PHOTO CREDIT: USAID/NEXTT ACTIVITY NIGERIA EXPANDED TRADE AND TRANSPORT PROJECT FINAL EVALUATION REPORT This publication was produced at the request of the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared independently by the Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Activity, DevTech Systems, Inc. 2 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY NIGERIA EXPANDED TRADE AND TRANSPORT PROJECT: FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Final Report Submitted: December 15, 2017 Revised Final Reports Submitted: March 5, 2018; May 18, 2018; and June 1, 2018 Contract No: AID-OAA-I-15-00018 Submitted to: Dr. Chidimma Anyanwu, Contracting Officer’s Representative Ms. Mai Huang, Alternate Contracting Officer’s Representative USAID/Nigeria Submitted by: Traci L. Dixon, Chief of Party DevTech Systems, Inc. Plot No. 15, Moundou Street, Off Nairobi Crecent Wuse II, Abuja, FCT, Nigeria Email: TLDixon@devtechsys.com DISCLAIMER This report was made possible by the support of the American People through the United States Agency for International Development. The authors’ views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. 3 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY This page is intentionally left blank. 4 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES 5 LIST OF TABLES 6 ACRONYMS 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9 SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 15 SECTION 2: BACKGROUND 17 SECTION 3: METHODOLOGY 20 3.1 EVALUATION PROCESS 20 3.2 SAMPLE SELECTION 20 3.3 DATA COLLECTION METHODS 21 3.4 QUALITY CONTROL 22 3.5 ANALYSIS 22 SECTION 4: EVALUATION LIMITATIONS 23 SECTION 5: FINDINGS 24 5.1 RELEVANCE: LAKAJI CORRIDOR 24 5.2 RELEVANCE: TRADE POLICY AND TRADE FACILITATION 27 5.3 RELEVANCE: EXPORT EXPANSION 29 5.4 PARTNERSHIP AND COOPERATION 31 5.5 RESULTS 34 5.6 SUSTAINABILITY 35 5.7 BEST PRACTICES 37 SECTION 6: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 39 6.1 CONCLUSION 39 6.2 RECOMMENDATIONS 40 ANNEX I: EVALUATION SCOPE OF WORK 43 ANNEX II: LIST OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR STAKEHOLDERS 58 ANNEX III: LIST OF DOCUMENTS 59 ANNEX IV: EVALUATION RESPONDENTS 60 ANNEX V: NEXTT ORGANIZATION CHART 63 ANNEX VI: DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS 64 ANNEX VII: REFERENCES 84 ANNEX VIII: PROJECT DOCUMENTS 85 5 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Number of Respondents.......................................................................................................................21 Figure 2. NEXTT Geographic Focus....................................................................................................................45 Figure 3. NEXTT Project Results Framework...................................................................................................46 6 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Respondents' Location ............................................................................................................................21 Table 2. Changes in OECD TFA Indicators for Nigeria..................................................................................28 Table 3. Methodology Matrix.................................................................................................................................50 Table 4. Levels of Effort (LOE)/Work Days and Timeline..............................................................................56 Table 5. List of Stakeholders for Components 1, 2 and 3..............................................................................58 Table 6. List of Documents....................................................................................................................................59 Table 7. Evaluation Respondents..........................................................................................................................60 Table 8. Trade Facilitation Indicators ..................................................................................................................83 7 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY ACRONYMS AEO Authorized Economic Operators AGOA African Growth and Opportunity Act BDSP Business Development Service Provider BMO Business Membership Organization BOI Bank of Industry CBN Central Bank of Nigeria CEMA Customs and Excise Management Act CMG Corridor Management Group COP Chief of Party COR Contracting Officer’s Representative ECOWAS Economic Community of West African States EGE ENFP Economic Growth and Environment Enlarged National Focal Point FAO Food and Agriculture Organization FDA Food and Drug Administration FERMA Federal Roads Maintenance Agency FGDs Focus Group Discussions FMARD Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development FMITI Federal Ministry of Industry, Trade, and Investment FTS Fast Track System GAP Good Agricultural Practices GON ICT Government of Nigeria Information and Communication Technology IFF Investment Facilitation Fund IMCFS IP Inter-Ministerial Committee on Food Safety Implementing Partner KII Key Informant Interview LAKAJI Lagos-Kano-Jibiya Corridor LDA LAKAJI Development Alliance M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MAN Manufacturing Association of Nigeria MARKETS Maximizing Agricultural Revenue and Key Enterprises in Targeted Sites MDA Ministries Departments and Agencies MEL Monitoring, Evaluation, And Learning MOU Memorandum of Understanding MSME Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises NACC Nigeria American Chamber of Commerce NACCIMA National Chambers of Commerce, Industry, Mines, and Agriculture NAFDAC National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control NANTS National Association of Nigerian Traders NASME Nigeria Association of Small and Medium Enterprises NASSI Nigerian Association of Small Scale Industrialists NCS Nigerian Customs Services NEPC NESG Nigeria Export Promotion Council Nigerian Economic Summit Group NEXIM Nigerian Export Import Bank 8 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY NEXTT Nigeria Expanded Trade and Transport Program NFSMC National Food Safety Management Committee NIPC Nigeria Investment Promotion Council NTFC National Trade Facilitation Committee PAAR Pre-Arrival Assessment Report PDF Project Development Facility PPP Public-Private Partnership SME Small and Medium Enterprises SMEDAN Small and Medium Enterprise Development Agency of Nigeria SON Standards Organization of Nigeria SOW Scope of Work TFA Trade Facilitation Agreement TFTF TPP Trade Facilitation Task Force Trade Policy Process UNIDO United Nations Industrial Development Organization USAID USG United States Agency for International Development United States Government WTO World Trade Organization 9 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Nigeria Expanded Trade and Transport (NEXTT) Project was a five-year (2012-2017) activity funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to: (1) support the Government of Nigeria’s efforts to expand trade domestically, within the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) sub-region and beyond; (2) improve efficiency, in terms of trade policy and trade facilitation, within internal trade corridors; and (3) facilitate and promote non-oil exports so that trade, particularly in agricultural products, will contribute to inclusive economic growth and development in Nigeria. This report presents the results of a final performance evaluation of USAID’s NEXTT activity. EVALUATION PURPOSE AND QUESTIONS The dual purpose of this evaluation is to provide an independent examination of the overall progress and accomplishments of the NEXTT activity, as well as to provide actionable guidance to USAID/Nigeria and other stakeholders in designing future trade capacity building activities. This evaluation aims to answer the following questions: Relevance • To what extent did NEXTT resolve the trade capacity challenges that it aimed to address, including, but not limited to, the three stated objective areas outlined above? Partnership and Cooperation • To what extent were partnerships between NEXTT and Government of Nigeria (GON) agencies fostered and established, and what mechanisms have been created to deliver services? Best Practices • What are the key strategic, programmatic, technical, and managerial features of the Activity that should be considered when designing and implementing a new trade and investment activity in Nigeria? Results • How has the Activity increased the capacity of beneficiaries’ abilities to export? Sustainability • To what extent are the outcomes that have been achieved likely to be sustained after the Activity ends? • What is the likelihood that beneficiaries will continue to employ the export practices they have learned from the Activity once it ends? • What, if any, are the key components of the Activity’s approach and programming that have contributed to sustainability? PROJECT BACKGROUND The NEXTT activity had three integrated components that worked in sync to make Nigeria’s trade more competitive and to expand it within the sub-region and to overseas destinations. Component One focused on improving the time and cost to trade goods along the Lagos-Kano-Jibiya (LAKAJI) corridor by building consensus among stakeholders to advocate for improving the corridor’s infrastructure and reducing the time and cost that it took to move goods along the corridor. Component Two focused on improving trade policy and facilitating trade, including building Nigeria’s capacity to implement the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA). Lastly, the third component focused on increasing the capacity of export-ready firms (or those that 10 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY were close to being export-ready) to expand their exports within the West Africa region and to international markets. Core interventions across all components included: (1) the capacity building of Nigerian institutions, such as the Customs Service and Export Promotion Council, to support transportation and customs reforms; (2) the facilitation of buyer-seller relationships to improve the quality and volume of exports; and (3) the development of business plans to facilitate Project Development Facility (PDF) applicants’ access to finance. EVALUATION DESIGN AND LIMITATIONS The evaluation employed a multi-stage and mixed-methods approach to collect, analyze, and interpret data to answer the evaluation questions. Data collected by the Activity over its lifetime, along with primary data