digiva Kitchenna tank cascade No.03 in Jambuvaripalli (V) in Bangarupalem (M) in Chittoor District 50%

Annexure 3-3: Progress of civil works in East Godavari district

Name of Work Progress as on 31.12.19 (in %)

Rehabilitation of Chellayamma Tank (Independent) in K. Kothapalli village in Prathipadu Mandal in East Godavari District 29% Rehabilitation of Konetivari Tank (Independent) in Bhavavaram village in Jaggampeta Mandal in East Godavari District 26.77% Rehabilitation of Raju Tank (Independent) in Gandepalli village in Gandepalli Mandal in East Godavari District 40% Rehabilitation of Nallathammayya Tank (Independent) in Yerravaram village in Yeleswaram Mandal in East Godavari 28% District Rehabilitation of Pedda Tank (Independent) in Sarabhavaram village in Prathipadu Mandal in East Godavari District 5% Rehabilitation of Raju Tank (Independent) in Peddapuram village in Peddapuram Mandal in East Godavari District 5% Rehabilitation of Kudumala Tank (Independent) in China Sankarlapudi village in Prathipadu Mandal in East Godavari 5% District Rehabilitation of Madhavani Tank Cascade No. 09 in Vadesaleru village in Rangampeta Mandal in East Godavari District 7% Rehabilitation of Venkatareddydora Tank (Independent) in Jaddangi village in Rajavommangi Mandal in East Godavari 70% District Rehabilitation of Malludora Tank (Independent) in East Lakshmipuram village in Yeleswaram Mandal in East Godavari 52% District Rehabilitation of Perumala RajuTank (Independent) in Tirumali village in Yeleswaram Mandal in East Godavari District. 45% Rehabilitation of Yerrakonda Tank (Independent) in Vemulova village in Gangavaram Mandal in East Godavari District 80%

Annexure 3.4: Progress of civil works in Kadapa district

Name of Work Progress as on 31.12.19 (in %)

Rehabilitation of Tangedu palli M.I. Tank Cascade No.01 in Prabhalavedu village in B. Kodur Mandal in Kadapa District 48% Rehabilitation of B. Kodur Cascade No.02 in Munnepalli Village in B. Kodur Mandal in Kadapa District 20% Rehabilitation of Puttayapalli Cascade No.03 in PuttayaPalli village in BadvelMandal in Kadapa District 33%

Annexure 3.5: Progress of civil works in Krishna district

Name of Work Progress as on 31.12.19 (in %)

Rehabilitation of Ura tank (Independent) in Veleru (V) in Bapulapadu (M) 16% Krishna district Rehabilitation of Diguva Vaddu Tank (independent) in Bahu 17% balendrunigudem(V) in Gannavaram (M) Krishna District Rehabilitation of Borragudem tank Cascade No. 2 in Borragudem (V) in 15% Mylavaram (M) Krishna District Rehabilitation of Reddigudipati tank (independent) in Pulluru (V) in 10% Mylavaram (M) Krishna District Rehabilitation of Yellappa tank Cascade No. 13 in Narsapuram (V) in 36% Vissannapet (M) Krishna District Rehabilitation of Kundapalem tank (independent) in Kalagara (V) in 16% Vissannapet (M) Krishna District Rehabilitation of Nalla tank (independent) in Tatakuntla (V) in 24% Vissannapet (M) Krishna District Rehabilitation of Gajula cheruvu Cascade No.7 in Putrela (V) in 32% Vissannapet (M) Krishna District Rehabilitation of Kesavaraju Tank (independent) in Reddigudem (V) 12% &(M) Krishna (District) Rehabilitation of Rudravaram Pedda Cheruvu (independent) in 15% Rudravaram (V) in Reddigudem (M) Krishna District Rehabilitation of Dharma tank (independent) in Muchinapalli (V) in 20% Reddigudem (M) Krishna District Rehabilitation of Malavagu tank (independent) in Reddigudem (V) & (M) 22% Krishna District Rehabilitation of Gangula tank (independent) in Maddulaparva (V) in 19% Reddigudem (M) Krishna District Rehabilitation of Ravula Tank (independednt) in Kotha Naguluru (V) in 19% Reddigudem (M) Krishna District Rehabilitation of Jogiraju tank Cascade No. 4 in Gullapudi (V) in 20% Musunuru (M) Krishna District Rehabilitation of Chilaka samudram tank Cascade No. 5 in Velpucherla 26% (V) in Musunuru (M) Krishna District Rehabilitation of Pedda Tank (independent) in Somavaram (V) in Chatrai 21% (M) Krishna District

Annexure 3.6: Progress of civil works in Kurnool district

Name of Work Progress as on 31.12.19 (in %)

Rehabilitation of Vavilala PR Tank Cascade No.08 in Perur (V) in Rudravaram (M) under AP-IIATPÃ¢Â€Â(Covered in Pedda Cheruvu, Kotha Cheruvu, Anki Reddy Palli PR Tank and B.Nagireddy palli Cheruvu) in Kurnool District 70%

Rehabilitation of Buchireddy PR Tank Cascade No. 09 in Chandaluru Village in Rudravaram Mandal in Kurnool District 54% Rehabilitation of Parumanchala MI Tank (Independent) in Parumanchala Village in Jupadu Bunglow mandal in kurnool District 26% Rehabilitation of Yerra Cheruvu Cascade No.01 in Peddadevalapuram (V) in Bandiatmakur (M) in Kurnool District 45% Rehabilitation of Vakkileru Anicut (Independent) in Kotakandhukur (V) in Allagadda (M) in Kurnool District 26%

Rehabilitation of Rangaraju Cheruvu (Independent) in Boyalakuntla (V) in Sirvella (M) in Kurnool District 32%

Rehabilitation of Palukudoddi cheruvu cascade no.2 in Palukudoddi Village in c.belgal Mandal in Kurnool District 30%

