Appendix 10 improving access to finance in e and w africa final project evaluation

Annex 10

PROJECT EVALUATION REPORT

PROJECT TITLE:

IMPROVING ACCESS TO FINANCE IN EAST AND WEST AFRICA

DOCUMENT PREPARED BY:

EVENTZPRO CONSULT P.O. Box AF 758 ADENTA FRAFRAHA, ACCRA-GHANA CONTACT: (+233) 0278144447/0209754970 Kbtey77@gmail.com

SUBMITTED TO:

SHARED INTEREST FOUNDATION No. 2 CATHEDERAL SQUARE THE GROAT MARKET NEWCASTLE UPON TYNE NE1 1EH, UK

JULY 2015

1

DECLARATION We hereby declare that this evaluation report presented on 29th July, 2015 to Shared Interest Foundation is the work of Eventzpro Consult and does not in any way express the views of other persons or organisations except for acknowledged opinions or references. Eventzpro is solely responsible for omissions and commissions in this report. The Evaluation Team from Eventzpro Consult consists of the following

Kwame Fosu Boateng

(Lead)

…………signed……………………

Lawrence Yirenkyi-Boafo

(Analyst)

…………signed…………………… …………signed………….…………

Emmanuel Hammond Dougan (Analyst)

2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT We express our profound gratitude to the Almighty God for His guidance and protection during the delivery of this project. We express our heartfelt appreciation to Comic Relief, Shared Interest Foundation and Fairtrade Africa for their wonderful cooperation and support especially from Malcolm Spence, Joanne Hall, Wangeci Gitata, Kwame Banson, Catharine Russell, Kodzo Korkortsi and John Dossou To the producer organisations who willingly and warmly welcomed us into their various offices and sites, we ask that the Almighty God bless you and increase your barns. To Theophilus Kyamasi, Salome Kilonzo, Alhaji Sidique, Humphrey Ayisi, Ohene Boafo and Asa Ofori who gathered their members and the necessary information we needed to complete this project, we are thankful for your support.

Finally, we say a big thank you to Gideon Mensah Mamah who served as the Secretary to the Project Team for his excellent clerical and analytical work. We also acknowledge all who have in diverse ways helped towards the completion of the project but have not been mentioned here, we say thank you.

3

TABLE OF CONTENT Declaration

2

Acknowledgement

3

Executive Summary

5

Chapter 1: General Introduction

7

1.0 Introduction

7

Chapter 2: Methodology

8

2.0 Introduction

8

2.1 Design

8

Chapter 3: Findings from the evaluation and Recommendation

10

3.0 Introduction

10

3.1 What Difference has the Project Made?

10

3.1.1 To what extent has the project met its objectives and outcomes

10

3.1.2 Were there any unexpected outcomes? (Both expected and unexpected)

11

3.1.3 How effectively and efficiently was the project implemented?

12

3.1.4 3.1.5 3.1.6 3.1.7 3.1.8 3.1.9 3.1.10 3.1.11 3.1.12

12 13 14 15 16 16 16 17 17

Who has benefited (women, men, boys and girls) and what ways?

What was the impact of the project?

Were they any relevant to people’s needs?

What changes can be evidenced in People’s lives?

To what extent has the achievement been influenced by external factors?

What sustainability measures are in place?

What impact has the project made on the target businesses?

Did the social investment pilot have any impact on this project?

What sources of loan finance have the target businesses been able to access?

3.2 How has the Project made this Difference?

18

3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.4 3.2.5 3.3 3.3.1 3.3.2 3.3.3

18 19 19 19 20 20 21 21 22

What has worked well and what has not worked?

How have relationships between partners influenced project outcome?

How effective has the project’s management, MEL financial systems been?

Has the project delivered in terms of value for money?

How effective was the project’s MEL system?

How has Comic Relief’s grant making policies been effective?

Were policy goals clear enough?

To what extent were strategies most appropriate to realizing policy goals?

Were programme outcomes SMART? 4

3.3.4 3.3.5 3.3.6 3.4 3.5

Was there adequate stakeholder involvement?

Was applications appraisal process transparent?

Did the applications process influence the attainment of project objectives?

Learning and Innovation Recommendations

22 22 22 23 24

Appendix I: List of People and Organisations Interviewed

27

Appendix II: List of Documents Reviewed

28

Appendix II: Time Schedule

29

Appendix IV: Ethical Considerations for Eventzpro Project Evaluation Team

30

Appendix V: Data Collection tools (Interview schedules and questionnaires used)

31

Appendix VI: Picture Gallery

41

Appendix VII –Field Survey Data From Selected Cooperatives

45

List of Abbreviations FTA

–

FairTrade Africa

EAD

-

Easy Africa Designs Limited

MSA

-

Marie – Sar Agencies

FONA

-

Fruits of the Nile Association

GOIG

-

Going Old Is to Grow

RSTGA

-

Rungwe Smallholder Tea Growers

ITOA

-

Igominyi Tea Out Growers Association

MEL

-

Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning

CDI

–

Cote D’Iviore

5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Evaluation of projects is an essential element in project management as it helps to determine the success or failure of the project and the lessons that were learnt. Eventzpro Consult therefore evaluated the “Improving Access to Finance in East and West Africa” project which was funded

by Comic Relief and jointly implemented by Fairtrade Africa and Shared Interest Foundation.

Eventzpro employed a mixed methodology and a system of triangulation to assess the impact of the project as well as achieve the aim of the project evaluation. We conclude our evaluation as follows; i.

ii.

iii.

The project has significantly achieved its intended objectives on the basis of the following; a. 81.3% in terms of targeted number of cooperatives to train b. 104% attainment of mentoring objectives c. The project recorded 48 cooperatives applying for loans instead of the initial 30 thereby representing an over-achievement over the target by 60% d. 80% (i.e. 24 out of 30) achievement in loan disbursement to cooperatives as at May 2015 e. 256% achievement in terms of value of loans disbursement (i.e. £2.56million instead of £1 million initially targeted) The highly commendable achievements of the project were made possible through the following ways; a.

Effective coordination between Shared Interest Foundation and Fairtrade Africa on one hand and other services providers across five countries on the other hand. b.

Effective project planning with highly efficient and effective MEL plan c.

Effective application of experiential learning methodologies during training sessions d.

Provision of adequate funding that met the needs of most of the cooperatives e.

Bespoke coaching methods that enabled many cooperatives to meet the requirements of Shared Interest loans We are confident to say that Comic Relief’s grant making policies and processes have greatly helped the delivery of lasting change. This is attributable to the following; a.

Clearly outlined and communicated policy goals b.

Carefully designed strategies that was informed by stakeholder inputs and met most of the needs of beneficiaries c.

Mostly SMART programme outcomes d.

Professionally transparent loan appraisal processes void of discrimination and biases

Recommendations: Eventzpro’s project evaluation team therefore recommends that, a project unit or manager be established or assigned respectively to be directly responsible for any project of this nature. Also adequate training on costing and budgeting be given to the FTA project/program managers before the completion of a project proposal document. In order to reduce the huge bank charges on project funds, the Evaluation Team recommends that funds should be directly transferred to the manager responsible for a particular region for onward spending. There must be adequate budgetary allocation for internal MEL for mentoring sessions in any subsequent project(s).

6

CHAPTER ONE GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1.0 BACKGROUND Improving access to finance in East and West Africa is a project that was funded by Comic Relief and implemented by Fairtrade Africa and Shared Interest Foundation. The project’s aim was to improve financial management knowledge and skills of cooperatives in five selected countries in East and West Africa namely Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Ghana and Cote D’Ivoire.

The project commenced in April 2013 and ended in March 2015. The specific objective of the project was to equip socially responsible businesses with tools to develop and grow by understanding how to gain access to financing towards making significant difference in the lives of people.

Upon the completion of the project, it was necessary to ascertain the impact made by the project on the targeted beneficiaries. Eventzpro was therefore mandated to undertake the evaluation of the project. The goal of the project evaluation task was to ascertain how far Fairtrade Africa and Shared Interest Foundation have gone towards achieving the mutually agreed outcomes as stated in the original project plans. The project evaluation spanned the period 30th March, 2015 to 29th July, 2015.

In line with achieving the project evaluation goal as stated in the Terms of Reference (TOR), Eventzpro worked (collected and analysed data) towards answering three principal questions which include the following: a. What difference has the project made? b. How has the project made this difference? c. How has Comic Relief’s grant making policies and processes helped or hindered the delivery of lasting change?

This report presents an analysis towards establishing the extent to which activities undertaken in line with this project have achieved their intended outcomes and the extent to which the project made a difference; how it made that difference and how effective Comic Relief’s grant making process has been.

7

CHAPTER TWO METHODOLOGY 2.0 Introduction This chapter presents the methodology that the Evaluation Team employed to ascertain the objectives of the project.