collected during the evaluation, provided an overall picture of the impact of the Activity. The evaluation took place from September 18, 2017 to November 2, 2017. Site visits for in-person interviews took place from October 3, 2017 to October 19, 2017 with beneficiaries and Activity partners in Kaduna, Abuja, Kwara, and Lagos States. Supplementary interviews were conducted in Abuja with GON beneficiaries from October 30, 2017 to November 2, 2017. Telephone interviews were conducted with beneficiaries outside of these four locations. A total of 63 organizations (i.e., beneficiaries) were interviewed. The evaluation encountered several limitations during data collection. Half of the target respondents, which included GON organizations; agribusiness and export-oriented companies who were beneficiaries of the PDF; Business Development Service Providers (BDSPs); and Activity implementing staff were either unavailable or could not be reached during the data collection period. The key reasons for this were that the timeframe for the evaluation was short; 1 potential respondents were not given adequate notice about the evaluation before field visits; and some phone numbers and email addresses in the Activity’s database were incorrect. In addition, the evaluation team was unable to validate investment and export figures reported by the Activity because respondents were unwilling to share financial information with the evaluation team. Some respondents pointed out that they did not know the evaluation team and were uncomfortable sharing financial information, primarily because Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) were not in place prior to the evaluation. The limitations encountered by the evaluation team resulted in fewer respondents than initially anticipated, limiting the range of beneficiary perspectives ideally required for data analysis and reporting. KEY FINDINGS RELEVANCE Resolving trade capacity challenges was a cross-cutting objective of the three Component Areas of the NEXTT activity. Therefore, key findings are presented addressing the challenges posed by these Components. COMPONENT ONE: LAKAJI CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT Under Component One, the Activity sought to reduce the time and cost to trade on the LAKAJI corridor by 30 percent and to facilitate investments valued at $69.5 million. The Activity’s 2015 performance assessment2 of the corridor reported a 25 percent reduction in the time to import 1 Field visits were initially conducted over 12 days in four states. However some key government officials could not be reached within this period. The evaluation team was subsequently given a four-day extension period to secure and conduct interviews with these stakeholders. 2 2015 LAKAJI Corridor Performance Assessment Report. 11 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY goods from ports in Lagos through to Jibiya in Katsina State and a 36 percent reduction in importation costs. Similarly, it reported a 6 percent reduction in export times and a 21 percent reduction in export costs from Jibiya to Lagos ports. No updated information was available at the time of this evaluation to assess longer-term impacts on time and cost to trade. Furthermore, respondents who participated in primary data collection reported that while there were no improvements in the quality of the LAKAJI road infrastructure, there were some reductions in the number of levies collected on some segments of the corridor, as well as reductions in the time required to clear goods at ports in Lagos. Through the USAID-developed PDF, some beneficiaries were also able to gain access to finance for their businesses. Despite these notable successes, bottlenecks – such as poor road infrastructure, multiple taxation, and unregulated taxation – in the transport and trade of goods along the corridor persist. Moreover, stakeholders primarily attributed the reduction in clearance times at the ports to a GON executive order, which mandated the clearing of goods within 24 hours of arrival. In addition, while Activity documents report that 57 PDF applicants (all of whom were involved in agribusiness investment) were approved for funding, totaling $21.5 million, by the second quarter of 2017 (against a target of $69.5 million), only 5 of the 22 PDF recipients interviewed for this evaluation (23 percent) reported any gains from accessing this facility. Gains reported under the PDF included expansion into new product lines, the ability to attract equity investors, and the procurement of debt financing. Consequently, the evaluation team believes that the Activity was somewhat successful in achieving its target to reduce the time and cost to trade along the corridor and in facilitating agribusiness investment. COMPONENT TWO: TRADE POLICY AND TRADE FACILITATION Under Component Two, NEXTT improved efficiencies in trade facilitation by building the capacity of the NCS in risk management, which aimed to fast track processes at the ports. A former Customs Comptroller, interviewed during this evaluation, reported that the training the NEXTT activity provided helped the customs service to implement the GON’s executive order. Respondents who interacted with the NCS reported a reduction of up to 64 percent (from seven days to two and a half days), in the time it took to clear goods. The Activity, under Component Two, also supported the Federal Ministry of Industry, Trade and Investment (FMITI) to develop the TFA action plan and software to track the quarterly progress of TFA implementation. This software is currently being used by the National Trade Facilitation Committee (NTFC) to monitor the country’s TFA implementation. The evaluation team believes the Activity was very successful in meeting the objectives of Component Two: improving trade policy and trade facilitation. COMPONENT THREE: EXPANDED EXPORT SUPPORT Under Component Three, the evaluation team believes that the Activity was very successful in facilitating export expansion. By collaborating with the Nigeria Export Promotion Council (NEPC) to train export-oriented businesses, and with BDSPs on export requirements, NEXTT clients were able to increase total volume and sales from exports. Activity documents report that as of 2016, NEXTT client (i.e., beneficiary) exports were 13.4 percent of the total non-oil exports from Nigeria. NEXTT client exports were valued at $26.6 million versus $198 million for national non-oil exports, and, by the second quarter of 2017, NEXTT clients had exported a total of $39.3 million non-oil products. In addition, NEXTT collaborated with the NEPC to take exporters to Vietnam for a buyer-seller meeting. As a result, the council secured a contract with Vietnamese firms for Nigerian firms to supply 80,000 metric tons (MTs) of cashew to Vietnam. According to NEPC respondents, under the agreement between Nigerian and Vietnamese firms, a total of 130,000 MTs of cashew were exported in 2016, and Nigeria’s revenue from cashew rose from less than $100 million to $250 million in 2016. 12 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY The Activity also facilitated the process of obtaining food and drug certifications for the domestic National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) through the international United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), as well as facilitated market linkages between exporters and potential buyers in international markets. PARTNERSHIP AND COOPERATION NEXTT established significant partnerships and increased the efficiencies of key Ministry Departments and Agencies (MDA), such as the Bank of Industry (BOI), the Nigeria Investment Promotion Council (NIPC), the FMITI, the NEPC, the NCS, FERMA, and the National Food Safety Management Committee (NFSMC), including NAFDAC. These stakeholders reported that NEXTT engaged with them in a timely manner, in line with their vision, which led to improvements in their operations. In addition, MDAs, such as the NIPC, the FMITI, the NEPC, FERMA, and the NFSMC, noted a continuation of the initiatives introduced by the Activity. Specifically, the BOI reported that it had funded seven of the eight PDF applicants who applied for debt financing (to date over N2 billion has been disbursed to these firms) because the BOI’s participation in the process assured the bank that the applicant firms had adopted best practices. In addition, as part of the NIPC-NEXTT partnership, a director at the NIPC was seconded to NEXTT to support advocacy efforts on the LAKAJI corridor and to galvanize the buy-in of businesses and government agencies at the sub-national level. The NIPC reported that through its engagement with the Activity, it gained insights into opportunities for domestic investments, thereby expanding its strategy from focusing solely on Foreign Direct Investments to include investors in Nigeria as well as those based abroad. Additionally, the NIPC has developed an Investment Facilitation Fund (IFF), which is a replication of the PDF, that focuses on assisting fledging businesses to expand as well as on Greenfield projects within and outside the LAKAJI corridor. The IFF represents a new frontier in the mandate of the NIPC as the program seeks to decrease the investment risks for businesses in their early stages. The NIPC was a member of the PDF selection committee and is currently working to link Activity beneficiaries with the Small and Medium Enterprise Development Agency of Nigeria (SMEDAN) and the Nigerian Export Import (NEXIM) bank. Lastly, NEXTT developed a significant relationship with the FMITI and was active in the ratification, implementation, and monitoring of the TFA. Through this interaction, the FMITI received technical support to develop an action plan and software for the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) framework for the TFA. This framework has improved efficiency in monitoring implementation. RESULTS Export and PDF beneficiary businesses reported improved visibility to both international and national audiences from their attendance at local and international exhibitions as well as buyer-seller meetings facilitated by the Activity. Beneficiaries also noted that trainings on packaging helped to improve the acceptance of their products in local and international markets. NEXTT provided technical support to the NEPC for a one-day technical workshop for exporters in Kano. The technical sessions, which over 100 commodity exporters attended along with other stakeholders, focused on understanding the dynamics of the global export market, with an emphasis on the US market under Nigeria’s African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA). NEXTT collaborated with the NEPC on international market linkages for Nigerian cashew exporters. The Activity also collaborated with the NEPC and the African Cashew Alliance to conduct trainings for exporters. NEXTT and the NEPC provided training to build the capacity of 12 Nigerian exporting companies ahead of their participation at the World Cashew Convention (WCC) in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. NEXTT prepared the participants for the convention by holding pre-session interviews and training for each of the 12 firms on how to participate at international trade shows. 