Rehabilitation of Mutyala Padu M.I Tank Cascade No.04 in Mutyala Padu (V) in Chagalamarri (M) in Kurnool District 90%

Rehabilitation of Bhavanasi Tank (Independent) in Ahobilam (V) in Allagadda (M) in Kurnool District 26%

Rehabilitation of Rupanagudi M.I Tank (Independent) in Rupanagudi Village in Uyyalawada Mandal in Kurnool District 90%

Rehabilitation of Manchalakatta MI Tank (Independent) in Manchalakatta Village in Gadivemula Mandal in Kurnool District 34%

Rehabilitation of Mandlem Tank (Independent) in Mandlem Village in Jupadu Bungalow Mandal in Kurnool District 26%

Rehabilitation of Penumada MI tank (Independent) in Kambalapadu Village in krishnagiri Mandal in Kurnool District 42%

Rehabilitation of Veerannagattu MI tank (Independent) in Veldurthi Village in Veldurthi Mandal in Kurnool District 25%

Rehabilitation of Venkatapuram tank (Independent) in venkatapuram Village in dhone Mandal in Kurnool District 29%

Rehabilitation of Valluru MI tank (Independent) in valluru Village in kowthalam Mandal in Kurnool District 31%

Rehabilitation of Gargi vanka MI tank (Independent) in Naganatha halli Village in adoni Mandal in Kurnool District 70% Rehabilitation of Kaminahal MI tank (Independent) in Kaminahal Village in halaharvi Mandal in Kurnool District 45% Rehabilitation of Hathi Belgal tank (Independent) in Hathi Belgal Village in aluru Mandal in Kurnool District 30%

Annexure 3.7:Progress of works as on 31st December in Nellore district

Name of Work Progress as on 31.12.19 in %

Rehabilitation Of Cherlo Yadavalli Tank (Independent) In Cherlo Yadavalli Village In Atmakur Mandal In Spsr Nellore District 5% Rehabilitation Of K Upparapalli Tank (Independent) In Upparapalli Village In Venkatagiri Mandal In Spsr Nellore District 40% Rehabilitation Of Telugurayapuram Tank (Independent) In Telugurayapuram Village In Kaluvoya Mandal In Spsr Nellore 5% District Rehabilitation Of Siddavaram Tank (Independent) In Siddavaram Village In Rapur Mandal In Spsr Nellore District 5% Rehabilitation Of Yepuru Tank (Independent) In Yepuru Village In Rapur Mandal In SPSR Nellore District 5% Rehabilitation Of Rapur Big Tank (Independent) In Rapur Village In Rapur Mandal In Nellore District 5% Apiiatp - RehabilitationOf Musunuru Big Tank (Independent) In Musunuru & Chenchuganipalem Village In Kavali Mandal , Nellore District 74%

Apiiatp - RehabilitationOf Cascade No.03 In North Amuluru And North Mopur Villages In Allur Mandal , Nellore District 32% Rehabilitation Of Nakkalagandi Reservoir (Independent) In Timmareddypalli Village In Varikuntapadu Mandal, Nellore 7% District Apiiatp - RehabilitationOf Cascade No.04 In Madhurupadu Village In Kavali Mandal, Nellore District 20% Rehabilitation Of Gudipadu Tank (Independent) In Gudipadu Village In A S Peta Mandal, Nellore District 14%

Name of Work Progress as on 31.12.19 in % Rehabilitation Of Ananthasagaram Tank (Independent) In Ananthasagaram Village In Ananthasagaram Mandal, Nellore 13% District Rehabilitation Of Polireddypalli Tank Cascade No-38 In Polireddypalli Village In Marripadu Mandal , Nellore District 18% Rehabilitation Of Dabala Tank (Independent) In Rapur Village In Rapur Mandal, Nellore District 24%

Rehabilitation Of Jorepalli Tank (Independent) In Jorepalli Village In Rapur Mandal , Nellore District 33% Rehabilitation Of Allampadu Tank Cascade No-21 In Allampadu Village In Kota Mandal , Nellore District 17% Rehabilitation Of Kanuparthi Tank (Independent) In Kanuparthi Village In Podalakur Mandal, Nellore District 22% Rehabilitation Of Navooru Tank (Independent) In Navooru Village In Podalakur Mandal, Nellore District 10% Rehabilitation Of Althurthi Tank (Independent) In Althurthi Village In Podalakur Mandal, Nellore District 65% Rehabilitation Of Tatiparthi Big Tank (Independent) In Tatiparthi Village In Podalakur Mandal , Nellore District 24% Rehabilitation Of Tatiparthi Small Tank (Independent) In Tatiparthi Village In Podalakur Mandal , Nellore District 78% Rehabilitation of Chalamacherla Large Tank (Independent) in Chalamacherla village in Kavali Mandal in Nellore District 60% Rehabilitation of Rudrakota Large Tank(Independent), Rudrakota (V) and Kavali Mandal in Nellore District 64% Rehabilitation of Bogole Tank Cascade No.1 in Bogole Mandal in Nellore District 37% Rehabilitation of Rangasamudram Tank Cascade No.9 in Dagadarthi Mandal in Nellore District 74%

Name of Work Progress as on 31.12.19 in % Rehabilitation of Bodagudipadu Kotha Tank (Independent), Bodagudipadu (V) and Dagadarthi Mandal in Nellore District 57% Rehabilitation of Dundigam Tank (Independent), Dundigam (V) and Dagadarthi Mandal in Nellore District 72% Rehabilitation of Sankavaram Tank, Sankavaram (V) and Vinjamuru Mandal in Nellore District 70% Rehabilitation of Peddakaniyampadu Tank (Independent), Peddakaniyampadu (V) and Varikuntapadu Mandal in Nellore 25% District Rehabilitation of Peddannaluru Old Tank (Independent), Peddannaluru (V) and Kalikiri Mandal in Nellore District 40%