2.1 Design The evaluation team employed a mixed methodology and used a system of triangulation to establish answers to the questions raised in the TOR of project evaluation. Both primary and secondary data were collected and analysed towards answering the research questions. With respect to secondary data; annual and country reports from Fairtrade Africa and Shared Interest Foundation relating to the project were reviewed in line with the objectives of the project evaluation. Individual country reports contained the evaluation reports of financial management training, participants’ feedback/assessment of the entire training and reports of mentoring sessions. There was a unique modification made in Ghana to train cooperatives on corporate governance in the second year, hence report on this training and participants’ feedback were also reviewed.

Primary data was collected from seven (7) randomly sampled cooperatives out of a total of fortyseven (47) cooperatives which were mentored across all five project countries. We paid visits to five (5) mentored cooperatives in Ghana, one (1) mentored cooperative in Kenya and physically interviewed the CEO of one (1) cooperative in Cote D’Ivoire. In Kenya, we conducted focus group discussion with members of one cooperative in Kakuyini during which thirty-five (35) farmers were interacted with. We also interviewed one (1) training consultant (Abena Otu of EDC consult) in Ghana, one training consultant in Cote D’Ivoire (Yao Fulbert) and one training consultant in Kenya (Judy Kithinji) all of whom were consulted by the project to develop training materials, train cooperatives and mentor cooperatives which were objectively shortlisted.

Furthermore, we interviewed Malcolm Spence (Programme manager, trade and enterprise Comic Relief, UK), Joanne Hall (Shared Interest programme manager), Wangeci Gitata (Nairobi based programme manager) and Catherine Russell (FTA M&E manager based in Nairobi). The others are; Marion N’ganga (FTA, Nairobi), Kwame Banson (Accra based FTA programme manager), Kodzo Korkortsi (Shared Interest Society M&E officer based in Accra) and John Dossou (Accra based Shared Interest Society’s business development manager).

The analysis of primary and secondary data gathered were interspersed to ascertain the extent to which the project made a difference, how it made that difference and how effective Comic Relief’s grant making process has been. The overall methodological framework employed is illustrated in Figure 1.0 and outcome of the evaluation is presented in the subsequent chapters of this report.

8

Figure 1: Methodological Framework

Collection of data from secondary sources Initial de-briefing/finalized research approach/work schedules

Data processing & Analysis Collection of data from primary sources Discussion of findings & presentation of alternative recommendations

Report writing

Discussion of factors to consider in implementation

As part of the ethical principles employed by the consultants, participants of the survey were promised utmost confidentiality hence, this report does not make specific attribution of information gathered to individuals rather reference is made to their offices instead (See Appendix IV for the ethical considerations employed by the study).

9

CHAPTER THREE FINDINGS FROM THE EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION 3.0 Introduction This chapter of the report presents the findings of the project Evaluation Team from both the review of secondary and primary data as against the research questions of the project. The secondary data that were reviewed pertained to the reports of the training and mentoring activities undertaken during the “Access to Finance in East and West Africa� project. The chapter presents analyses of data gathered towards answering research questions outlined in the TOR.

3.1 What difference has the Project Made?

In wholly answering the above question, the specific questions below were attended to after which conclusions were formed.

3.1.1 To what extent has the project met its objectives and outcomes?

The project had four main objectives which were to; a. Train 150 cooperative representatives in key financial management skills concepts. b. Introduce 150 co-operative representatives to sources of finance including information on social lenders. c. Mentor 45 co-operatives in situ to embed learning in financial management and enhance their own systems to deliver and understand financial statements. d. Assist 30 co-operatives to make good quality applications for loan finance with a target of achieving ÂŁ1 million of approved lending over the 2 year project life cycle.

Analysis of data gathered revealed that, in terms of the first objective, 122 cooperative representatives representing 81.3% of the target group were trained in financial management across the two regions of the project. One of the cardinal principles of the training was to help them to appreciate the essence of good book keeping and reporting frequently to the management team on the cooperatives. Participants were taken through cash flow statement preparation, income statement preparation, preparation of statement of financial position and financial statement analysis.

All representatives of respective cooperatives at the workshop were also introduced to business and strategic planning as well as the various sources of financing including social lenders.

Shared Interest Society was given the opportunity to make presentations at the various 10

workshops that were organised to increase participants’ appreciation of the business operations of Shared Interest Society and other social lenders. In the annual project reports it was evidenced that, 86 individuals (63 males and 23 females) from 32 new businesses were trained in financial management whiles 90 businesses (80 agri-businesses and 10 handcraft) were trained in the first year.

In respect of the third objective, it was discovered that 47 cooperatives were mentored and embedded with financial management skills. This exceeded the objective of mentoring 45 cooperatives by 2 cooperatives. The mentoring sessions improved their financial systems as they were helped to develop their own business plans, financial projections and sales forecast.

According to year 2 report of Comic Relief, 18 producer organisations represented by 73 individuals (58 male and 15 female) were mentored as part of the project. Meanwhile, the remaining 29 were mentored in the year 1 of the project. Forty eight (48) cooperatives were assisted to make applications for loans from Shared Interest Society out of which 24 had already been granted and the remaining are still in the loan appraisal process as at the time this report was written.

In answering the extent to which the project met its fourth objective, it was discovered that the £1million initial target of loans to be approval was exceeded by £1.56 million even after only 24 applications had been approved. Further detail on the loans that were applied for are presented in the Table 3.1 below: Table 3.1: Loan application and approval schedule Country Kenya Uganda Tanzania Cote D’Ivoire Ghana Total

Number of Applications 10 4 5 21 8 48

Number of successful Loans 3 4 2 11 4 24

Amounts approved £122,000 £653,000 £136,000 £1,626,000 £119,000 £2,656,000

3.1.2 Were there any unexpected outcomes (Both expected and unexpected)?

The project recorded five distinct unexpected outcomes which were beyond the objectives of the project. The first among the 5 is the fact that 47 instead of 45 cooperatives targeted were mentored. This implied that 2 more cooperatives were mentored in excess of the targeted 45.

The second unexpected outcome was that, targeted loan approval was exceeded by £1.56 million.

As part of the objectives of the project, 30 cooperatives were to be helped to make quality loan applications with a target of achieving £1million of approved lending over the 2 year period, but with only 24 loans approval, a total amount £2.656 million had been disbursed. This over11

achievement could be an evidence to support the effectiveness of the financial management training sessions for the cooperatives.

The third unexpected outcome is that 26 of the cooperatives were also trained in good corporate governance still under the project. This was undertaken to help strengthen the corporate governance structure of the respective producer organisations in Ghana which hitherto had a weak governance structure. We observed that, unlike their East African counterparts, Ghana had an almost non-existent producer organization cooperative structure. The formation of the cooperatives which were beneficiaries of this project was aided by a Fairtrade initiative in 2007 by a company called Fruitland. We observed that prior to the financial management training; most of the cooperatives in Ghana were directly managed by the executive committee made up of farmers with no formal education in business or financial management. Hence, the inclusion of corporate governance training was really important and actually informed the restructure of all the five cooperatives that were randomly selected; such that upon our visit, we observed that each cooperative had employed a secretary and an accountant and in some cases a manager as well. Persons holding these positions were hired on the basis of their competency and were duly paid by respective cooperatives.

Another unexpected outcome worthy of note is the under-achievement with regards to the number of cooperatives (122 instead of 150) which were earmarked to be trained. Our further probing revealed that, it was as a result of non-response by some cooperatives which could not honour the invitation to the training sessions.

Finally some officers in the Accra hub were very confident that, by granting funds to cooperatives in Cote D’Ivoire, the project has succeeded in opening the country up again to other social lenders to resume their operations in the country after the political turmoil.

3.1.3 How effectively and efficiently (Resources used against cost and results) was the project implemented?

From all data collected, we can confidently say that there was prudent use of project funds given the marginal underspend in year one of 5.9% and the substantial overspend in year 2 of 28.38%.

The overspend was mostly attributable to budgeting challenges on the part of the project designers. Considering the high rate of inflation and fluctuating values of some of the local currencies of the beneficiary countries over the project period coupled with high bank charges (which were mostly unbudgeted for) for fund transfers and exchange rate loses, the project managers did very well to ensure that all planned activities were implemented to the latter with high rate of realizing their intended objectives.

12

3.1.4 Who has benefited (women, men, boys and girls) and what ways?

The determination of the exact number of beneficiaries and the gender distribution thereof was quite difficult to ascertain because the ripple effect of the project was far reaching; extending beyond the immediate beneficiaries of training programme. Moreover, loans were granted to cooperatives made up of hundreds of thousands of local producer unions or societies in the rural areas who would benefit from funds accessed. At the end of the second year, over 31,260 persons making up all the beneficiary cooperatives have had access to financing. However, with respect to the direct beneficiaries of the project, the table below shows the gender breakdown of beneficiaries.