13 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY BDSPs reported an improved awareness of export processes and procedures. In addition, beneficiaries reported increased business revenues from market linkages facilitated by the NEXTT activity. One cashew exporter reported an increased turnover from $3 million in 2012 to $17 million in 2017. Another exporter reported a $425,000 increase in turnover in 2017, while another beneficiary and PDF recipient reported an increased customer base of up to 70 percent, due to market linkages established during exhibitions organized by NEXTT. SUSTAINABILITY It is likely that interventions will continue after the Activity ends, and the results achieved will be sustained providing critical, key stakeholders continue to engage with ongoing activities. The Nigerian Economic Summit Group (NESG), a private sector think-tank and policy advocacy group, is now leading the implementation of interventions under Components One and Two, advocating for improvements in the corridor and supporting the TFA implementation. The group has recently signed an MoU with the Governors’ Forum to engage northern governors. The NESG also plans to source funds to continue monitoring the transport infrastructure along the corridor, and will work with the FMITI to identify avenues for financing the establishment of a TFA secretariat as well as to convene public-private sector advocacy groups. Under Component Three, collaborative efforts between NEXTT and the NEPC on cashew and shea have improved the GON’s support for these value chains. The NEPC reported that shea and cashew are now in Category B of a Zero-Oil Plan – an initiative of the NEPC to lift Nigeria out of its recession using non-oil export products within the next 10 years. Category B is targeted at developing small businesses, with the potential for job creation and revenue generation for populations of shea and cashew producing areas. As part of its role, the NEPC has committed to promoting the development of export-related industries in Nigeria and spearheading the creation of appropriate export incentives, while building capacity on best management practices among local communities and value chain operators. BEST PRACTICES Strategic, needs-based, and timely technical assistance from consultants and through trainings were key to obtaining the buy-in of NEXTT activity stakeholders. The FMITI noted that the technical assistance provided by NEXTT in the development of the tracking software as well as trainings delivered to the FMITI staff on the TFA were timely. Similarly, the engagement of private sector advocacy groups, such as Business Membership Organizations (BMO) including, but not limited to, the Nigeria Association of Small and Medium Enterprises, the Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the National Cashew Association of Nigeria, and the Shea Nut Association of Nigeria, and the NESG were essential to affect change in the trade sector. In addition, facilitating market linkages between beneficiaries and potential buyers to ensure that exporters have a market for their products was critical. Knowledgeable implementing staff also provided key support to beneficiaries and were essential for successful outcomes. CONCLUSIONS The NEXTT activity was generally successful in resolving the trade capacity challenges identified across the Component Areas. The Activity engaged with several GON MDAs over the period of implementation and established meaningful relationships and partnerships with GON agencies that were instrumental in facilitating trade in Nigeria. By facilitating market linkages and capacity building sessions for export-ready firms, NEXTT made a significant difference in the capacity of beneficiary firms to export. The sustainability strategy employed by NEXTT, which places key Nigerian stakeholders at the forefront of implementation, also improves the likelihood that interventions will be sustained beyond the life of the Activity. 14 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY Technical and managerial highlights of the activity included strategic, needs-based, and timely technical assistance and facilitation of market linkages between beneficiaries and potential buyers. RECOMMENDATIONS In continuing to address Nigeria’s trade barriers, future activities should build on the lessons learned and challenges faced by NEXTT to improve the implementation of trade interventions going forward. Recommendations include: 1. Undertaking an assessment of NEXTT beneficiaries to identify persistent challenges, constraints and/or limitations, ensuring that interventions sustainably address issues along the LAKAJI corridor. 2. Monitoring the GON’s strategic interests through regular visits and interactions with GON partner agencies to ensure the continuous alignment of project activities with GON strategic interests. 3. Ensuring BDSP services are tailored to the needs, size, and nature of micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs), giving beneficiary firms a voice in how much BDSPs are paid if counterpart payments are required. 4. Ensuring future PDF processes, including the development of business plans, culminate in BDSPs facilitating access to funds for clients. Moreover, payment to BDSPs by clients should be tied to the funds clients receive from financial institutions. GON agencies at the senior level should participate in this process to ensure swift and independent decision-making. 5. Promoting access to equity funding for MSMEs or forming cooperative unions that allow for the pooling of resources. Debt financing is risky for start-ups and agriculture-related businesses that are susceptible to weather and environmental hazards. 6. Building institutional memory by including middle cadre staff in meetings with MDAs. 7. Recruiting staff who are aware of, and understand, the contextual and sociocultural differences of Activity intervention locations. This will promote stakeholder buy-in and the adoption of Activity objectives. Ensuring Activity Offices are adequately staffed with a minimum of one (1) Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) Officer at each Activity Office. 15 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION The Nigeria Expanded Trade and Transport (NEXTT) Activity was a five-year (2012-2017) USAID￾funded project established to increase Nigeria’s capacity to trade domestic agricultural products within the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) sub-region and to improve trade efficiency and inclusiveness. The principal objectives of NEXTT were to improve Nigeria’s overall trade and transport competitiveness by addressing Nigeria’s trade and transport challenges along the Lagos-Kano-Jibiya (LAKAJI) corridor, improving and facilitating trade policy, and expanding exports. The NEXTT activity had three components that worked in sync to make Nigeria’s trade more competitive and to expand it within the sub-region and to overseas destinations. Component One focused on improving the time and cost to trade goods along the LAKAJI (Lagos- Kano-Jibiya) corridor by building consensus among stakeholders to advocate for improving the corridor’s infrastructure and reducing the associated time and cost to move goods along the corridor. It also supported the development of new agribusiness investments in the trade corridor. Component Two focused on improving trade policy and facilitating trade, including building Nigeria’s capacity to implement the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA). An expected outcome of this component was to reduce the hold time (or release time) at the ports in Lagos and at the Seme border post to make cross-border trade quicker and easier. Component Three focused on increasing the capacity of export-ready firms (or those that were close to being export-ready) to expand their exports within the West African region and to international markets. Over the life of the Activity, the intended results were to: 1. Affect a 30 percent reduction in the delays and bottlenecks in moving goods from the ports in Lagos through to Kano and up to Jibiya on the Niger border (the LAKAJI corridor). 2. Facilitate investments valued at $69.5 million along the LAKAJI corridor. 3. Improve the capacity of GON officials to address Nigeria’s trade policy and trade facilitation constraints, and address implementation issues including supporting the customs reform program. 4. Improve the capacity of the GON to implement the WTO’s TFA. 5. Increase the ability of small and medium enterprises to contribute to Nigeria’s non-oil export revenues by helping firms generate $50 million from exports of cashew, cocoa, sesame seeds, shea, and processed agricultural foods to regional and international markets. 6. Strengthen the capacity of export service providers and the Nigerian Export Promotion Council (NEPC) to better support exporters. USAID commissioned a final evaluation of the NEXTT activity to provide an independent examination of the Activity’s accomplishments. The purpose of the evaluation was to assess the Activity’s achievements against expected results and to determine the sustainability of capacity that was built during the lifetime of the Activity. The evaluation also intended to provide useful guidance to USAID/Nigeria and other stakeholders in designing future trade capacity building activities. This evaluation examines the extent to which NEXTT successfully addressed the identified trade capacity challenges by comparing the Activity’s achievements against its targets. In addition, the evaluation examines the extent to which the interventions were consistent with the needs of stakeholders, as well as the likelihood that stakeholders will utilize their newly acquired skills after the Activity’s support ends. The evaluation also highlights the Activity’s design, management, and operational decision-making features including those that were successful, those that did not work (lessons learned), and those that should be considered in the design and implementation of new trade and investment projects. 