Rehabilitation of Kudumuladinnepadu Tank (Independent), Kudumuladinnepadu (V) and Kalikiri Mandal in Nellore District 50% Rehabilitation of Kalavalapudi Tank (Independent), Kalavalapudi (V) and Venkatagiri Mandal in Nellore District 42%

Rehabilitation of Adavilakshmipuram Tank (Independent) in Adavilakshmipuram village in Kavali Mandal in Nellore District 80%

Rehabilitation of Pathabitragunta West Tank Cascade No.8 in Bogole Mandal in Nellore District 62%

Annexure 3.8: Progress of civil works in Prakasham district

Name of work Progress as on 31.12. 19 in % Rehabilitation of Markapur tank (independent) in Markapur Village in Markapur (M) in Prakasam District 100

Rehabilitation Of Gandlopalli Tank (Independent) In Kondareddypalli Village In Tarlupadu (M) In Prakasam District 20 Rehabilitation Of Gangamma Tank (Independent) In Gangampalli Village In Racherla (M) In Prakasam District 10

Rehabilitation Of Rajupalem Mi Tank (Independent) In Rajupalem Village In Martur (M) In Prakasam District 50

Rehabilitation Of Gorrepadu Mi Tank (Independent) In Gorrepadu Village In Ballikuruva (M) In Prakasam District 40 Rehabilitation Of Kondapi Mi Tank (Independent) In Kondapi Village In Kondapi (M) In Prakasam District 10 Rehabilitation Of Deverajugattu Cascade No.06 (Peddaraveedu Tank And Devarajugattu Tank) In Peddaraveedu Village In Peddaraveedu (M) In Prakasam District . 10

Rehabilitation Of Martur Mi Tank (Independent) In Martur Village In Martur (M) In Prakasam District 10

Rehabilitation Of Petluru Cascade No.12 (Ura Tank And Kotha Tank) In Petluru Village In Kondapi (M) In Prakasam District 10 Rehabilitation of Bodireddypalli tank (independent) in Obulakkapalli Village in Peddaraveedu (M) in Prakasam District 15

Name of work Progress as on 31.12. 19 in % Rehabilitation of Nayuni tank (independent) in Bollupalle Village in Ardhaveedu (M) in Prakasam District 10 Rehabilitation of Chennarayuni Tank Cascade No. 18 (Mallaiah Cheruvu, Timmanna Tank and Chennarayuni Tank) in Ardhaveedu Village in Ardhaveedu (M) in Prakasam District 10

Rehabilitation of Tappetavani Cheruvu (independent) in Thurimella Village in Cumbum (M) in Prakasam District under APII&ATP 10 Rehabilitation of Teegaleru Reservoir (independent) in Y. Cherlopalli Village in Dornala (M) in Prakasam District under APII ATP 50 Rehabilitation of Tularam Kathawal (Independent) in Bollu palle village in Ardhaveedu Mandal in Prakasam District 15

Rehabilitation of Pusalapadu tank in Pusalapadu village in Bestawaripeta mandal in Prakasam District 30

Rehabilitation of Yedavalli Small tank cascade No-16 in Yedavalli village in Racherla Mandal in Prakasam District 10

Rehabilitation of Circar tank (Independent) in Bhupatipalli village in Markapur Mandal in Prakasam District 10

Rehabilitation of naidu tank (Independent) in Pullayapalli village in Donakonda mandla in Prakasam District 35 Rehabilitation of Pedda Nagulavaram tank (Independent) in Peddanagulavaram village in Markapur mandal in Prakasam District 30 Rehabilitation of Circar Pedda Cheruvu Cascade No-05 in Palakaveedu village in Racherla Manadal in Prakasam District 5

Rehabilitation of Thimmaraju Obulapathi Tank (Independent) in Mundlapadu village in Giddaluru mandal in Prakasam District 5

Name of work Progress as on 31.12. 19 in % Rehabilitation of Sunkireddy tank cascade No-17(Rangareddy Tank &Sunki reddy Tank) in Chittireddy palli village in Giddaluru Mandal in Prakasam District 5

Annexure-3.9: Progress of civil works in Srikakulum district

Name of Work Progress as on 31.12.19 (in%)

Rehabilitation of Buchanna Karra Cascade 01 in PL Devi Peta Village in Burja Mandal in Srikakulam District 16%

Rehabilitation of Kotha Tank Cascade 05 in Kuppili Village in Etcherla Mandal in Srikakulam District . 34% Rehabilitation of Ponakala Tank of Amadalavlasa Village in Amadalavlasa Mandal in Srikakulam District . 2% Rehabilitation of Sagaram Tank of Ramachandrapuram Village in Amadalavlasa Mandal in Srikakulam District . 2% Rehabilitation of Bandikai Tank of Gorlepadu Village in Kaviti Mandal in Srikakulam District . 35%

Annexure 3.10 :Progress of civil works in Visakhaptanam district

Name of Work Progress as on 31.12.19 (in %) Modernization / Rehabilitation Yeerakanna Dora Tank cascade.07 in Anakapalli Village in Anakapalli (M) in Visakhapatnam District 2% Modernization/ Rehabilitation of Kanumala tank Cascade in Chinadoddigallu Village in Nakkapalli Mandal, Visakhapatnam District 5%

Modernization/ Rehabilitation of Jagannadhraju Tank Cascade.03 in Godicherla Village in Nakkapalli (M) , Visakhapatnam 7% District Modernization/ Rehabilitation of Palepu Tank Cascade No-01 in Kumarpuram Village in Golugonda (M), Visakhapatnam District 2% Modernization/ Rehabilitation of ILLAMDEVI Tank Cascade No-12 in Dakamarri Village in Bheemili (M), Visakhapatnam 4% District Modernization/ Rehabilitation of Ummadi Tank Cascade No-13 in Vemagiri Village in S.Rayavaram (M), Visakhapatnam District 2% Modernization/ Rehabilitation of Yedla Gedda Reservoir (Indpendent) in Kokkirapalli Village in Yellamanchili (M), Visakhapatnam District 2%