Activity 1. Training 2. Mentoring 3. Loan Application

Male

Female

Total

149 98 69

45 26 15

194 124 84

It should be noted that these beneficiaries as stated in the table above are representatives of their cooperatives. The gender disparity was in part as a result of cultural limitations. Though, the Shared Interest and FTA managed to curb this to the barest minimum by engaging the management teams of the various cooperatives at the planning stage and impressing upon them to encourage women participation, it was found (for instance in Ghana) that, many married men found it very difficult to allow their wives (who were part of the management teams of the cooperatives) to reside in hotels overnight. This was partially due to some misconstrued notions about female residents in hotels. Moreover, the land tenure systems in most of the countries forbid women to own lands; hence most of the management teams/Boards were dominated by men.

This notwithstanding, review of annual evaluation reports and feedback of the field visits showed that women and children were expected to benefit the most from this project. This is because, once the yields per acre of the members of the beneficiary cooperatives increased as a direct result of accessing funds to; purchase farm inputs; or improve processing efficiency and capacity of dairy products; or buy member produce for exports, family incomes will increase leading to increased ability to pay children’s school fees, improved family’s nutrition and enhanced general wellbeing of the family. This creates a greater sense of peace for women who are the predominant managers of homes in the African setting.

13

3.1.5 What was the impact of the project?

The time-lag between project completion data was short hence, only the immediate outcome of the projects could be evidenced from data gathered. The expected and intermediate outcomes are those which were confirmed by the project’s beneficiaries.

A summary of the project’s impact is summarized in the illustration below:

Project activities

Capacity building in financial management and corporate governance

Mentoring

Provision of long term loans (funds)

Immediate outcome 1. Increased skill and confidence in preparing financial statements and reports regularly 2. Increased resolve to get source documents (receipt and payment voucher) to support every receipt or payment transaction 3. Increased skill to use financial ratios for analysis 4. Increased knowledge of the operations of social lenders 5. Increased knowledge in financial planning, business planning, risk management and corporate governance

1. Enhanced access to Shared Interest funding 2. Increased confidence to indepenendently access for funds from other financial institutions 3. *Increased appreciation and skill to independently prepare buisness plans to position co-operatives as viable investment destinations*

Intermediate outcome

1. Increased prudence in financial management 2. Enriched financial reports 3. Increased production 4. Increased confidence to negotiate for better prices 5. Increased incomes 6. Improved livelihoods

1. Access to adequate funds to buy inputs for farm improvement 2. Access to funds to enhance a coffee co-operative’s dairy farm thereby diversifying its sources of income towards ensuring an all-year round cash inflow 3. Access to funds to purchase members produce for export 4. Enahnced credit history for future financing from other financial institutions

* Note: only a few cooperatives could confirm this because the period allocated for mentoring was found to be too short and that, consultants required a lot more time to coach cooperatives to reach the desired level of independence in preparing their business plans.

3.1.6 Were there any changes that resulted from the project relevant to people’s needs?

Yes, there were changes that were made in response to identified needs in the course of implementation. Two of the most distinctive ones were; a. Inclusion of the corporate governance training for Ghana and 14

b. Piloting of local currency lending to one of the cooperatives in Kenya.

The first change was based on the poorly resourced nature of cooperatives in Ghana which meant that without adequate capacity building in corporate governance, the financial management training would not have achieved much. The second change was in response to complaints of exchange rate losses after funds were disbursed to cooperatives. For instance, a cooperative in Kakuyini lost KSH89, 000 on the same receipt of funds as a result of fluctuations on local currency’s value.

3.1.7 What changes can be evidenced in people’s lives?

The financial management training has increased the confidence of the cooperatives regarding financial matters. They have become more aware of their financial state and are more confident in forecasting their cash flows and thereby plan effectively to curtail future liquidity crises. The latter circumstance when it occurs plunges cooperatives into panicky borrowing which reduces their ability to negotiate and end up increasing their cost of borrowing.

It was discovered that members of the cooperatives who benefited from the loan are now able to properly educate their children as a result of the improved standard of living caused by the project. Producer organisations have improved their financial systems which are helping to increase their profit margins. The increase in profit margins therefore trickled down to improve the standard of living of farmers. It must be noted that majority of participating cooperatives are yet to experience full impact of the project yet the short term outcomes are very encouraging.

In Kakuyini (Kenya) for instance, we observed how appreciative farmers were to access funds to acquire lime which was applied to their coffee farms for the first time. Just after six weeks of application, they confirmed seeing signs of flourishing leaves which was a good indication of healthy plants; a sign of bumper harvest to come to the extent that some were confident to triple their yields per acre. Again, all the cooperatives which had accessed funds at the time of our visits exhumed so much happiness after accessing funds to acquire farm inputs at a time when it was practically impossible for individual farmers to access funds from traditional financial institutions. The loans to them were much on time that, hence it saved some farmers from cutting all their orange trees for charcoal so as to use the lands for 15

other non-cash crops like maize which had one shorter cash flow cycle. The annual evaluation report also showed how income levels had suddenly increased for the cooperative which owned the dairy processing plant. By accessing the funds, they could instantly add value to their produce and earned more sales income.

3.1.8 To what extent has the achievement of the changes/outcomes been influenced by external context and other factors?

Very little force was exerted by external factors to significantly alter the planned activities of the project. If any at all, a few adverse external forces worked more against the targeted beneficiaries (cooperatives) leading to some of them not being able to attend the capacity building/training workshops. After reviewing all the project documents, especially the MEL plan and comparing them against actual/observed outputs, we were very impressed at how planned activities were implemented to the latter irrespective of country specific challenges like poor communication networks, poor road networks, poor electricity supply, fluctuating local currencies and high inflation.

3.1.9 What sustainability measures are in place/ is the project able to demonstrate approaches that promote sustainability?

The project itself has ended and budget lines have been closed. Sustainability is so much required to entrench the benefits of the projects especially for the areas where the cooperatives are weaker. We found that the training sessions were designed to equip beneficiaries with skills necessary for self-sustainability. Moreover, the mentoring sessions were supposed to deeply entrench knowledge acquired during training sessions. From our interviews, the project managers continuously emphasised the need for farmers to see farming as a business that could be self-sustaining like any other business in any sector. Hence, the content of the training was supposed to equip the 150 cooperatives to be self-sustaining.

Beyond these, there were series of monitoring, evaluation and learning activities that were undertaken spearheaded by the M&E managers of Shared Interest Foundation and Fairtrade Africa. We however believe that, given the height of the financing gap coupled with the limited number of social lenders in both East and West Africa, there is the need for a specially designed sustainability project annexed to this one such that, it is interspersed with series of mentoring and a further extension to cover new sets of cooperatives.

16

3.1.10 What impact has the project made on the target businesses and how does this impact vary across different businesses?

East Africa Cooperatives Fairtrade Cooperatives in this region benefitted from training to enhance their financial management skills.

West Africa Cooperatives Fairtrade cooperatives in this region benefitted from training to enhance their financial management skills and improve upon their corporate governance skills.

Fairtrade business in this region accessed approximately 34% of the disbursed funds which were mostly used to purchase farm inputs for coffee farm improvement. One of the cooperatives accessed funds to improve its dairy processing plant which facilitated the diversification of its income sources.

Fairtrade cooperatives in this region have accessed the majority (66%) of funds. These businesses have larger memberships and cultivate mostly cocoa which have larger premiums against which some cooperatives borrowed. Moreover, the businesses in this region which access financing were more diverse; as it included artisanal (handicraft manufacturing and export) cashew and orange cultivators cooperatives.

Cooperatives in Cote D’Ivoire alone accessed 61% of the funds. These funds were used to buy the cocoa beans of members for export thereby increasing their ability to earn higher premiums to further enhance their wellbeing.

The CEO of ECOOKIM affirmed that, without these funds they would have run the risk of losing some of their members’ produce to other buyers or even increased the risk of post-harvest losses. Or possibly going in for commercial loans from traditional financial institutions which are usually costlier.

3.1.11 Did the social investment pilot conducted by Shared Interest Foundation have an impact on this project? If so what was the result?

This pilot gave the impetus for this project in that, it provided the baseline data required to define the problem for which this project was designed to address. It also facilitated the profiling of cooperatives and their unique needs that informed the design of the project to consist of training, mentoring and funding. Without, this pilot, it would have been very difficult to develop the project in such a comprehensive manner.

3.1.12 What sources of loan finance have the target businesses been able to access?

As at the time of conducting the evaluation, 24 out of 48 loan applications received by Shared Interest Society had already been approved and disbursed remaining 50% yet to be appraised.

Larger and well organized Cooperatives in Kenya and Cote D’Ivoire had avenues for accessing 17

funds from other financial institutions (like the cooperative banks) in their respective countries but the case was different for smaller Cooperatives. Interviews with the 5 cooperatives in Ghana for instance revealed that, only one cooperative had accessed a loan from a bank before (HFC bank) and even that was before the project. They exclaimed that, accessing loans as a cooperative had been very difficult due to poor record keeping and adequate collateral. However, given the training and mentoring, they were quite confident at being able to approach a bank for a loan. They were very quick to add that additional period of mentoring is required for further nurturing in financial management even if it means they have to bear or share the costs associated.