16 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY The evaluation aims to provide normative and descriptive answers to the following questions: Relevance 1. To what extent did NEXTT resolve the trade capacity challenges that it aimed to address, including, but not limited to, the three-stated objective (component) areas? Partnership and Cooperation 2. To what extent have partnerships between NEXTT and Government of Nigeria (GON) agencies been fostered and established, and what mechanisms have been created to deliver services? Best Practices 3. What are the key strategic, programmatic, technical, and managerial features of the Activity that should be considered when designing and implementing a new trade and investment activity in Nigeria? a. What worked and what did not, i.e. lessons learned? b. What should be considered in the design and implementation of new trade and investment projects? Results 4. What impact has the Activity had in building the capacity of beneficiaries to export? Sustainability 5. To what extent are any results achieved likely to be sustained after the Activity ends? a. What is the likelihood that beneficiaries will use their newly acquired skills and capacity to export once the Activity ends? b. What, if any, were the key components of the Activity’s approach and programming that contributed to sustainability? 17 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY SECTION 2: BACKGROUND Trade policy, trade facilitation, and transport infrastructure all significantly impact on food security in Nigeria. Rapid and efficient transport from farms to consumers is essential to preserve agricultural products and to deliver them to the market. Inadequate transport and inconsistent trade policy increases the time and cost that it takes for goods to get to the market. Higher transportation costs result in higher costs of trading, which impacts on food security by raising food prices and reducing people’s ability to purchase food. Food security is weakened without effective transport and trade policies that improve the trading and investment environment for trade-related infrastructure. Nigeria’s commercial environment is perceived as harsh. Business owners and entrepreneurs have to contend with bureaucratic and other regulatory processes such as the obsolete customs law of the Nigeria Customs Service (NCS); physical infrastructure that creates bottlenecks, such as poor road conditions; the absence of multiple modes of transportation systems; and the absence of advocacy groups to address transportation problems. These issues continue to be major obstacles to domestic and international trade, making the cost of products, whether imported or for export, expensive. Nigeria’s list of items prohibited for import and the incorrect declaration of goods by importers result in 95 percent of containers being physically examined. These examinations cause delays and increase the cost of the customs clearing process. Businesses state that high tariffs, nontransparent valuation procedures, frequent policy changes, and unclear guidelines from the NCS relating to the application of policies, continue to make trade difficult and expensive, and often create bottlenecks for commercial activities. Reportedly, many importers resort to undervaluing their products or employing other means to avoid paying the full tariff. 3 At the micro, small and medium enterprise (MSME) level, limited access to finance restricts the ability of small and medium enterprises to tap into export markets and to take advantage of opportunities within the West African sub-regional market and with the United States under the African Growth and Opportunities Act (AGOA). Consequently, the contribution of Nigeria’s non-oil exports to its total gross domestic product (GDP) remains low despite the GON’s declarations regarding the diversification of the economy and increasing the contribution of these exports to the total GDP. 4 As of 2013, non-oil exports were valued at $148.5 million; the total GDP was $451 billion. 5 The baseline evaluation of the LAKAJI trade corridor conducted by the Activity revealed that trading costs along the corridor were very high. It cost up to $3,889 (transport costs, freight, and forwarding fees including border clearance, handling charges, and storage fees) and took an average of 16 days to trade goods across borders in Nigeria, compared to $2,822 and an average of 7.5 days to trade goods across the Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso) - Tema (Ghana) border. In addition, it cost an average of $1,193 to move goods between Kano and Lagos. The Activity also carried out an assessment of Nigeria’s trade policy process (TPP) and found that the existing trade policy-making and implementation structures lacked key components of global best practice. The development of trade policies was undertaken using a club model or group that spearheads the demand for favorable policies. This model is typically dominated by internal bureaucratic consultations with little private sector representation. On the contrary, international best practices favor a more inclusive, transparent, and multi-stakeholder approach. The mapping of Nigeria’s TPP within the Activity’s assessment also highlighted that the two main structures supporting the process, the Enlarged National Focal Point (ENFP) and the Trade Facilitation Task Force (TFTF), had functionally ceased to exist.6 3 Mid-Term Performance Evaluation of the NEXTT Project Report. 4 Mid-Term Performance Evaluation of the NEXTT Project Report. 5 NEXTT Contribution to National Output Report. 6 NEXTT Project Year 1 Annual Report. 18 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY To improve the trading environment and to facilitate investment in trade-related infrastructure, the NEXTT activity was designed to carry out the following tasks (interventions) under three component areas: COMPONENT ONE: LAKAJI CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT ● Build the capacity of an advocacy oversight organization to facilitate transportation improvements along the LAKAJI corridor. The Activity trained LAKAJI Corridor Management Group (CMG) members on how to measure the time and cost to trade along the corridor and how to monitor transport and logistics performance on the corridor. The CMG was expected to use the information gathered to track and advocate for improvements along the corridor. ● Facilitate agribusiness investment along the corridor through business linkages and the Project Development Facility (PDF). The advocacy intervention for this component did not work as envisaged as the CMG did not demonstrate that it was capable of leading activities without NEXTT playing a significant role. As an alternative, the Activity focused on the PDF to drive improvements in the corridor through agribusiness investment. The PDF was a $1.8 million seed fund that aimed to catalyze investment in the corridor. The Activity contributed 50 percent while beneficiaries made a counterpart contribution to develop business plans, undertake feasibility studies, environmental impact assessments, and market studies, as well as to develop other planning instruments, which culminated in the production of a document to attract investment in the businesses of beneficiaries. The Activity indicator, outlined in the Activity documents to track the progress of this intervention, was the value of investments facilitated by the NEXTT activity. COMPONENT TWO: TRADE POLICY AND TRADE FACILITATION ● Build the capacity of the Federal Ministry of Industry, Trade, and Investment (FMITI) for trade policy formulation and implementation. ● Support customs modernization. ● Provide institutional capacity building to the National Food and Safety Management Committee (NFSMC) on standards and infrastructure for food and agricultural products trade. The Activity achieved this component by providing technical assistance to key government agencies to train staff to develop the specialized software needed to improve trade policy formulation and implementation, to modernize customs, as well as to set the standards needed for food and agricultural products trade. The indicators outlined by the Activity to track the progress of this intervention were: (1) the number of legal, regulatory, or institutional actions taken to improve implementation or compliance, and (2) the number of participants who attended trade and investment trainings. COMPONENT THREE: EXPANDED EXPORT SUPPORT ● Promote the use of business development services to export-oriented firms with the aim of increasing the quantity of goods exported. ● Strengthen the capacity of the NEPC and industry associations to export goods. The Activity facilitated the training of Business Development Service Providers (BDSPs) and export firms on different aspects of the export business and export requirements and helped firms to access local and international certifications needed to promote and sell their products. In addition, NEXTT helped to create market linkages for export firms by facilitating their participation in local and international exhibitions to showcase the potential of the firms. The indicators outlined by the Activity to track the progress of this intervention were: (1) the number of firms receiving capacity building assistance to export, (2) the number of participants who attended US government￾supported trade and investment capacity building trainings, (3) the value of exports by NEXTT client 19 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY firms, (4) the number of firms receiving USG assistance that obtained international quality control certification and adhered to environmental, other processes, voluntary standards or regulations, and (5) the number of capacity building service providers receiving USG assistance. These interventions were expected to lead to sustainable impacts in the form of a reduction in trading and food costs and an increase in the quality of food available in the domestic market, as well as jobs and income generation opportunities for people linked to firms exporting goods abroad. This development hypothesis notes that, by linking increased agricultural competitiveness to improvements in trade and transport, economic opportunities in rural communities will increase, leading to inclusive economic growth. In addition, by working to reform and create a business enabling environment in Nigeria and modernizing and streamlining customs operations at ports, the cost of trading and conducting business in Nigeria will decrease. NEXTT was designed to address trade and transport constraints in ways that were catalytic, transformative, and aligned with the efforts of the GON and the private sector. NEXTT’s role was to provide technical assistance and direct support including training and technical assistance to beneficiary enterprises and GON institutions. 