Modernization/ Rehabilitation of Pedda Tank (Independent) in Sunkapura (V), Kotaurtla (M), Visakhapatnam District 40%

Modernization/ Rehabilitation of Tamaracharla Channel (Independent) in Dimili (V), Rambilli (M), Visakhapatnam District 2%

Modernization/ Rehabilitation of Cheeranjivi Tank (Casecade No-9) in Bayyavaram (V), Makavarapupalem (M) , Visakhapatnam District 3%

Name of Work Progress as on 31.12.19 (in %) Modernization/ Rehabilitation of Yenadri Tank (Independent) in Revidi (V), Padmanabham (M) , Visakhapatnam District 2% Modernization/ Rehabilitation of Kanumala Tank (Casecade No. 11) in Erakannapalem (V), Narsipatnam (M), Visakhapatnam District 25% Modernization/ Rehabilitation of Tajangi Reservoir (Independent) in Tajangi (V), Chintapalli (M), Visakhapatnam District 2%

Modernization/ Rehabilitation of Lubharthi Reservoir (Independent)) in Lubharthi (V)of Chintalapudi (P) of Koyyuru (M), Visakhapatnam District 2%

Modernization/ Rehabilitation of Kinchavanipalem Reservoir (Independent)) in Kinchavanipalem (V)of Mampa (P) of Koyyuru (M) , Visakhapatnam District 2%

Modernization/ Rehabilitation of Palagedda anicut (Rachakattu anicut) in Kothayellavaram (V), Golugonda (M) , Visakhapatnam District 35%

Modernization/ Rehabilitation of Chowduvada channel (Independent ) in Chowduvada (V &M), Visakhapatnam District

30%

Annexure 3.11:Progress of works in Viziyanagaram district

Name of Work Progress as on 31.12.19 in % APIIATP- Modernization/ Rehabilitation Jayakara Tank cascade.01 in Devarapodilam Village in Cheepuripalli (M) in Vizianagaram District 7%

Modernization/Rehabilitation of Raju Tank (Indpendent) in Lingalavalasa Village in Dattirajeru (M) in Vizianagaram District 35% Modernization/Rehabilitation of Venkayya Tank (Indpendent) in Poram Village in Mentada (M) in Vizianagaram District 30% Modernization/Rehabilitation of Raju Tank Casacde No.-09 in Chinamedapalli Village in Mentada (M) in Vizianagaram District 30% Modernization/Rehabilitation of Vissanna Tank Casacde No.-8 in Cheepuravalasa Village in Kothavalasa (M) in Vizianagaram District 10%

Modernization/Rehabilitation of Anantasagaram Tank (Indpendent) in Sathivada Village in Nellimarla (M) in Vizianagaram District 5% Rehabilitation of Dabbiraju Tank (Indpendent) in Vallampadu Village in Vepada (M) in Vizianagaram District 10%

Modernization/Rehabilitation of Markonda Patnaikuni Tank (Indpendent) in Korlam Village in Meerakummidam (M) in Vizianagaram District 3%

Modernization/Rehabilitation of Vijayaramasagaram Tank (Indpendent) in Vasantha Village in Gantyada (M) in Vizianagaram District 28%

Modernization/Rehabilitation of Kondaraju Tank (Indpendent) in Gunupurupeta Village in Denkada (M) in Vizianagaram District 3%

Rehabilitation of Rani Cheruvu (Independent) in Lingapuram Village in Therlam Mandal, Vizianagaram district 32%

Rehabilitation of Komati Tank (Independent) in Uttaravilli Village in Merakamudidam Mandal in Vizianagaram District 31%

Rehabilitation of Sada Sivuni Tank Cascade No-19 (Mandapadu Tank & Sada Sivuni Tank) in Uttaravalli Village in Merakamudidam Mandal in Vizianagaram District 40%

Annexure 3.12: Progress of civil works in West Godavari district

Name of Work Progress as on 31.12.19 (in terms of %) Rehabilitation of Ura tank (Independent) in Jeelugumilli village in Jeelugumilli(M) , West Godavari 90%

Rehabilitation3 of Puntha tank (Independent) in Reddi Ganapavaram village in Buttaigudem(M) , West Godavari 20% Rehabilitation of Bommaraju kunta Cascade No.3 in Rayannapalem village in Pedavegi Mandal, West Godavari 10% District Rehabilitation of Andachandala tank (Independent) Antarvedigudem village in Buttaigudem(M), West Godavari 90% District Rehabilitation of Allicalva tank (Independent) in Manchulavarigudem village in Buttaigudem(M) , West Godavari District 5%

Rehabilitation Singasamudram Tank Cascade .01 in Thirumalapalem Village in Dwaraka Tirumala mandal , West Godavari District 40%

Rehabilitation of Gatchkayala Kunta Cascade.02 in ChakrayagudemVillage in Pedavegi (M) , West Godavari District 5%

Rehabilation of Lothuvagu Tank Independent in Buruguvada in Buttaigudem (M), West Godavari District 90%

Annexure -6.1

District-wise Action Plan of the activities 2019-20 S.No District Civil works Equipment PH supply Remarks Brood Fish Captive Fish to Aqua of fishing bank seed nurseries landing lab inputs- farm centres retail outlet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 Srikakulam - - 4 - - - Estimates to be prepared- 2 Vizia - - 5 - 1 1 Lab building is nagaram ready .Estimates to be prepared- 3 Visakhapatnam - - 4 1 - 1 Estimates prepared for nurseries. 4 East - 1 14 1 - 1 Estimates Godavari prepared for nurseries, fish farm. 5 West Godavari ------