Section 3.1 conclusion: The project has heavily achieved its intended objectives on the basis of the following; iv. v. vi. vii. viii.

81.3% in terms of targeted number of cooperatives to train.

104% attainment of mentoring objectives.

The project recorded 48 cooperatives applying for loans instead of the initial 30 thereby representing an over-achievement of target by 60%.

80% (i.e. 24 out of 30) achievement in loan disbursement to cooperatives as at May 2015.

256% achievement in terms of value of loans disbursed (i.e. ÂŁ2.56million instead of ÂŁ1million).

3.2 How has the project made this difference?

In wholly answering the above question, the specific questions below was attended to after which a conclusion was formed.

3.2.1 What has worked well (good practice) and what has not worked (lessons learned)?

Who has the lesson learning been shared with?

The project structure employed worked well as it was embedded with effective communication and reporting carefully laid-out over regular intervals. More so, the people involved were so highly intrinsically motivated and goal oriented. Again the MEL plan was very vivid such that, it was easy to understand hence, the key players in the project had a great idea of their individual roles and how those roles fit into the broader chain of activities. Also, the use of experiential learning techniques enhanced knowledge assimilation at training sessions.

18

The training and mentoring period were rather too short. Granting loan in foreign currency exposed producer organizations to undue foreign exchange risk. There was under-budgeting which compromised the M&E activities to a large extent such that, there were instances where feedbacks were collected through internet surveys rather than field visits to gather data through physical evidence. The loan appraisal process also seemed too cumbersome leading to delays that may compromise the usefulness of the funds for a particular season. Though, we learned from data gathered that decisions regarding the loan appraisal process and timelines were beyond the control of the project, we are of the view that Shared Interest Foundation as a principal implementer had a responsibility to ensure that loans were disbursed in time to producer organizations.

Lessons that were learnt from the project included the need to broaden the scope of training needs assessment for every selected participating country before the design of the project in order to smoothen the implementation of the project. It was discovered that there was the need for a bottom-up approach in the design and implementation of the project. Though social investment pilot project partly addressed this, much more emphasis should be placed here to ensure that all perceived risks are well appraised and factored into the project plan.

The budget of the project was under estimated which therefore hampered effective monitoring and evaluation of the project. The time-lag between project and the evaluation or impact assessment was quite inadequate as some participants of the project are yet to record real yields or impact of the project.

3.2.2 How have relationships between partners throughout the relationship chain helped or hindered the delivery of change/Outcomes?

Review of interview data gathered from Comic Relief, Shared Interest Foundation and Fairtrade Africa has proven that, relationship among the partners has been very cordial and goal oriented.

To a large extent, this has helped in achieving the goals of the project. There were a few challenges with work overload that led to the exertion of undue pressure on project parties to deliver. These challenges were quite natural considering the situation whereby officers from three distinct organizations had to combine their regular duties with assigned duties on this project. The expected deliverables were seen to be much larger than the budget and the time frame within which they were expected to complete as planned activities were relatively shorter.

19

3.2.3 How effective has the project’s management, monitoring, learning and financial systems been and how have they helped or hindered the delivery of lasting change?

The project suffered some challenges in its MEL component due to budget limitation. Hence, MEL activities were reduced from gathering first hand data of the situations that pertained on the ground to reliance on information communicated via telephone, email and other telecommunication devices. Also, at the initial stage training consultants recounted how their payments were delayed but it was explained that, a general restructure of the financial system of Fairtrade accounted for this delay but once the restructure was completed, transfer payments were prompt. It was also found that, there were serious issues of under-budgeting for consultants and travel expenditure within and across countries.

3.2.4 Has the project delivered in terms of value for money?

Yes, there was value for money, in that planned activities were well executed in time at the barest minimum costs as at that time given the list of project achievements.

3.2.5 How effective was the project’s MEL system, in particular regarding reliability of information collected and analysis provided?

The project relied on both secondary and primary information from project activities and participants for its MEL plan, but the secondary information was more than the primary information due to budgetary constraints. However, analysis of data gathered from the field was superb as they were well analysed with graphical illustration. Moreover, they were carefully related to the goals of the project. Thus, each MEL report communicated the extent to which actual output matched against projections with corresponding variance analysis. Furthermore, there was constant communication of how much project goals have been achieved with the completion of each activity. We are of the view that the MEL system deployed was simply excellent from the plan itself and working papers to the actual reports submitted.

20

Section 3.2 conclusion: The highly commendable achievements of the project were made possible through the following ways; i.

ii. iii. iv. v.

Effective coordination among Comic Relief, Shared Interest Foundation and Fair Trade Africa on one hand and other services providers across five countries on the other hand.

Effective project planning with highly efficient and effective MEL plan.

Effective application of experiential learning methodologies during training sessions.

Provision of adequate funding that met the needs of most of the cooperatives.

Bespoke coaching methods that enabled many cooperatives to meet the requirements of Shared Interest loans.

3.3 How has Comic Relief’s grant making policies been effective?

In wholly answering the above question, the specific questions below was attended to after which a conclusion was formed. All these were answered with data gathered from the Comic Relief’s grants strategy document and our interview with Malcolm Spence.

3.3.1 Were the goals of the policy clear enough?

Yes, all the policy goals were very clear such that all partnering organizations could clearly see areas of interest and thereby fashioned their programs in that regard. In the regard, it is clear that, this project directly met Comic Relief’s goal to see that “poor people can improve their income through trade, enterprise and employment”. Other indirect ways by which this project met Comic Relief’s goals were in the area of enhancing women participation (bridging gender disparities) and enhancing access to quality education to adults.

3.3.2 To what extent were strategies most appropriate to realizing policy goals?

The grant making process of Comic Relief has been found to be effective in the sense that, it served as a useful guide for designing the ‘access to finance project’ in that the projects goals 21

had to conform with policy goals of Comic Relief before funding could be granted to Shared Interest Foundation. Also, the rigorous nature of the grant making process and its tenets ensured that, grants have far reaching impact on the social and economic wellbeing of its beneficiaries.

Without this project, none of these would have been achieved in many of the cooperatives. Even the ones which were considered larger and more experienced still highly rated the training content and method of delivery.

In line with Comic relief’s strategies to “Building financially viable enterprises that are committed to ensuring that poor people are included in economic growth as both suppliers and employees” ; “Providing appropriate finance for enterprises at different stages of their development and avoiding subsidising inefficient enterprises. This means ensuring enterprises are able to access loans as well as grants “ and “Supporting Agricultural initiatives that are conscious of environmental risks and shocks caused by climate change, and taking action to ensure that farmers are able to adapt to a changing environment”, this project was designed to precede funding with training and mentoring was simply perfect; as it created opportunities for many cooperatives to prepare well and qualify under Shared Interest’ Foundation’s lending terms. We want to strongly indicate that; we found a strong positive correlation between the passion and commitment of cooperatives during training and mentoring sessions with the expectation of getting funding from Shared Interest Society. This was so strong that even after our field visits, we were still receiving calls from cooperatives who had placed loan requests from Shared Interest as to whether we communicated how delays in loan processing was going to hamper their harvest and premium projects if there was a further delay. Albeit their confidence in accessing funds from other financial institutions, they believed that, an initial credit facility from Shared Interest was a necessary step for their future lending transactions. Moreover, the terms offered by Shared Interest were extremely beneficial. Hence, we strongly recommend replication of such strategies in any future capacity building projects.

3.3.3 Were programme outcomes SMART? Having reviewed all available documents from all project partners and reassessed the actual outcomes of this project, we are confident that the programme had; Perfectly ‘Specific” goals.

Perfectly ‘Measurable’ outcomes.

Highly ‘Attainable’ outcomes.

Not so ‘Realistic’ outcomes given the initial budget. This necessitated the presentation of the supplementary budget. e. Relatively shorter designated ‘Time’ considering the fact that, Shared Interest did not have much prior experience dealing with Fairtrade cocoa producer organizations. As such, extensive time was required to study their nature of business and make necessary a. b. c. d.

22

adjustments to the lending policies which had been designed to suit producers of other commodities like coffee.

3.3.4 Was there adequate stakeholder involvement in the development of programmes?

The ground was prepared by the social investment pilot. Through which key stakeholder identification and analysis were conducted. With such inputs, the project objectives were developed. More so, there was continuous involvement with stakeholders even at the implementation stage that facilitated learning and innovation leading to the inclusion of activities (corporate governance and ending in local currencies) which were not part of the initial plan.

Section 3.3 Conclusion: At this point we are confident to say that Comic Relief’s grant making policies and processes have greatly helped the delivery of lasting change. This is attributable to the following; i. ii. iii. iv.

Clearly outlined and communicated policy goals.

Carefully designed strategies that were informed by stakeholder inputs and met most of the needs of beneficiaries.

Mostly SMART programme outcomes.

Professionally transparent loan appraisal processes void of discrimination and biases.