20 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY SECTION 3: METHODOLOGY The evaluation employed a multi-stage and mixed-methods approach to collect, analyze, and interpret data to answer the evaluation questions. Data collected by the Activity over its lifetime (used as secondary data in this evaluation), along with primary data collected during the evaluation, provided an overall picture of the achievements of the Activity. Hence a combination of quantitative (collected by the Activity) and qualitative methods (conducted by the evaluation team) were employed for this final performance evaluation. The evaluation took place from September 18, 2017 to November 2, 2017. Site visits for in-person interviews took place from October 3, 2017 to October 19, 2017 with beneficiaries and Activity partners in Kaduna, Abuja, Kwara, and Lagos States. Supplementary interviews were conducted in Abuja with GON beneficiaries from October 30, 2017 to November 2, 2017. Telephone interviews were conducted with beneficiaries outside of these four locations. 3.1 EVALUATION PROCESS At the outset, the evaluation team reviewed the Activity’s documentation, its achievements, deliverables, and targets, and developed draft data collection protocols. Then potential respondents were randomly selected from the Activity’s global beneficiary list provided by USAID. The evaluation work plan and data collection protocols were finalized and approved by the USAID/Nigeria Office of Economic Growth and the Environment (EGE). Key informant interviews and group discussions were conducted with Activity stakeholders and beneficiaries. Interviews were conducted with the Activity team first, then the evaluation team conducted face-to-face individual and group discussions and telephone interviews with Activity beneficiaries and other stakeholders. Site visits took place from October 3, 2017 to October 19, 2017 with beneficiaries and Activity partners in Kaduna, Abuja, Kwara and Lagos States. Supplementary interviews were conducted in Abuja with GON beneficiaries from October 30, 2017 to November 2, 2017. Interviews were conducted, and discussions were held with a total of 63 beneficiary and stakeholder organizations. Following the collection of data, the evaluation team conducted an initial analysis of the data collected and presented the preliminary findings to USAID/Nigeria. Then, additional interviews were conducted with GON stakeholders who were unavailable during the initial data collection period.7 Lastly, the evaluation team performed an in-depth analysis of all data collected, using the methods outlined below. 3.2 SAMPLE SELECTION The NEXTT stakeholder/beneficiary database held details for the following: PDF companies, export companies, BDSPs, GON organizations, other partner organizations (Business Membership Organsations (BMOs)), and implementing staff. PDF and export component beneficiaries (BDSPs and export-oriented businesses) were randomly selected from the global beneficiary list provided by the NEXTT Activity. These beneficiaries were first stratified by location, and then potential respondents were randomly selected from each stratum. By oversampling where possible, the selection made allowances for non-responses. Attempts were made to contact all key GON stakeholders and other partners with whom the Activity had extensive contact, as well as the implementing team, particularly component leads in the contact database. The response rate for the evaluation exercise was 61 percent, with a total of 63 7 Supplementary interviews were conducted from October 30 to November 2, 2017. 21 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY organizations (i.e., beneficiaries) interviewed for the evaluation. The detailed respondent list can be found in Annex 1. Table 1. Respondents' Location TYPE OF RESPONDENTS BUSINESS LOCATION Export/PDF beneficiary companies/BDSPs Katsina, Kano, Kaduna, FCT, Kwara, Lagos, Oyo, Ogun Government of Nigeria FCT Other Partners Lagos, FCT NEXTT Staff-Leads/Implementing Partners Lagos, FCT, USA 3.3 DATA COLLECTION METHODS Both primary and secondary data collection methods were used for the evaluation. SECONDARY DATA COLLECTION The evaluation team’s secondary data collection involved a review of the Activity documents, which were shared with the evaluation team, including data that monitored the Activity’s indicators over the life of the Activity. The review provided key background information for the evaluation and acted as a base for the primary data collection exercise.8 PRIMARY DATA COLLECTION Primary data were collected via Key Informant Interviews (KIIs), which were conducted face-to-face, by telephone, and at round-table discussions with beneficiaries and other stakeholders. KIIs and group discussions were held in-person with beneficiaries from businesses in Abuja, Kaduna, Kwara, and Lagos States – where the Activity concentrated its activities. Telephone interviews were also conducted with stakeholders outside of these four locations. A total of 20 people attended the four 8 See Annex VI for the secondary data sources reviewed. Figure 1. Number of Respondents 22 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY round-table discussions conducted by the evaluation team in Lagos and Kaduna, with an average of five beneficiaries attending each session. In addition, KIIs were conducted with 43 export/PDF beneficiary businesses and BDSPs, as well as GON stakeholders and NEXTT staff/implementing partners (IPs). Email and verbal consent were obtained from respondents prior to interviews, and respondents were informed that personal information would not be included in the evaluation report. The evaluation team recorded 94 percent of interviews and round-table discussions, except where respondents objected to conversations being recorded. 9 In addition, to ensure that the evaluation team captured as much information as possible, and that no information was missing, a minimum of two people took notes during discussions with stakeholders. The primary data collection exercise used a focused interview/discussion approach. This approach used interview discussion guides to systematically explore key topics, while allowing time for respondents to raise issues they felt were relevant and important. This approach ensured that respondents spoke about the subject in question on their own terms, which provided the evaluation team with a greater understanding of respondents’ points of view. Moreover, the open-ended nature of the interview questions provided respondents with the opportunity to raise issues that had not been identified beforehand. 3.4 QUALITY CONTROL Staff of DevTech Systems, Inc. (implementers of the Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning [MEL] Activity contract) supervised the entire evaluation process, from the development of data collection protocols to the development of the draft report, with oversight from members of the USAID/Nigeria’s EGE team. 3.5 ANALYSIS The evaluation team used a deductive approach for its primary data analysis, by summarizing interview and group discussion notes in line with the evaluation questions; this served as the framework for the analysis. The evaluation team then performed content analysis of the primary data, identifying similarities or differences in the data, as well as recurrent themes, using NVivo Pro software. 9 The team obtained verbal consent from respondents before audio recording interview sessions. 23 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY SECTION 4: EVALUATION LIMITATIONS Half of the target respondents were either unavailable or could not be reached during the data collection period. This resulted in a total of 45 out of 87 targeted export/PDF beneficiary businesses and BDSPs being interviewed during the evaluation. Introductory emails to project beneficiaries and stakeholders were sent out five days before field visits began. This meant that potential respondents were not given ample time to make themselves available for the exercise. The evaluation team called each potential respondent an average of six times for confirmation and sent text messages to potential respondents who did not answer their calls. The Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) for the NEXTT activity also sent follow-up emails to some selected respondents (particularly GON stakeholders) to introduce the evaluation team and to request their participation in the study. However, as some information was incorrectly inputted into the database, a number of emails were returned undelivered and the team was unable to get through to some telephone numbers. As a result, these respondents could not be contacted. An inability to interview key stakeholders such as the NCS, the NEPC and the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) during the initial field visit period led to the extension of the primary data gathering period, so that feedback could be collected from these stakeholders. Ultimately, although representatives of all three Government agencies were interviewed, only the previous Comptroller (retired) at the NCS provided feedback on NEXTT’s engagement with the service. The current Comptroller (head of the resource department) at the NCS could not be interviewed as he requested the list of trainings that had been conducted with the Service under his predecessor, being unwilling to grant an interview about NEXTT until he received this information. The Activity team reached out to Palladium, the Activity’s IP, to address this issue, but it could not be resolved during the extension period. Finally, the evaluation team was unable to validate investment and export figures reported by the Activity because respondents were unwilling to share financial information with the evaluation team. A key issue highlighted by respondents was that they did not know the evaluation team and were uncomfortable sharing financial information, particularly without prior Memorandums of Understanding (MoU) with NEXTT or USAID in place, which would have required them to do so. 24 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY SECTION 5: FINDINGS The first question the evaluation sought to answer was relevance; that is, to what extent did the NEXTT activity resolve the trade capacity challenges that it aimed to address. NEXTT component areas were graded on a scale of one to five for this final evaluation. The scale definitions and criteria are provided below. 