6 Krishna - - 4 - - 1 Estimates to be prepared- 7 Prakasham ------

8 PSR Nellore - 1 8 1 - 1 Estimates prepared for nurseries, fish farm. 9 Chittoor - 1 - - 1 Estimates prepared for nurseries. 10 YSR Kadapa 1 1 2 - - 1 Estimates prepared for nurseries, brood bank and fish farm. 11 Ananatapur - 1 3 1 - - Estimates prepared for nurseries,fish landing centre and fish farm . 12 Kurnool - 1 10 1 - - Estimates prepared for nurseriesand fish farm . TOTAL 1 5 55 5 1 7

Annexure9. 1 Beneficiary Status

Borewell user Other % %Other Borewell % Borewell user Control/ in tank Non- water Grand % Borewell %Non- water %Grand District Ayacutdar user in in tank influence Project influence Ayacutdar users Total Ayacutdar user in Ayacutdar users Total ayacut zone zone (Specify) ayacut (Specify) CONTROL Anantapur 15 15 100 0 0 0 0 100 Chittor 4 6 4 1 15 27 40 27 7 0 100 East Godavari 15 15 100 0 0 0 0 100 Kadapa 15 15 100 0 0 0 0 100 Krishna 15 15 100 0 0 0 0 100 Kurnool 13 1 1 15 87 0 0 7 7 100 Nellore 15 15 100 0 0 0 0 100 Prakasham 15 15 100 0 0 0 0 100 Srikakulam 12 12 100 0 0 0 0 100 Vizianagaram 15 15 100 0 0 0 0 100 West Godavari 15 15 100 0 0 0 0 100 CONTROL Total 149 6 4 2 1 162 92 4 2 1 1 100 PROJECT Anantapur 60 60 100 0 0 0 0 100 Chittor 20 21 16 2 1 60 33 35 27 3 2 100 East Godavari 60 60 100 0 0 0 0 100 Kadapa 63 63 100 0 0 0 0 100 Krishna 61 1 62 98 0 0 0 2 100 Kurnool 59 1 60 98 0 0 2 0 100 Nellore 59 1 60 98 0 0 0 2 100 Prakasham 57 3 60 95 0 0 0 5 100 Srikakulam 36 1 37 97 0 0 0 3 100 Vizianagaram 54 1 1 2 58 93 2 2 0 3 100

Annexure 9.2 Household size wise (No of Acres)

Control/ Project District 0 to 1 1 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 4 4 to 5 5 to 6 6 to 7 7 to 8 8 to 9 9 to 10 10 Above Grand Total CONTROL Anantapur 8 3 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 15 Chittor 4 5 1 1 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 15 East Godavari 6 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 15 Kadapa 4 6 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 Krishna 3 2 1 4 1 0 1 1 0 0 2 15 Kurnool 5 1 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 15 Nellore 4 5 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 Prakasham 7 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 Srikakulam 7 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 Vizianagaram 7 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 West Godavari 6 7 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 CONTROL Total 61 52 21 12 5 3 2 2 0 1 3 162 PROJECT Anantapur 26 8 7 4 5 1 1 2 0 1 5 60 Chittor 8 13 12 8 10 2 1 1 0 0 5 60 East Godavari 25 17 4 9 0 2 0 0 1 2 0 60 Kadapa 8 15 9 16 5 0 4 4 1 1 0 63 Krishna 15 16 6 4 6 2 1 1 2 1 8 62 Kurnool 10 11 4 8 8 4 1 1 2 2 9 60 Nellore 17 17 6 3 7 3 2 0 0 3 2 60 Prakasham 32 7 4 6 3 3 0 1 1 0 3 60 Srikakulam 18 10 3 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 Vizianagaram 32 14 6 2 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 58 West Godavari 8 11 8 3 10 3 3 2 0 3 9 60 PROJECT Total 199 139 69 67 58 21 13 13 7 13 41 640 Grand Total 260 191 90 79 63 24 15 15 7 14 44 802

Household size wise (No of Acres) – percentage(%)

Control/ Project District 0 to 1 1 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 4 4 to 5 5 to 6 6 to 7 7 to 8 8 to 9 9 to 10 10 Above Grand Total

CONTROL Anantapur 53.3 20.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Chittor 26.7 33.3 6.7 6.7 6.7 13.3 0.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

East Godavari 40.0 40.0 6.7 0.0 6.7 0.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Kadapa 26.7 40.0 20.0 13.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Krishna 20.0 13.3 6.7 26.7 6.7 0.0 6.7 6.7 0.0 0.0 13.3 100.0

Kurnool 33.3 6.7 33.3 13.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.7 6.7 100.0

Nellore 26.7 33.3 13.3 20.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Prakasham 46.7 53.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Srikakulam 58.3 33.3 8.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Vizianagaram 46.7 33.3 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

West Godavari 40.0 46.7 6.7 0.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

CONTROL Total 37.7 32.1 13.0 7.4 3.1 1.9 1.2 1.2 0.0 0.6 1.9 100.0

PROJECT Anantapur 20.0 13.3 13.3 13.3 13.3 3.3 3.3 6.7 0.0 0.0 13.3 100.0

Chittor 20.0 20.0 23.3 16.7 16.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.3 100.0

East Godavari 26.7 36.7 13.3 20.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Control/ Project District 0 to 1 1 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 4 4 to 5 5 to 6 6 to 7 7 to 8 8 to 9 9 to 10 10 Above Grand Total

Kadapa 9.7 32.3 6.5 32.3 9.7 0.0 9.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Krishna 6.5 16.1 12.9 12.9 19.4 6.5 0.0 3.2 6.5 3.2 12.9 100.0