3.4 Learning and Innovation There was clear evidence of learning and innovation in the course of project implementation.

This feat was very impressive, as project managers displayed so much skill in identifying an opportunity for the project to create lasting and sustainable change in the lives of people. The first instance was when a major deficiency was found among the Ghanaian cooperatives. This informed the inclusion of the corporate governance training session to fill this void. The project management team were confident that without this training, the cooperatives could not run as sustainable organizations thereby making them unattractive for any kind of funding or investment target.

Secondly, the project management team after receiving complaints of instances of high foreign exchange losses, decided to pilot local currency lending to one of the cooperatives in Kenya with the hope that, the feedback could be positive enough to be replicated elsewhere.

23

3.5 Recommendations We are very confident that this project has met its intended objectives to a very large extent and have paved way for significant gains to be reaped for FTA and any social lending group that would be willing to proceed in that direction. We recommend the following for your consideration.

1. Establish a project management unit/manager to be directly responsible for such projects in the future.

We applaud the efforts that were invested by officers of FTA and Shared Interest in implementing the project over the past two years. However, there were significant number of coordinating and reporting flaws that would have been averted if there was a project management unit or at least manager to be physically present to oversee all phases of the project life cycle. Joanne and Wangeci did their best with the remote management but the challenges associated with such cross-regional projects required some element of physical presence by the project manager to make it even more effective.

In the case where a project will span across two or more regions, the project manager should be the principal officer in charge of the project; coordinating the activities of each regional manager. Each regional project manager should however be allowed to localize the project to suit the condition prevailing in that region. These modifications should however be incorporated at the conception phase of the project. Regional project managers in that regard would be required to conduct community or stakeholder needs assessments to be informed of the realities on the ground in terms of scope, time and cost.

This will facilitate the development of project requirements that could adequately match intended objectives of the project.

2. There should be adequate training of FTA project/program managers on costing and budgeting prior to the completion of a project proposal document.

We observed that, the root cause of the project budgetary constraint was the weakness in project costing and budgeting. In the case where more than one organization would form a project team, the entire team should be adequately trained on project costing and budgeting. This is very essential because each project is unique in its own right (in terms of scope, depth, time) and therefore presents costing and budgeting challenges which should be adequately handled otherwise the financial constraints suffered with this project will reoccur.

The financial constraints suffered in the project was partially attributable to the fact that the project had a very large scope; cutting across two regions and five countries. We however beg to differ because; adequate proficiency in project costing and budgeting will aid the identification of this challenge and adequately address it.

3. There should be direct transfer of funds from the funding agency to the manager responsible for a particular region within which a project/activity is being funded to avoid huge bank charges that associate multiple transfers.

We observed that, there were many multiple transfers that led to loss of funds to bank charges because in many cases, funds had to be transferred from the Shared Interest UK 24

to FTA and then transferred to other cooperatives or other individuals responsible for implementing project activities. We strongly recommend that, once a budget item is approved for disbursements, it should be transferred directly to the ultimate beneficiary with all the accounting protocols fully observed.

Moreover with our banking experience, we are confident that the Foundation have the opportunity to negotiate with their bankers for concessionary rates in transfer charges with reasons being that such funds are being used for social projects.

4. There should be cost sharing of training programs between beneficiaries and the funding agency.

Information gathered from all producer organizations revealed that, they appreciate the value of training and are therefore prepared to pay for the associated cost for its members.

Once a cost sharing ratio is agreed on, the venues for such trainings should be organized in the vicinity of such producer organizations in order to make it more accessible for many members of the organizations especially females. We found that, many females did not participate in most of the training workshop in Ghana for instance. This is because as married women, their husbands were unwilling to permit their wives to be sleeping in hotels in their absence.

The content of the training should not be limited to financial management but should commence with management as well as technical issues associated with their production process.

5. There should be adequate budgetary allocation for internal MEL for the mentoring processes.

Ideally, the officer responsible for MEL should have been present in at least one of the mentoring sessions per cooperative in order to appreciate the content of the mentoring process. This will also require the cooperatives to be well informed of the TOR of mentoring consultants so as to be able to place adequate demand on the services received.

6. There should be well planned and funded sustainability plan for each project.

As social lenders, real dividends are seen in the medium to long term post project period when, there are clear evidences of social and economic transformation in the lives of project beneficiaries. It should therefore be the principal interest of Comic Relief to consider funding series of sustainability activities in the project areas to consolidate their gains. It is true that the huge milestone was the closure of this project but a greater challenge even lies ahead over the next three years of loan repayment.

Many of these producer organizations are operating in very volatile economies and will require so much support to sustain their growth and onward repayment of their loans.

Hence, as a way of securing loan repayments for the next three years, Comic Relief should endeavour to fund a sustainability plan that should consist of frequent M&E and regular visits of consultants for mentoring.

7. Producer organizations should be granted loans in their local currencies.

As much as possible, social lenders should provide funds to producer organizations in their local currencies. This is required to avert the huge foreign exchange (forex) rate losses that are suffered by the producer organizations as they exchange the funds for local 25

currencies. It is true that in most cases export earnings are used to pay-off however, the immediate negative impact of the forex losses could be very depressing for the producer organization.

When funds are given out in local currencies, the lending rate will now be the effective rate that encapsulates the portion of forex risk. In the end, the effective rate will go up marginally but it is quite manageable, hence careful attention should be given to what is being piloted in Kabuboni.

8. Loans should be disbursed early enough to qualified applicants.

We realised from our evaluation that, delays in loans would significantly lead to a shortfall in the expected output in the first year of loan receipt which will further compromise the ability of Producer Organizations to honour their repayment obligations in the first year. For instance, cocoa producer organization need loans not later than June 30th especially when such loans are earmarked for the purchase of farm inputs to enhance yield-per-acre. If loans are granted late, real impact of the application of inputs purchased will not be realised in the September harvest because of the short period between input application and harvest and also as a result of heavy rains after June which have the tendency to wash inputs away after application thereby not allowing those farm inputs to sink into the soil for plant application.

26

APPENDIX I LIST OF PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONS INTERVIEWED Country

Organisation /Cooperative

Name of Person Interviewed

Date

Ghana

Fairtrade Africa Ghana Shared Interest

Kwame Banson John Doussou Kodzo Korkortsi Trainer EDC Consult Ohene Boafo Humphrey Ayisi Abubakar Sadique Mustapha Asa Ofori Ofori Amanfo Dacosta Wangeci Gitata Catharine Russell Salome Kilonzo Judy Kithinji

26/05/2015 13/05/2015

Mr. Bamba Yao Fulbert

06/05/2015 09/07/2015

Malcolm Spence Joanne Hall

16/07/2015 10/07/2015

Abena Otu West Akyem Fanteakwa Cooperative Nyame Akwan Citrus CCPT Suhum Ahafo-Ano Association Kenya

Cote D’ Ivoire

UK

Fairtrade Fair Trade Kakuyini Training and mentoring consultant Ecookim Training and mentoring consultant Comic Relief Shared Interest Foundation

27

27/05/2015 13/05/2015 12/05/2015 12/05/2015 13/05/2015 12/05/2015 30/04/2015 29/04/2015 29/04/2015 01/07/2015

APPENDIX II LIST OF DOCUMENTS THAT WERE REVIEWED Annual Narrative and Data Report (Comic Relief) 1st April, 2014 to 31st March, 2015.

Financial Management/ Cooperative Ecamon Meagui Cote D’Ivoire.

Report on Loan Application support provided to four organisations in Tanzania.

A Report on tailored Mentoring carried out to producers organizations in Tanzania from 23rd October 2nd November 2013.

5. A report on financial management workshop conducted to representatives of cooperatives and producer organisations held at View Hill Hotel, Mbeya, Tanzania, July 2013.

6. A report on mentoring on financial management and social lending procedures carried out to three business organisations in Tanzania, February 2015.

7. A Report of tailored onsite training on financial management and lending procedures conducted in cooperatives and producer organisations from 4th September to 18th September, 2014.

8. Shared Interest Quarterly Report by Albert Mruma on Tanzania, 1st November, 2013.

9. Access to finance training and mentoring reports by Anthony Ndora (DEMIS Consult limited).

10. A training report on Access to finance workshop for fair trade members, 7th -8th August, 2013and Corresponding Time Sheets.

11. Mentoring phase, Uganda.

12. Final Mission Report on Capacity Building Project aimed at improving financial capacity and access to loan finance for farmers’ cooperatives by Anthony Ndora (DEMIS Consult limited).

13. Project Review: Access to finance project, Uganda.

14. Quarterly Report for Shared Interest Consultants, Ghana, Abena Out, 8th January, 2014 15. Quarterly Report for Shared Interest Consultants, Ghana, EDC Consulting Limited, 26th November, 2014 16. Report on a 3-day good Governance training programme, 6th – 7th November, 2014.