1: Not at all successful; 2: Marginally successful; 3: Somewhat successful; 4: Successful; and 5: Very successful. A component area was assigned a score of 1 if “No change occurred;” 2 was assigned if “Some intended changes occurred, but it was not clear if the change was due to the Activity’s interventions;” 3 was assigned if “Some intended changes occurred, partially due to the Activity’s interventions;” 4 was assigned if “Significant intended changes occurred partially due to the Activity’s interventions;” and 5 was assigned if “Significant intended changes occurred largely due to the Activity’s interventions.” 5.1 RELEVANCE: LAKAJI CORRIDOR The Activity’s target for the corridor was to reduce the time and cost to trade on the corridor by 30 percent and to establish investments facilitated by the Activity valued at $69.5 million. REDUCTION IN TIME AND COST TO TRADE ON LAKAJI CORRIDOR BY THIRTY PERCENT A baseline assessment of the corridor undertaken in 2013 revealed that approximately 60 percent of the time required to import and export goods via the LAKAJI corridor was attributable to delays, while approximately 50 percent of the cost to import and 40 percent of the cost to export goods was attributable to inefficiencies or informal payments. Fifteen out of the 19.5 days it took to import goods were attributable to delays at the port (most of which were related to border clearance procedures), and the short transport segment from the port to Lagos warehouses, where goods were typically transferred to trucks destined for all points north. In terms of cost, transport from Lagos to Kano ($1,548) and freight forwarding fees ($885) incurred at the ports were the highest outlays. Export costs were lower, but similarly distributed, with transport from Kano to Lagos ($837) and freight forwarding ($587) also comprising the highest costs. Transport infrastructure from Lagos to Kano and vice versa was also a key cost and time driver for trade along the corridor. The research team segmented the observed costs into the categories of “extra costs” and “optimized costs”. Extra costs represented inefficiencies in both the import and export processes, as well as informal costs. Optimized costs represented the proportion of observed costs that were comparable to a reasonable benchmark. On the import side, extra costs related to yard handling fees (which included demurrage and storage) represented an extraordinary 78 percent of the total cost, driven by the lengthy border clearance times of customs and other government entities and yard handling procedures by terminal operators. Extra costs related to transport from the port to Lagos warehouses represented 97 percent of the total cost, driven by congestion, transportation policy (such as limiting truck movement to night hours), and a limited reliance on containers for shipments once in-country. The major driver of extra costs on the export side was also for transport between Lagos warehouses and the ports ($548), due to the same reasons (congestion, transportation policy, and a limited reliance on containers for export transportation) representing 95 percent of the total cost of this part of the export process. To address time and cost delays at the ports, NEXTT provided technical assistance to the NCS to support customs reforms. The Activity facilitated the development and delivery of a risk awareness training module for wider dissemination to NCS staff. This aimed to increase the NCS’s knowledge 25 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY of risks so that they adopted more effective risk controls by making the transition to the Pre-Arrival Application System (PAAR). NEXTT also developed a one-day training module for the private sector on how to access materials for rapid clearance and to increase their knowledge on key customs processes. To address transport infrastructure constraints, the Activity engaged with several stakeholders, including GON agencies and private sector business membership organizations, to facilitate transportation improvements along the corridor. NEXTT also sought to build relationships between the CMG and state governments, to give the CMG leverage to push for infrastructure improvements and reforms that would reduce the time and cost of trading goods along the corridor. Through the CMG the NEXTT activity sought to strengthen transport corridor governance and development planning to support the improvement of transport infrastructure and services along the LAKAJI corridor. NEXTT’s support of the LAKAJI CMG aimed to bring together public and private sector stakeholders as a cohesive group that would advocate for improvements along the corridor, propose solutions to reduce transport inefficiencies, and monitor improvements. The Activity’s 2015 performance assessment10 of the corridor reported a 25 percent reduction in the time to import goods from Lagos ports through to Jibiya in Katsina State and a 36 percent reduction in importation costs. Similarly, a six percent reduction in the time to export goods and a 21 percent reduction in export costs from Jibiya through to Lagos ports were reported. However, the corridor performance assessment was completed two years prior to the final evaluation of the Activity and a quantitative assessment of the current state of the corridor could not be undertaken. While respondents reported that there were no improvements in the quality of the LAKAJI road infrastructure, a few respondents reported reductions in the number of levies collected on some segments of the corridor, as well as in the time it took to clear goods at ports in Lagos. Respondents reported that levies had been banned within the Kaduna-Plateau segment of the corridor, reducing the cost of transporting goods along this segment. Some noted that the number of levies collected on roads in Kwara State had also decreased. However, stakeholders attributed the reduction in clearance times at ports to a GON executive order, which stated that goods had to be cleared within 24 hours of arrival at the port. One respondent reported a 64 percent reduction (seven days to two and a half days) in the time it took to clear goods at Lagos ports in 2017. NEXTT staff pointed out that while the 2015 assessment report revealed reductions in trading times and cost along the corridor, they did not attribute these reductions directly to NEXTT. They felt it was possible that this was more to do with the new government administration. Nonetheless, the NCS reported that the trainings the Activity facilitated on risk mitigation had been incorporated into the NCS’ PAAR system helping to improve their performance. Despite the reduction in time in goods clearance at the ports and the reduction in levies along the corridor, bottlenecks - such as poor road infrastructure, multiple taxation, and unregulated taxes - in the transport and trade of goods from Lagos through to Kano up to Jibiya at the Niger border still persist. Furthermore, some of the interventions undertaken by the Activity to address transport infrastructure constraints did not work out as envisaged. The Activity built the capacity of the LAKAJI CMG to advocate for, and oversee transport improvements along the corridor, but it did not fulfill this role. Apart from registering the organization, the group did not embark on any activities to drive improvements along the corridor and it is currently non-functional. A representative of the CMG, who was interviewed by the evaluation team, reported that the CMG only undertook activities as directed by NEXTT and were unsure of what additional actions the Activity required of it. NEXTT staff, on the other hand, reported that it expected the CMG to take actions, under their own initiative, to drive change in the corridor. 10 2015 LAKAJI Corridor Performance Assessment Report. 26 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY In addition, support provided to the Federal Roads Management Agency (FERMA) to establish trailer parks (to reduce delays caused by trailers parking on the roads) and for a performance-based contracts model for road maintenance did not yield the intended results. The Minister of Transport determined that this was beyond the scope of FERMA’s remit. Therefore the trailer parks’ public￾private partnership model was transferred to its parent ministry; the Ministry of Transport. Despite this, FERMA is currently seeking funding to implement the performance-based contract model for road maintenance because the available budget within the agency is inadequate. Consequently, the evaluation team believes that the Activity was somewhat successful in achieving this target. Although no improvements in road transport infrastructure were recorded and the improvements reported at the ports were largely attributed to the GON, the evaluation team notes that the Activity carried out interventions to affect customs modernization. INVESTMENTS FACILITATED BY THE NEXTT ACTIVITY VALUED AT $69.5 MILLION The Activity collaborated with key GON organizations such as the BOI and the NIPC to increase investment in the corridor. In addition, the Activity assisted in creating a private sector driven organization, the LAKAJI Development Alliance (LDA), to attract private sector investment to the region. The Activity also established the PDF, a $1.8 million seed fund, to catalyze investment in the corridor. The Activity made a 50 percent contribution which was matched by an equivalent contribution by beneficiaries. The seed fund was used to create business plans, undertake feasibility studies, environmental impact assessments, and market studies, as well as to develop other planning instruments, which culminated in the production of a document to attract investment in beneficiaries’ businesses. Although the LDA identified potential high net worth private investors, the Alliance was unable to attract investment in the region because: (1) they felt NEXTT did not provide sufficient financial support, which was required for some of their projects, and (2) because of internal issues within the organization. The LDA is now defunct. The Activity paired PDF beneficiaries