Kurnool 3.3 13.3 6.7 10.0 26.7 6.7 0.0 3.3 3.3 3.3 23.3 100.0

Nellore 10.0 20.0 10.0 6.7 23.3 10.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 6.7 6.7 100.0

Prakasham 40.0 3.3 10.0 16.7 6.7 6.7 0.0 3.3 3.3 0.0 10.0 100.0

Srikakulam 46.2 30.8 11.5 3.8 7.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Vizianagaram 21.4 42.9 14.3 7.1 7.1 3.6 0.0 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

West Godavari 3.3 16.7 10.0 3.3 13.3 3.3 6.7 3.3 0.0 10.0 30.0 100.0

PROJECT Total 18.4 22.1 12.0 13.2 13.2 4.0 2.5 2.1 1.2 2.1 9.2 100.0

Grand Total 66.7 13.3 10.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.3 3.3 100.0

Annexure 3.3 Caste wise Details

Control/ Grand %Grand Project District SC ST BC Others Total %SC %ST %BC %Others Total CONTROL Anantapur 7 8 15 0 0 47 53 100 Chittor 1 14 15 0 0 7 93 100 East Godavari 15 15 0 0 0 100 100 Kadapa 2 5 8 15 13 0 33 53 100 Krishna 4 1 10 15 27 0 7 67 100 Kurnool 3 10 2 15 20 0 67 13 100 Nellore 5 1 9 15 33 7 0 60 100 Prakasham 1 3 11 15 7 0 20 73 100 Srikakulam 11 1 12 0 0 92 8 100 Vizianagaram 15 15 0 0 100 0 100 West Godavari 12 3 15 0 0 80 20 100 CONTROL Total 15 1 65 81 162 9 1 40 50 100 PROJECT Anantapur 3 48 9 60 5 0 80 15 100 Chittor 12 7 41 60 20 0 12 68 100 East Godavari 1 12 47 60 2 0 20 78 100 Kadapa 7 20 36 63 11 0 32 57 100 Krishna 1 1 28 32 62 2 2 45 52 100 Kurnool 9 1 36 14 60 15 2 60 23 100 Nellore 6 6 48 60 10 0 10 80 100 Prakasham 8 4 14 34 60 13 7 23 57 100 Srikakulam 2 34 1 37 0 5 92 3 100 Vizianagaram 1 14 42 1 58 2 24 72 2 100 West Godavari 4 7 21 28 60 7 12 35 47 100 PROJECT Total 52 29 268 291 640 8 5 42 45 100 Grand Total 67 30 333 372 802 8 4 42 46 100

Annexure 9.4 – Type of house/shelter

% Semi Control /Project District Total Nos. Pucca Semi Pucca Kutcha % Pucca house % Kutcha Total value Avg Value pucca CONTROL Anantapur 15 15 100 0 0 3238000 215867 Chittor 15 15 100 0 0 5130000 342000 East Godavari 15 9 6 60 40 0 17330000 1925562 Kadapa 15 15 100 0 0 4410000 294000 Krishna 15 13 2 87 0 13 16140000 1241540 Kurnool 15 12 1 2 80 7 13 5730000 477503 Nellore 15 15 100 0 0 3115000 207667 Prakasham 15 15 100 0 0 3300000 220000 Srikakulam 12 12 100 0 0 2603000 216917 Vizianagaram 15 15 100 0 0 5300000 353333 West Godavari 15 15 100 0 0 12530000 835333 CONTROL Total 162 151 7 4 93 4 2 78826000 522037 PROJECT Anantapur 60 60 100 0 0 14980000 249667 Chittor 60 58 1 1 97 2 2 28250000 487071 East Godavari 60 54 5 1 90 8 2 29100000 538895 Kadapa 63 62 1 98 0 2 33195000 535404 Krishna 62 57 4 92 6 0 39290000 689303 Kurnool 60 58 2 97 0 3 22830000 393623 Nellore 60 60 100 0 0 20500000 341667 Prakasham 60 56 4 93 7 0 24350000 434825 Srikakulam 37 36 97 0 0 9690000 269168 Vizianagaram 58 52 4 2 90 7 3 30311000 582910 West Godavari 60 53 6 1 88 10 2 17680000 333592 PROJECT Total 640 606 24 8 95 4 1 270176000 445869 Grand Total 802 757 31 12 94 4 1 349002000 461078

Annexure 9.6 (A) Agriculture implements – District wise

Tractor Poewr trillers Bullock Carts Plough ( Nagali) Cultivator

Project/Control District No Total Total Average Total Total Averag Total Total Average Total Total Average Total Average of % % % % Total No. % No. Value Value No. Value e Value No. Value Value No. Value Value Value Value HH

CONTROL Anantapur 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chittor 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 1000 1000 0 0 East 15 1 7 650000 650000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Godavari Kadapa 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Krishna 15 3 20 1100000 366666 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 20 57000 19000 Kurnool 15 2 13 250000 125000 2 13 55000 27500 3 20 55000 18333 3 20 18000 6000 0 0 Nellore 15 1 7 500000 500000 1 7 19000 19000 0 0 2 13 12000 6000 0 0 Prakasham 15 0 0 0 0 5 33 58000 11600 1 7 8000 8000 0 0 Srikakulam 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vizianagaram 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 West 15 1 7 900000 900000 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 15000 15000 Godavari

CONTROL Total 162 8 5 3400000 425000 3 2 74000 24666 8 5 113000 14125 7 4 39000 5571 4 2 72000 18000

PROJECT Anantapur 60 1 2 750000 750000 1 2 2000 2000 6 10 182000 30333 10 17 33600 3360 0 0