17. Governance Training Manual by Nana Tabi-Amposah.

18. Accessing Finance in East and West Africa, Ghana, Participant Hand out.

19. Baseline Report: Accessing Finance in East and West Africa, by Catharine Russell 20. Improving Access to Finance in East and West Africa, MEL Plan.

21. Year 1 Evaluation Access to Finance in East and West Africa by Catharine Russell.

1.

2.

3.

4.

28

APPENDIX III TIME SCHEDULE Activity Signing of Contract Inception Meeting Daily meetings of Consultants

Proposed Date 30/03/2015 1/04/2015 1/04/2015 3/04/2015 Submission of Plan of Work to 10/04/2015 Client Meetings of Consultants 13/04/2015 15/04/2015 Collation of Reports from Accra 15/04/2015 and Nairobi Hub Meeting of Consultants 26/04/2015 27/04/2015 Working Visit to Nairobi 28/04/2015 1/05/2015 Meeting of Consultants 5/05/2015 7/05/2015 Field visits/Primary Data 6/05/2015 Collection 14/05/2015 Interview with Reps from FTA- 21/05/2015 Ghana, Shared Interest Ghana and 27/05/2015 Trainer from Ghana Consolidation of findings/Final 28/05/2015 Report Writing 4/06/2015 Oral Presentation of Report to 5/06/2015 Accra Hub Submission of initial Draft 5/06/2015 Submission of Final Report 12/06/2015

29

Actual Date Remarks 30/03/2015 1/04/2015 to 1/04/2015 to 3/04/2015 10/04/2015 to 13/04/2015 15/04/2015 20/04/2015

to

to 26/04/2015 27/04/2015 to 28/04/2015 1/05/2015 to 5/05/2015 7/05/2015 to 6/05/2015 14/05/2015 to 21/05/2015 27/05/2015

to

to 28/05/2015 4/06/2015 5/06/2015

to

5/06/2015 15/07/2015

Joan was leave

on

to to to to

Request to increase sample size of respondents

APPENDIX IV ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE EVENTZPRO PROJECT EVALUATION TEAM 



    

In this research/project evaluation, participants’ consent was obtained before they completed the questionnaires. They were also informed of their rights to willingly consent or decline to participate and to withdraw participation at any time without penalty. In addition, the respondents received a complete overview of the research endeavour, so that they could be as objective as possible. Respondents were also informed of the purpose of the study; the procedures employed in collecting data, and assured them that there were no potential risks or costs associated with their decision to participate.

The Participant Information Sheet included information on what the research was for, who will conduct the research, how the personal information will be used, who will have access to the information and how long the information will be kept for. This is known as a 'fair processing statement’.

Each evaluator was committed not do anything with the personal information collected over and above the reason for which their consent was sought.

No evaluator made any audio or visual recordings of participants without their consent.

Identifiable personal information was only conveyed to others within the framework of data collection and discussion but not reported in the findings of the study.

Each evaluator collected only data that was relevant to the study being undertaken.

Data gathered may be kept indefinitely provided its sole use is for research purposes and meets the following conditions: o The data is not being used to take decisions in respect of any living individual. o The data is not being used in any which is, or is likely to, cause damage and/or distress to any living individual. o An evaluator should always protect a participant's anonymity unless they have given their permission to be identified (if they do so, this should be stated on the Informed Consent Form). o All data should be returned to client or destroyed if consent is not given after the fact, or if a participant withdraws.

30

APPENDIX V – PRIMARY DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS (A) INTERVIEW SCHEDULE FOR COOPERATIVES

SECTION A: IMPACT OF TRAINING AND MENTORING ON COOPERATIVES 1. Was this cooperative part of the training?

2. How many represented this cooperative in that training?

3. What are some of the basic concepts learned during the training?

4. Has there been significant improvement in your financial management system?

5. How often do you prepare your financial statements?

6. Do you undertake financial analysis on the financial statements?

7. If YES: Do the results of the analysis influence the future financial decisions of the organization 8. Which of the following methods do you employ in analyzing your financial statements? a. Ratio analysis b. Cash flow analysis c. Both d. Other …………………………………….

9. In your recent analysis, did you realize any significant changes in your financial position? If so kindly describe it?

10. Would you say that, the changes observed was a result of the training and mentoring provided by the project?

11. Kindly indicate the extent to which you undertake the following financial management tasks Never Sometimes Often Capital budgeting Cash budgeting (yearly) Financial reports don on quarterly and annual basis.

Economic reports prepared quarterly Working capital management Financial planning Risk management (insure your assets) 12. How did you know about FTA? 13. Was this cooperative mentored?

14. How many times did the mentor visit/made contact with you in a year?

15. In what areas were you mentored?

31

16. Were there any extra benefits (Abilities, Skills, Knowledge) you acquired from the mentoring that was not part of the training workshop?

17. Do you have any recommendation/concerns in relation to the mentoring?

18. Were you a beneficiary of the loan through Shared Interest?

19. Was each member of this cooperative granted a loan over the past two years?

20. What was the average amount granted (in USD equivalent)? 5,000,000. The society could not have requested for more than this amount because of its limited capacity to repay but after three years we hope to be capable of applying for larger amounts 21. Was there a criterion for determining who qualifies for the loan?

22. How many members do you have and how many got the funds?

23. Were there some members who were disgruntled because they did not get the loan?

24. Were they given adequate explanation as to why they were not granted the loans?

25. Are those people named above still active members of the cooperative?

26. How many people within this cooperative were granted loans and what proportion are they of the total number of persons in this cooperative?

27. Are some present here? (ADMINISTER A SEPARATE QUESTIONNAIRE TO THEM) 28. Aside the loan accessed from Shared interest, has this cooperative been able to access any other loan after the project?

29. If YES to question 29 above kindly fill the detail below: .

30. Challenges that other Financial Institution present that social lenders don’t a. The tenure is usually longer b. They are prepared to finance inputs, but shared interest does.

NAME OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTION

AMOUNT REQUESTED

AMOUNT GRANTED

DURATION OF LOAN

31. If NO to question 23 kindly explain why?

32. Is there something that you expected this project to offer that was not offered?

33. Were there shortfalls that were identified in the process?

34. General assessment of the project:

32

REMARKS

(B) QUESTIONNAIRES TO INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS OF PRODUCER ORGANIZATIONS 1. Gender 2. Age 3. Do you have a spouse and other dependents?

4. What is your family size?

5. How much was requested?

6. How much was granted?

7. What were you requesting the loan for?

8. What did you use the loan for?

9. Was the amount granted adequate?

10. Has the loan yielded any benefit to you?

11. Kindly provide evidence/reasons to the question above?

12. Did the cooperative give you any other training aside granting the loan?

13. IF YES kindly describe some of the things you have learned from the trainings given?

BEFORE THE PROJECT (Y/N)

AFTER THE PROJECT (Y/N)

Are you able to afford three square meals a day and dessert?

Do you have savings account/deposit?

Do you have a means of transportation?

Do you have adequate inputs for your farm/business?

Has your yield increased?

Has your farm/business size increased?

Do you have a decent shelter for the family?

Are your young dependents sponsored in school?

Are you able to afford decent clothing for your dependents?

Are you able to afford healthy drinking water?

Are you able to play your social roles in the community including gifting and tax payment?

DO you have a better understanding of wealth creation?

14. Is there any other change that this project has brought into your life? a. ………………………………………………………………………… b. …………………………………………………………………………

15. Is there something more that you would have wished to acquire under this project?

33

(C) INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR STAFF OF FTA AND SHARED INTEREST FOUNDATION IN ACCRA AND NAIROBI HUB 

1. ORGANISATION

Consider the following: Did the overall organisation structure among the three organizations (FTA, Comic Relief and FTA) work?

QN: Was the consultants in Ghana required to assist them with business plans or just financial management or both?

Balance of resources from key areas?

The organisational structure and hierarchy of the team (as a separate unit & as part of the overall organisation) WHAT WENT WELL?

WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE BETTER?

Recommendations:

2. TEAMWORK & COMMUNICATION

34

Consider the following areas: Internal communication (within the Project team)

External communication (with other Projects, suppliers, support groups)

Were key decision makers easily accessible?

Was information exchanged between different areas (i.e. problems shared)?

WHAT WENT WELL?

WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE BETTER?

Bottlenecks:

Recommendations :

3. PROJECT START UP

WHAT WENT WELL?

WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE BETTER?

Recommendations :

4. PLANNING & TRACKING

35

Consider the following: Were there clear time lines:

Changes to the scope - how were they controlled and communicated?

Requirements - were any dates or methods imposed? What was the impact?

Responsibilities - were they clearly defined?

Planning - did the schedules include activities for all areas?

Were key deliverables/milestones clearly defined?

Control - was there sufficient control/tracking information? How was progress monitored / communicated?

Was a Risk/Issue Management process applied adequately?

Dependencies with other projects/areas?

WHAT WENT WELL?

WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE BETTER?

Recommendations :

36

5.a. IMPLEMENTATION – FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT TRAINING Consider the following: Was an implementation plan produced and communicated to all relevant parties?