with BDSPs who helped beneficiaries set-up accounting systems, with the necessary documentation, for their businesses. The Activity organized capacity building sessions for PDF beneficiaries to develop their presentation skills for funding requests. While Activity documents report that 57 PDF applications were approved and a total of $21.5 million was invested in already existing businesses, by the second quarter of 2017, only five of the 22 PDF beneficiaries interviewed for this evaluation reported any gains. Nonetheless, gains reported under the PDF included business expansion, including expansion into new product lines, and attracting equity investors. Beneficiaries also reported that the capacity building provided under the PDF assisted them to pitch their business proposals to commercial banks when they were applying for loans. Furthermore, some beneficiaries reported that the services provided by BDSPs were invaluable. One beneficiary noted that although their business had not procured any financing for its business model, information contained in their business plan had been used to develop a farmer out￾grower model. According to this respondent, the growth in her business would have been impossible without the NEXTT activity. However, access to finance remains a challenge for many businesses along the LAKAJI corridor, and the limited success of PDF businesses could be attributed to the type of funding available to them. Businesses in Nigeria largely depend on debt funding, as equity funding or impact financing is not well structured. PDF beneficiaries said they could not afford the double-digit interest rates charged by Nigerian financial institutions. They also said that given the volatility of the agricultural sector and its susceptibility to weather challenges, pests and other environmental issues, many businesses are unable to finance commercial loans. Therefore, a key issue was the mismatch between the type of financing available and the needs of businesses. According to a member of the NEXTT implementation team, an intervention to develop and promote other forms of financing (such as equity and impact financing, as well as the option to lease equipment in place of outright purchase, 27 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY which would free up capital for other business ventures) would better support businesses and potentially increase the translation of business plans into executed projects. PDF beneficiaries also reported a distrust of commercial financial institutions. Evaluation respondents spoke about the absence of a non-disclosure agreement, which protects their business proposal. For these businesses, the fear of theft of their business ideas by commercial bank officials, after the financing of their business plans had been rejected, was a major concern. Respondents mentioned that available funding schemes from public financial institutions, such as the BOI facilities, only provided fixed capital rather than working capital financing. One PDF beneficiary noted that his farm is already over-capitalized and what he lacks is financing for the day-to-day running of his farm. However, financing from the BOI is still a viable option for businesses and interest rates are lower than those of commercial banks. Discussions with the BOI revealed that seven of the eight PDF beneficiaries who applied to the bank for debt finance had been approved, amounting to a disbursement of about N2 billion in total. This was largely due to the rigor undertaken by the Activity in developing business plans and the due diligence undertaken to vet the businesses. There were some overlaps (seven companies) between beneficiaries of the export component and beneficiaries of the PDF. Beneficiaries who received support under both components reported an increased investment in their businesses. Unfortunately, the evaluation team was unable to validate the investment figures reported by the Activity because respondents were unwilling to share financial documents with the team. Although the Activity did not achieve its target for this intervention, some respondents, particularly export-oriented firms who were also PDF beneficiaries, reported that the intervention had increased investment in their businesses. In addition, public sector respondents noted that NEXTT’s engagement with public and private financial institutions on access to finance for businesses along the corridor, informed reforms in the operations of public financial institutions. The evaluation team therefore believes that the Activity was somewhat successful in achieving its target for this intervention, with the potential that the target could be achieved in-the-near-future. 5.2 RELEVANCE: TRADE POLICY AND TRADE FACILITATION NEXTT’s target under this component was to improve the capacity of the GON to address trade policy and trade facilitation constraints, as well as to improve the capacity of the GON to implement the WTO TFA. The indicators outlined by the Activity to track the progress of this intervention were the number of legal, regulatory, or institutional actions taken to improve implementation or compliance with the WHO TFA, and the number of participants who attended trade and investment trainings. IMPROVE THE CAPACITY OF THE NIGERIAN GOVERNMENT TO ADDRESS TRADE POLICY AND TRADE FACILITATION CONSTRAINTS NEXTT conducted several capacity building sessions with staff at various GON organizations to address trade facilitation constraints. The Activity trained staff at the FMITI on policy formulation and implementation. In addition, the former customs comptroller, interviewed for this evaluation, reported that the Activity trained the NCS staff on risk mitigation in customs operations including in Risk Management, Post Clearance Audit, and Authorized Economic Operators (AEO), to improve the performance of the service. Key staff were also trained as trainers to build the capacity of other staff at the NCS. 28 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY In regard to food safety, in collaboration with other donor partners,11 the Activity brought together the five Ministries charged with food safety: the FMITI, the Federal Ministry of Health, the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, the Federal Ministry of Environment, and the Federal Ministry of Science and Technology, to launch the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Food Safety (IMCFS) and the NFMSC, as well as to develop the National Food Safety Policy. 12 The Activity also provided technical assistance to the NFMSC to implement this policy, providing consultants and funding capacity building trainings. Representatives of the FMITI interviewed for this evaluation reported that the NEXTT capacity building sessions for the Ministry have improved staff performance in policy formulation. Similarly, risk management has been incorporated into the NCS’s PAAR system. In addition, beneficiaries in the private sector who interact with the NCS reported a reduction in the processes required to export goods and an improvement in customs processes for importation, particularly a marked reduction in clearance times at the ports. In addition, the NFSMC is implementing the work plan developed by NEXTT and the committee has facilitated trainings for food handlers on food safety. NEXTT also convened stakeholder meetings with the Standards Organisation of Nigeria (SON) on required standards for cashew and kola, as well as on the code of practice for cold room storage. The NCS reported that they have not operationalized trainings on AEO because only a few staff at the service are familiar with it. Also, most staff trained on Post Clearance Audit have moved to other departments, limiting the institutional memory of trainings received by this department. Nevertheless, GON organizations interviewed reported improvements in their processes because of the trainings and engagement with the Activity. Additionally, the Food Safety Policy facilitated by NEXTT is being implemented. The evaluation team therefore believes that the Activity was very successful in addressing the trade capacity challenges it aimed to address. IMPROVE THE CAPACITY OF THE NIGERIAN GOVERNMENT TO IMPLEMENT THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION TFA The Activity was pivotal in Nigeria’s ratification of the WTO’s TFA, especially in the categorization of implementation levels for Nigeria. As of 2014, Nigeria indicated its Category A commitments under the TFA, and, by June 14, 2017, Nigeria had made additional notifications on its commitments. These new notifications included commitments on access to information, customs processing, and accountability in customs processes. NEXTT trained the FMITI’s National Trade Facilitation Committee (NTFC) and private sector actors13 engaged in trade-related activities on the implementation of Category C of the TFA. NEXTT also conducted sensitization workshops on the TFA with private sector businesses. In addition, the Activity supported the NTFC to develop the TFA action plan and software to track quarterly progress of implementation of the TFA. Table 2. Changes in OECD TFA Indicators for Nigeria Component14 2015 Measurements 2017 Measurements Percentage Change 1 Information Availability 1.4 1.4 0 percent 11 United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). 12https://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recentpercent20GAINpercent20Publications/Nigeriapercent20Inauguratespercent20 Committeespercent20forpercent20Foodpercent20Safety percent20Management_Lagos_Nigeria_2-17-2015.pdf 13 Nigeria Association of Small and Medium Enterprises (NASME), National Association of Nigerian Traders (NANTS), Nigerian Association of Chambers of Commerce, Industry, Mines and Agriculture (NACCIMA), Nigerian Association of Small Scale Industrialists (NASSI) and the Manufacturers Association of Nigeria (MAN). 