Chittor 60 10 17 1477000 147700 4 7 78000 19500 0 0 2 3 2000 1000 0 0

Tractor Poewr trillers Bullock Carts Plough ( Nagali) Cultivator

East 60 1 2 6000000 6000000 1 2 24000 24000 0 0 0 0 1 2 24000 24000 Godavari

566666.6 36666. Kadapa 63 3 5 1700000 3 5 110000 0 0 1 2 23000 23000 0 0 667 66667

Krishna 62 8 13 3620000 452500 0 0 0 0 5 8 40000 8000 7 11 80000 11429

Kurnool 60 13 22 2600000 200000 3 5 55000 18333 15 25 327000 21800 16 27 93000 5813 0 0

Nellore 60 4 7 2000000 500000 1 2 50000 50000 3 5 30000 10000 0 0 0 0

Prakasham 60 0 0 1 2 10000 10000 2 3 38000 19000 1 2 6000 6000 0 0

Srikakulam 37 2 5 840000 420000 0 0 0 0 4 11 16000 4000 0 0

Vizianagaram 58 2 3 800000 400000 1 2 30000 30000 0 0 8 14 10500 1313 0 0

Tractor Poewr trillers Bullock Carts Plough ( Nagali) Cultivator

West 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Godavari

449704.5 PROJECT Total 640 44 7 19787000 15 2 359000 23933 26 4 577000 22192 47 7 224100 4768 8 1 104000 13000 455

445903.8 Grand Total 802 52 6 23187000 18 2 433000 24055 34 4 690000 20294 54 7 263100 4872 12 1 176000 14667 462

Annexure 9.6 (B) Agriculture implements – District wise

Pumpset Oil Engine Sprayer (Manual) Sprayer (Power) Project/Control District Total Total Average Total Total Average Total Total Average Total Total Average % % % % No. Value Value No. Value Value No. Value Value No. Value Value

CONTROL Anantapur 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 13 24000 12000

Chittor 7 47 291000 41571 0 0 0 0 0 0

East Godavari 1 7 700000 700000 0 0 0 0 0 0

Kadapa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Krishna 5 33 535000 107000 3 20 42000 14000 1 7 8000 8000 5 33 32500 6500

Kurnool 0 0 0 0 8 53 34000 4250 0 0

Nellore 0 0 0 0 1 7 10000 10000 1 7 9000 9000

Prakasham 0 0 0 0 2 13 20000 10000 0 0

Srikakulam 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Vizianagaram 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

West Godavari 0 0 0 0 6 40 17500 2917 0 0

CONTROL Total 13 8 1526000 117385 3 2 42000 14000 18 11 89500 4972 8 5 65500 8188

PROJECT Anantapur 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7 33000 8250

Chittor 20 33 766000 38300 1 2 15000 15000 15 25 66000 4400 0 0

East Godavari 0 0 1 2 13000 13000 4 7 12000 3000 1 2 7000 7000

Kadapa 1 2 60000 60000 0 0 0 0 3 5 17500 5833

Krishna 13 21 1200000 92308 4 6 74000 18500 4 6 23500 5875 11 18 139000 12636

Kurnool 0 0 5 8 110000 22000 33 55 103600 3139 32 53 54000 10800

Nellore 3 5 60000 20000 0 0 3 5 24000 8000 2 3 19000 9500

Prakasham 1 2 50000 50000 1 2 15000 15000 5 8 45000 9000 1 2 9000 9000

Srikakulam 0 0 0 0 4 11 14000 3500 4 11 19000 4750

Vizianagaram 2 3 510000 255000 4 7 40000 13333 3 5 12000 4000 1 2 8000 8000

West Godavari 2 3 1450000 725000 0 0 2 3 5000 2500 1 2 5000 5000

PROJECT Total 42 7 4096000 97524 16 3 267000 17800 73 11 305100 4179 60 9 310500 9409

Grand Total 55 7 5622000 102218 19 2 309000 17167 91 11 394600 4336 68 8 376000 9171

Annexure 9.7 Milch Animals

S. No_of.Milk_animals Category District No_of_Milk_animals_hybrid_cows No_of_Milk_animals_local_buffaloes No_of_Milk_animals_Local_cows No. _hybrid_buffaloes 1 Anantapur 0 0 0 0 2 Chittor 0 0 0 8 East 3 0 0 0 0 Godavari 4 Kadapa 0 0 0 3 5 Krishna 0 0 19 0

6 Kurnool 0 0 0 6 Control 7 Nellore 0 0 2 0 8 Prakasham 0 0 2 0 9 Srikakulam 0 0 0 0 10 Vizianagaram 0 0 0 0 West 11 0 0 8 7 Godavari 12 Anantapur 1 0 7 12 13 Chittor 2 8 21 42 East 14 1 0 15 1 Godavari 15 Kadapa 0 3 28 52 16 Krishna 0 0 55 1

17 Kurnool 0 0 0 72 Project 18 Nellore 0 0 15 0 19 Prakasham 0 0 4 0 20 Srikakulam 0 0 22 1 21 Vizianagaram 8 8 19 0 West 22 0 0 21 0 Godavari