How were the Trainees selected?

How was the scope of the training decided?

Were the Training materials standardized across the regions?

WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE BETTER?

WHAT WENT WELL?

Recommendations :

5.b. IMPLEMENTATION – LENDING PROCESS

37

Consider the following: Was an implementation plan produced and communicated to all relevant parties?

Were there uniform standards in deciding who qualified for the loans across the regions?

Were the borrowers informed about the loan process and all the documentation required from the onset? If Yes

What might have accounted for the delays in approving and releasing the funds?

Did the approval process include consideration of sustainability?

WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE BETTER?

WHAT WENT WELL?

Recommendations :

6. MENTORING AND REPORTING

38

Consider the following: How were the mentors selected?

What was the scope (TOR) of the mentoring programme?

Generally, what were the comments from the Mentors?

Were any complaints received from the Mentees about the mentoring programme?

Was documentation produced, in the right format, with correct content and distributed by the right people at the right time (e.g. baseline report, strategy, progress reports etc)?

WHAT WENT WELL?

WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE BETTER?

Recommendations :

7. PEOPLE rating of 8/10. Where 1=failure

10=excellent

39

Consider the following: Was the project team skill level correct?

Were resources with the right skills available when needed?

Were the appropriate resources involved early enough?

Support (from other project team members, other projects & support areas)

Management– project and support areas

Relationship with other key areas Overall, how would you rate the team spirit?

(Rated 1-10 from complete failure to outstanding success).

WHAT WENT WELL?

WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE BETTER?

Recommendations :

8 . ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS, ACTIONS OR LESSONS LEARNT 8. b) HOW SHOULD THESE (8a) BE INCORPORATED INTO FUTURE PROJECTS

40

APPENDIX VI – PICTURE GALLERY Picture with farmers of Kakuyini farmers cooperative after the focus discussion

Sths this is

Picture with some BOD members of Kakuyini farmers cooperative - Kenya

41

Coffee Processing Machine at Kakuyini

Interview session at Ahafo-Ano South Citrus

42

Interaction session at Nyame Akwan Citrus-Kumasi

Group photograph at CCP-Fanteakwa

43

Interview session at FTA office, Nairobi

44

APPENDIX VII –FIELD SURVEY DATA FROM SELECTED COOPERATIVES (a) Findings from Field Survey at West Akyem-Asamankese, Ghana West Akyem started its operations in 2008 with the help of Cadbury and registered as a Union of 11 societies and became a fair trade certified, it now has 34 societies with 4,224 acres. It was part of the cooperatives that participated in the financial management training programme in Ghana and was subsequently selected for the mentoring process. The evaluation consultant therefore surveyed West Akyem as one of the beneficiaries of the project. Their ability before and after the project was the focus for the evaluation team as well as the impact that the project has made on the cooperative organisation.

The organisation recounted book keeping from the society level to the union as the basic concept learnt at the training, for which reason they now use cash analysis books and has transformed their financial management. Meanwhile, they prepare financial statements annually.

The cooperative recalled that they were visited twice by the consultants in the mentoring process while the consultants also spent four days with the union executives. Areas in which they were mentored in included daily book keeping, cash analytical books, trial balance, final accounts, business planning and financial forecast. Even though they are happy with the training, they request a lot more detailed training on bank reconciliation.

The organisation has not yet received funding from Shared Interest even though they just applied for funding to the tune of $200,000 in 17th March, 2015. They intimated that the amount they are requesting is all they need at the moment. When asked about their view on the criteria used in determining the one who qualifies for the loan, the organisation mentioned that it is based on need and commitment to the union. The estimated impact of the loan on their cooperative was a growth from 409kg per acre to 500kg, increased income, improvement in welfare and wellbeing and increased their ability to cater for their kids and other dependants.

The cooperative recounted that they had earlier accessed 10,000 loan from the HFC bank which was not as convenient as the funds from Shared Interest because they demand too much collateral. In reaction to the assessment of the project as well as recommendation for the project, West Akyem reiterated that the time for the preparation of the business plan was too short and stressful even though it was helpful. They therefore recommended that the period of the training and mentoring be extended for them and that they are ready to share the cost with the donors, they further request Shared Interest to grant them the loan/fund not later than June. The training on corporate governance helped the cooperative in building structures and improving skills in conflict management.

The cooperative have decided as a sustainabillity plan to invest premiums into construction of buildings for hiring, encouraging individual farmers to pay more attention to their farms to enhance output and to also use the by-products of cocoa to generate other income based on the advice of CSIR.

45

(b) Findings from Field Survey at Fanteakwa Union-Osino, Ghana Faanteakwa cooperative is a union with 24 societies and over 1,578 members who are fair trade cocoa producers. The cooperative presented three of its members at the training on financial management implemented by FTA and Shared Interest. They recognised that the issues that were treated at the training included book keeping and the basics of financial management and that they recorded significant improvement in financial management, thus systems have been put in place to provide evidence of receipts of sums paid or received. They now undertake an annual financial reporting system even though they have not used any of the financial analysis methods.

The cooperative iterated that they were introduced to Fair Trade by Cadbury who helped them to establish their union. The cooperative was also mentored under the project which helped them with the development of the business plan. The cooperative also realising the need to build their capacity, engaged the consultant on their own terms outside the project after he spent four days with them under the project’s mentoring process. The cooperative was mentored in areas such as financial management, ledger entries, general capacity in Human Resource management and business plan development. The cooperative therefore recommends that the period for the mentoring should be prolonged for full benefit.

In ascertaining whether the cooperative was a beneficiary of the loan facility from Shared Interest, they reiterated that they had applied for the loan to the tune of 100,000 USD in March 2015 and awaiting the response. They indicated that the amount was what they needed for the mean time to purchase inputs and distribute them to the various societies based on the ability of the members to repay the facility.

Group photograph at CCP-Fanteakwa

Some of the input will be stored in the cooperative’s store in order to be distributed to members at the time when there is lack on the market, this is due to the fact that the cooperative and its members rarely gets fertilizers for their farms. The cooperative recommended that they would want a competitive forex rate, and that the number of participant from their organisation on the project be increased.

The cooperative have seen the need to diversify and sustain their project, they have therefore planned to buy a plot of land and commence a poultry farm business. They indicated that they have benefitted from the project because, once their books are well kept, they will be able to attract financiers. The cooperative retorted that the training have made members appreciate the structures in place and various societies now elect their leaders on a four year term without witholding the individual responsibilities of each member.

46

(c) Findings from Field Survey at CCP-Suhum, Ghana CCPT-Suhum started as a cooperative in 2011 through the efforts of Cadbury, the cooperative now has about 34 societies consisting of 1,500 members. The cooperative was also a beneficiary of the financial management capacity building project implemented by FTA and Shared Interest.

The Evaluation Team therefore selected them as one of the cooperatives to be assessed in order to verify the impact of the project on their operations. Three members of the cooperatives participated in the training which has helped the cooperative to improve its financial reporting to meet international standards and also enhanced its capacity to build consensus among farmers.

They also participated in the good governance training organised under the project.

The cooperative now prepares an annual financial report and undertake financial analysis such as cash analysis, trial balance and cash flow statements. The cooperative members were introduced to the FTA by Cadbury and were mentored on business plan, financial projections and loan application process. The consultant met the cooperative on three (3) different occasions in the mentoring process after which communication via telephone was used. CCP therefore aims at trickling down the training to the various societies within the cooperative.

Even though the cooperative applied for a loan facility of $100,000 from Shared Interest, their application is yet to be granted. The loan is to help the cooperative purchase input specifically fertilizer to increase their production. They are therefore planning to use their premiums and proceeds to absorb the exchange losses. They indicated that the facility will be given to members based on commitment, production history and capacity to repay which will further help the farmers to get reliable sources of inputs for higher yields, high income which help members take care of their children and other dependants.

The Cooperative indicated that they have not accessed any loan facility from any financial institution but believes their credit history will be improved. They also recommend that the number of participants for the training as well as the days for the training should be increased and that they are ready to share the cost. The project has impacted positively on the cooperative as they now have better understanding of corporate governance structures. They are therefore looking forward towards allocating significant premiums to develop other modes of gaining alternative sources of incomes even through cocoa byproducts and other non-cocoa areas like poultry and weaving.

(d) Findings from Field Survey at Nyame Akwan Citrus-Kumasi, Ghana Nyame Akwan Citrus was founded in October 2007 and currently have a membership 104 persons. The cooperative cultivates an arable land with 2,200 acres as the size. The cooperative was a beneficiary of the Access to Finance project jointly implemented by Fairtrade Africa and Shared Interest. They participated in the financial management and governance training as well as the mentoring process of the project. The cooperative indicated that they got to know of FTA through Fruitland.