Annexure 9.8 Household Income

Agriculture - Agriculture - Other from Ayacut Petty Service(Govt/ Leasing out Animals/ Dairy Dairy own from Category Artisan Wages Income and Influence Business Private) land Poultry commission animals NonAyacut zone area area Control 438000 10341615 90000 2126000 60000 1343000 212000 68380 1004915 1115480 Anantapur 30000 20000 113000 Chittor 235000 311300 990000 54000 8000 37080 207090 107280 East Godavari 1111200 13000 Kadapa 60000 656000 40000 36000 Krishna 150000 6119910 480000 40000 66000 24000 417800 779200 Kurnool 763920 121000 31300 54400 136000 Nellore 26000 1111000 409000 Prakasham 27000 275000 540000 180000 Srikakulam Vizianagaram West Godavari 649285 289625 80000 Project 3029200 36879177 108000 1333000 8195000 648600 9964900 262000 371410 4341328 17418020 Anantapur 158000 2016250 58000 36000 180000 10000 660500 57000 293320 777000 Chittor 1791700 3820300 10000 500000 1970000 13600 1030900 66650 702155 1392620 East Godavari 2572320 229598 1005000 Kadapa 123000 25000 575000 635000 21500 441900 78800 Krishna 532000 4627967 100000 3020000 2392500 9000 625565 8824000 Kurnool 7169500 230000 797000 70100 609500 1539500 Nellore 82000 4279400 40000 160000 1360000 35000 1617000 110000 194160 117100 500400 Prakasham 438000 996000 420000 1040000 290000 2543000 55000 31500 771300 Srikakulam 7500 1211400 92000 195000 18000 193500 Vizianagaram 20000 2739340 50000 94000 500 959050 120400 West Godavari 7323700 70000 169640 2409000 Grand Total 3467200 47220792 198000 1333000 10321000 708600 11307900 474000 439790 5346243 18533500

Annexure 9.9 Househod consumption pattern

Housing / Food Other food Fuel Interest Events and Other District Total Nos. Education Clothing Health Transport Electricity Project/Control rental Grains items wood charges festivals Expnd CONTROL Anantapur 1481200 0 282000 164000 122000 114000 162000 87000 65200 32000 310000 143000 0 Chittor 1533860 0 302300 190800 41000 118000 283000 81300 48180 130880 132400 206000 0 East Godavari 425800 0 67000 55000 30000 50000 27000 65000 20000 11800 0 100000 Kadapa 1716450 0 407000 305000 110000 218000 170000 126000 62400 34550 5000 275000 3500 Krishna 3011750 0 289400 338600 960000 243000 294000 287000 72200 45950 338100 143500 Kurnool 2275200 0 224000 205000 135800 149500 797500 77600 49000 80000 382800 174000 0 Nellore 1034500 0 150000 119000 61000 67200 97000 77300 48600 54900 247500 112000 Prakasham 1728400 0 158000 186000 73000 115000 97000 76000 57200 37700 803500 115000 10000 Srikakulam 697800 0 116000 118000 54000 86000 87000 48500 37500 53600 6200 81000 10000 Vizianagaram 691500 0 97000 74000 77000 125000 48000 45000 27500 56000 0 142000 0 West 1758800 0 232000 219000 175000 184000 198000 171000 134700 66800 203300 175000 0 Godavari CONTROL Total 16355260 0 2324700 1974400 1838800 1469700 2260500 1141700 622480 604180 2428800 1666500 23500 PROJECT Anantapur 6381100 707000 954000 590000 346000 512000 470600 338200 231300 259000 1461000 512000 0 Chittor 10436436 0 1584000 1614000 1174000 1060500 1368000 640000 341900 201100 1396436 1017500 39000 East Godavari 4321200 0 709000 345000 790000 350000 458000 352000 124000 118200 690000 385000 0 Kadapa 11620320 0 1817700 1203000 3022000 929500 1647500 472800 350700 196920 604900 1023800 351500 Krishna 15537750 0 1544800 1979000 2423000 1062000 2167000 1006500 332800 227150 1573000 3216000 6500 Kurnool 17057214 0 683006 354823 9160000 464146 1278000 3437000 194937 92006 894226 499037 33 Nellore 6596007 6 754000 585000 1474000 602300 802000 341000 385400 227500 834001 587800 3000 Prakasham 7398500 0 1113000 1025300 909000 656500 975500 467800 235200 170800 1175400 642000 28000 Srikakulam 2080100 6000 317000 195800 362500 300000 203200 170900 149300 83900 5000 286500 Vizianagaram 4944000 0 785200 603400 845800 642300 421500 408300 312500 243600 82400 581000 18000 West 3070300 0 489000 336000 275000 314000 481000 458200 160100 147400 137600 271000 1000 Godavari PROJECT Total 89442927 713006 10750706 8831323 20781300 6893246 10272300 8092700 2818137 1967576 8853963 9021637 447033 Grand Total 105798187 713006 13075406 10805723 22620100 8362946 12532800 9234400 3440617 2571756 11282763 10688137 470533

Annexure 9.10 Household Borrowing sources – District wise

Cooperative Money Total Number of Project/Control District Total Banks SHGs Friends Traders Micro finance Others societies lenders Sources CONTROL Anantapur 15 14 0 4 5 0 1 0 0 24 Chittor 15 8 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 12 East Godavari 15 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 4 Kadapa 15 5 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 11 Krishna 15 10 2 4 4 1 1 0 1 23 Kurnool 15 8 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 13 Nellore 15 11 0 1 3 2 0 0 0 17 Prakasham 15 13 0 1 2 7 0 0 0 23 Srikakulam 12 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 Vizianagaram 15 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 West Godavari 15 9 6 8 1 2 0 0 0 26

CONTROL Total 162 98 8 26 25 12 2 0 1 172

PROJECT Anantapur 60 37 3 24 17 10 5 0 0 96 Chittor 60 37 0 15 6 1 1 0 0 60 East Godavari 60 21 3 12 3 3 0 0 0 42 Kadapa 63 49 4 26 14 1 0 0 0 94 Krishna 62 48 6 17 10 5 0 0 5 91 Kurnool 60 24 0 27 20 1 0 0 0 72 Nellore 60 33 0 18 8 8 0 0 0 67 Prakasham 60 38 5 17 12 7 3 0 3 85 Srikakulam 37 21 7 4 0 0 0 0 0 32 Vizianagaram 58 25 18 12 0 2 0 0 0 57 West Godavari 60 19 4 14 5 1 0 0 0 43 PROJECT Total 640 352 50 186 95 39 9 0 8 739 Grand Total 802 450 58 212 120 51 11 0 9 911