One member of the cooperative participated in the financial management training while two members participated in the governance training session. They indicated that principles such as 47

book keeping and preparation of financial statements and business plans were treated at the training. The financial management training has helped to improve the financial reporting of the organisation which is done on monthly and yearly basis. They also increased their knowledge on the operations of Fairtrade through corporate governance training. They were further introduced to the types of cooperatives and how structures are built and maintained. This has helped them to build good structures even though they are yet to be incorporated.

In relation to the mentoring process, the cooperative was visited three times by their mentor who helped them to apply the knowledge acquired from the training as well as help them to complete the loan application process. The mentor has also established relationship with the cooperative to guide and direct them in all endeavours. They however recommend that the number of participants for the training be increased as well as the increment of the mentors for their cooperative in order to experience different perspective in dealing with issues. They are therefore prepared to share the cost of the training with the donor agencies.

The Cooperative indicated that they applied for $150,000, and they were granted $50,000 loan facility from Shared Interest. The loan application process which spanned three to four months was finally granted in February 2015. The cooperative initially wanted to establish a processing plant but diverted their course into improving their farms. The funds were subsequently distributed to 50 members based on the members that applied, the frequency of supply of produce to Fruitland as well as the size of the land of the member. The process of disbursing the funds did not bring grumblings among members but rather gingered the non-performing ones to improve their performance. The funds were given to members in the equivalence of USD and therefore they faced exchange rate losses. The facility has helped them refurbish and pruned farms that were initially abondoned.

The cooperative stated that they had initially accessed loan from Fruitland at an interest free rate while some individual farmers (8 farmers) had also accessed loans from Catholic Credit Union for 6 months at a rate of 25% on the principal.

The immediate impact of the loan has been that the flowering of the trees are much better after the prunning and therefore hope that by the third year their yield will incease from 5 tons per acre to 10 tons per acre. They also indicated that through the loan, the income of members have increased which have increased their standard of living and therefore farmers are able to properly educate their children and better cater for their dependants. They also noted the cooperative is facing some post harvest losses which is attributed to poor transportation.

They also recommended that the days for the training be prolonged while the granting of the loan should be based on the need of the cooperative. They also need extra funds to purchase some farm machineries such as tractor, trucks, trycicles, and so on.

48

(e) Findings from Field Survey at Ahafo-Ano Citrus Association-Mankraso, Ghana Ahafo-Ano Citrus Association commenced its operations in 2005 across 68 communities in the Brong Ahafo region of Ghana. It has membership strength of 360 and was a beneficiary of the financial management training, mentoring and loan from Shared Interest and Fairtrade Africa project. The cooperative was introduced to Fairtrade by Fruitland. They indicated that proper book keeping and financial management were the focus or topics treated at the training sessions.

The training has added up to other trainings they have received from other organisations.

Even though the cooperative prepares an annual financial statement, it is putting in place accounting systems in order to prepare quarterly financial statements as a result of their participation in the financial management training. The Cooperative recommended that the training period be extended and also multiplied within a year. Training in management principles should also be added to the curricular of the training.

In benefiting from the loan facility from Shared Interest, the cooperative intimated that their request of $50,000 was granted. The loan was granted through the mentoring process which did not only help the cooperative in the loan application process but also on budget development, cashflow, balance sheet and risk management. The consultant visited the cooperative on two different occasions. The cooperative indicated that the loan granted by Shared Interest in comparison with others that the cooperative had contracted before was liberal and required no collateral except using the expected inflow from sales. The loan application process was close to six months.

Sixty eight (68) members of the cooperative benefited from the facility that was granted them, but before anyone could benefit, the farmer had to fill an application form with a guarantor, pasport pictures, and a statement of intended means of repayment. Disbursement of the loan was also based on the previous history of supplies while the farmlands of the farmers were also used as collateral. They indicated again that, the real impact of the project will be felt in 8 months time through the increase of yields from 5 tons per acre to 10 tons per acre. They noted that the loan has relieved many of their members from the impediments of financial pressure regarding farm maintenance.

The cooperative recommended that Fairtrade Africa in developing a similar program should preceed it with needs assessment to cover most areas. They indicated that their produce is sent to just one buyer which creates a lot of losses to them because of the effects of monopoly due to their repayment schedules with the buyer. They are therefore looking at other structured ways of reporting such as the use of software. They further recommend that the project should include frequent monitoring to enhance sustainability.

49

(f) Findings from field survey at Kakuyini Farmers Cooperative Society Ltd, Kenya Kakuyini was one of the cooperatives that were trained in 2013 and subsequently mentored, therefore as part of our evaluation of the project, we surveyed them to ascertain the impact of the project on their performance. Kakuyini was registered in 1961 and located at the North Eastern part of Nairobi. The cooperative is made up of 5 coffee factories as well as small holder mixed farmers who grow variety of crops and livestock. The cooperative has an active membership of 1,704 members with 1,107 adult male, adult 464 female, 111 youth and 22 institutions . The youth composition of the members is 111 with twenty two (22) institutions (Churches and schools) also affiliated to the cooperative. In the training, the cooperative was represented by its CEO and they recalled that issues on financial management and facility from Shared Interest were the focus of discussion at the training.

Coffee Processing Machine at Kakuyini

The cooperative recounts that there has been improvement in their financial management system after the training for which reason there was an updated report, quaterly economic reports and updated financial reports. The cooperative recorded significant improvement in profits which was mostly attributed to the training that was administerd to them.

After the receipt of the funds, a committee was set which collected invoices from suppliers and then a formula was developed after which distributions were made to members.

The cooperative often undertakes cash budgeting (yearly), financial reporting, economic reporting, financial planning and risk management planning while they sometimes undertake capital budgeting and working capital management. They indicated that their mentors visited them about 4 to 5 times in a year in areas such as excel based financial reporting system, application process, business plans and financial projections. They also communicated via email and telephone.

50

Sths this is

The cooperative applied for a fund and was granted an amount 5,000,000 (Ksh) even though it was not all that the cooperative needed but could not have asked for more because they did not have the capacity to repay for higher loan amount. A farmer was considered for a share of the facility only if he/she has been active and cultivated for the past three years. The funds were distributed to the farmers in the form of inputs of which 832 members benefited. The cooperative estimates an increase in yield from 277,677 kilos last year to 585,000 kilos this year (2015).

Even though some members were disgruntled because they did not receive a share of the fund, they are still active members of the cooperative because the process were made known to them before the disbursement of the fund. The cooperative noted that they had accessed loan amounted to Ksh 3,000,000 from the Cooperative bank in 2013 even before the inception of the project. Kakuyini expected that refresher courses were organised on financial management and that an accountant be included in the list of participants. They acknowledged that the loan process was too long.

They recommended that the cooperative should be evaluated after two years to compare performance against the baseline. Also, training on production issues should be organised for them because that is one of the challenge they face. Their expectation is that in future better living standards will be achieved for their members, thus through improved production, farmers will get high incomes to take care of their families and more especially children in school. The project has enabled the society to reach out to more members. Meanwhile, the training has equipped them to be better placed in applying for another facility without the direct assistance from Buisness Development Services (BDS) or mentoring support from consultants.

(g) Outcome of Interview Session with ECOOKIM, Cote D’Ivoire Cote D’Ivoire is one of the benefiaciary countries of the project. It was recognised that the West African country had a very vibrant cooperative system which helps their farmers with a lot of support. Due to the good structures of the cooperatives in CDI, they were granted majority of the funds allocated to the West African sub-region. The evaluation team therefore interviewed the Managing Director of one of the beneficiaries from CDI (ECOOKIM).

Ecookim was part of the training on financial management and they were represented by their Chief accountant and internal auditor because their Managing Director had travelled. Some of the topics that were treated included financial management practices, fund management and rules of Shared Interest. The organisation acknowledged that their budgeting skills have been improved with limited errors and good monitoring as a result of the training. The cooperative now undertakes weekly and monthly reports which has helped them inprove substantially on their profit margins. The cooperative has now purchased an accounting software that helps them to work.

Ecookim participants at the training trickled down the lessons from the training to the various cooperatives that are part of them through trainer of trainers programme. It was noted that Ecookim is a union of cooperatives.

51

The cooperative was not mentored because it was considered as a strong cooperative which can apply for loans without the help of the mentoring process. They therefore applied for the loan from Shared Interest and were granted a quantum of 400,000 Euros. Four (4) out of the twenty three (23) cooperatives that made up Ecookim benefited from the loan facility, Mr. Bamba recognised that the amount was sufficient for them because there were other sources of funding.

The four cooperatives were selected based on their ability to repay and how well organised they were in terms of corporate governance. Mr. Bamba intimated that none of the 19 cooperatives who did not benefit from the fund were disgruntled because the entire selection process were discussed before the disbursement of the funds.

The cooperative have been able to access loans from five other financial institutions to the tune of 6.05 million Euros. In terms of unmet expectation of the project, Ecookim mentioned that the training was too short and that there was no follow-up, moreover the cooperative needs training in risk management systems and business plan writing. The cooperative recommended that refresher courses be organised for them probably before the beginning of a new season in order to help forecast future occurences.

52