14 See full descriptions of components in Appendix V. 29 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY Component14 2015 Measurements 2017 Measurements Percentage Change 2 Governance and Impartiality 0.63 0.857 36 percent 3 External Border Agency Cooperation 1 1 0 percent 4 Internal Border Agency Cooperation 0.67 0.667 -0.44 percent 5 Procedures 1.33 1.25 -6 percent 6 Automation 0.75 1.5 100 percent 7 Documents 0.67 1.167 74.2 percent 8 Fees and Charges 0.75 1.51 100 percent 9 Appeal Procedures 1.14 1.333 16.9 percent 10 Advance Ruling 0.33 0.667 102.1 percent 11 Trade Community Involvement 1.2 1.2 0 percent Source: OECD. (2017). Trade Facilitation Performance Indicators - Nigeria's Profile. Retrieved from: http://compareyourcountry.org/trade-facilitation Implementation of the TFA is expected to streamline trade-related processes and reduce the cost of conducting business in Nigeria, thereby making the country more competitive in trade. This will have multiplier effects in other areas such as employment creation. The implementation tracker software is currently being managed by the FMITI, and the table above highlights changes in Nigeria’s TFA implementation for different components of the TFA. Nigeria made some progress in six of the 11 indicators listed above, over a two-year period. The most successful components of the TFA to date are “Advance Ruling,” “Automation,” and “Fees and Charges,” which address importation procedures and administrative processes. The improvements in these indicators align with respondents’ reports of improvements in the NCS’s processes for importation and reduced procedures for exports and reflect the capacity building NEXTT provided to the NCS as well as the areas of support. The evaluation team believes the Activity was very successful in achieving its target for this intervention. Although Nigeria has made positive progress in implementing the TFA in only six of the 11 indicators over the last two years, structures initiated by NEXTT at the FMITI are helping to track Nigeria’s progress in the implementation of the TFA. 5.3 RELEVANCE: EXPORT EXPANSION IMPROVE THE CAPACITY OF SMES TO CONTRIBUTE TO NON-OIL EXPORTS BY GENERATING $50M FROM THE EXPORT OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS The Activity promoted the use of BDSPs to export-oriented firms; provided trainings to both BDSPs and beneficiary SMEs on export requirements and improved packaging; facilitated local and international certification; and, in some cases, created market linkages between SMEs and international buyers. As of 2016, NEXTT client exports constituted13.4 percent of the total non-oil exports from Nigeria, and NEXTT client exports were valued at $26.6 million versus $198 million 30 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY for national non-oil exports.15 Activity documents report that a total of $39.3 million non-oil products had been exported by NEXTT beneficiary firms by the second quarter of 2017. The NEXTT activity made significant strides towards creating market linkages between businesses, both domestic and international. Market linkages were created through exhibitions held in major cities in Nigeria, including Lagos and Abuja, as well as participation at international exhibitions. One respondent, Pack And Seals, reported an increased customer base of up to 70 percent due to market linkages established with local businesses during domestic exhibitions organized by the Activity. This respondent reported the award of a major contract in 2017, initiated during an exhibition organized by NEXTT in Abuja. NEXTT, in collaboration with the Africa Cashew Alliance, also provided training on cashew processing and value addition to export businesses in the cashew value-chain, to ensure the continued survival16 of cashew exporting businesses. The Activity also facilitated buyer-seller meetings in Vietnam and the United Arab Emirates (Dubai), between cashew exporters and potential buyers. For one cashew exporter, revenue increased from $3 million in 2012 to $17 million in 2017, as a result of market linkages created by the Activity. Respondents also reported significant benefits from exhibitions and workshops organized by the Activity in collaboration with the Nigeria American Chamber of Commerce (NACC), such as the facilitation of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) certification for these export businesses. NEXTT trained small and medium enterprises (SME) on food safety and conducted pre-advisory visits to clients’ factories to inform them of what they needed to do to obtain certification as well as conducted on-the-job coaching with clients. In addition, the Activity arranged advisory visits to client sites with NAFDAC, to inform businesses of additional actions which needed to be completed before inviting NAFDAC for an official inspection. NEXTT also lobbied the Vice President, who, in turn, mandated NAFDAC to reduce the amount SMEs paid for registration by 50 percent. SMEs reported that their trade capacity has increased significantly as a result of NEXTT’s support in helping them to obtain NAFDAC registration for their businesses. One beneficiary claimed that NEXTT had helped them to obtain NAFDAC certificates for up to 20 product lines produced by their business, which allowed them to diversify their products in the domestic market and increased their revenue. The Activity’s training on the packaging of goods was also valuable to beneficiaries. One respondent reported increased sales of their product by approximately 20 to 30 percent due to an improvement in product packaging, which was due to the trainings organized by the Activity. Another beneficiary reported that an improvement in packaging of exported goods contributed to the increase in their business’ revenue from $450,000 to $875,000. The evaluation team could not verify any claims reported by beneficiaries, and it is difficult to determine whether improvements in export figures were more a result of the weakness of the Naira, which made Nigeria’s exports more attractive, than because of the Activity’s intervention. However, although some of the export figures may have been affected by the lower value of the Naira, the business linkages that the Activity forged, as well as the trainings that it conducted, created an environment where businesses could take advantage of the weaker Naira and export their products. Also, reports from beneficiaries indicate that businesses were positively affected by 15 NEXTT Contribution to National Output Report. 16 Cashew businesses, interviewed during this evaluation, expressed serious concerns about the survival of their businesses. They noted that foreign cashew traders by-pass middle men, which is the normal trade sequence agreed on by businesses and members of the Alliance, and go directly to the farm gate and offer farmers higher amounts for products (higher than the market price), while at the same time short changing farmers by valuing the quality of cashew at a lesser price than its actual quality. 31 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY NEXTT’s interventions in this area. Consequently, the evaluation team believes that the Activity was successful in this intervention. STRENGTHEN THE CAPACITY OF EXPORT SERVICE PROVIDERS AND THE NIGERIAN EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL TO BETTER SUPPORT EXPORTERS The Activity provided trainings to BDSPs on export requirements and certifications needed to export. In addition, NEXTT signed an MoU with the NEPC to improve exports of key products. NEXTT collaborated with the NEPC to develop the cashew and shea value chains. The NEPC reported that the Activity collaborated with them to take exporters to Vietnam for a buyer-seller meeting, and to Dubai for cashew exhibitions, which were attended by exporters/buyers from other countries. As a result, the council secured a contract with Vietnamese firms for Nigerian firms to supply 80,000 metric tons (MTs) of cashews to Vietnam. Under the agreement between Nigerian and Vietnamese firms, a total of 130,000 MTs were exported in 2016, a 61.5 percent increase in the expected volume when the agreement was initially made.17 The council noted that Nigeria’s supply of cashews to Vietnamese firms rose from about 60,000 MTs to 80,000 MTs (target amount). They also noted that farmers’ sales of cashews increased from 150,000 MTs to 250,000 MTs in 2015 because of the increased demand for cashews. They reported that the quantity purchased from farmers rose as high as 650,000 MTs in 2016 because of the high Naira to dollar exchange rate, enabling the dollar to purchase more Naira denominated products. This quantity eventually fell to 400,000 MTs at the end of the season. The NEPC reported that Nigeria’s revenue from cashews rose from less than $100 million to $250 million in 2016. The Activity also collaborated with the NEPC to build the capacity of local shea producers (women) to improve the quality of raw materials and the finished product. The Council reported that several exhibitions and awareness-raising sessions were conducted with shea butter producers. They noted that the quality of shea produced in Nigeria has improved, leading to an increased demand for shea butter in Nigeria and in international markets. They reported that there are now about 20 new shea butter processing companies in Nigeria and two big shea refineries – one in Akure and one in Lagos. The NEPC stated that they are now aware of the opportunities and challenges in the shea butter business, a result of the support provided by NEXTT. The NEPC reported that they have been able to mitigate these challenges by providing capacity building sessions on best practices to shea communities and value chain operators, using the quality requirements of potential buyers as a guide. BDSPs reported that the capacity building sessions they attended have improved the quality of advisory services they now provide to clients, including to foreign businesses seeking to trade along the LAKAJI corridor. One BDSP said: “I learned that when importing a machine, for instance, the ideal thing is to use the insurance of the originating country. One has to understand these things to help reduce wastage for the client.” Reports from beneficiaries of this intervention suggest that the Activity played a significant role in improving the capacity of stakeholders to better support exporters, indicating that NEXTT was successful in this intervention. 5.4 PARTNERSHIP AND COOPERATION The second question the evaluation sought to answer is partnership and cooperation, i.e., to what extent were partnerships between NEXTT and GON agencies fostered and established, and what mechanisms were created to deliver services. 17 NEXTT Contribution to National Output Report. 32 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY The NEXTT activity engaged with several GON ministries, departments, and agencies over the Activity’s lifetime. During the evaluation period, the team spoke with the BOI, the FMITI, FERMA, the NIPC, the NEPC, NAFDAC, and the SON, as well as a retired comptroller at the NCS. Partnerships were clearly in line with the GON’s vision; however, the commitment MDAs made varied. Partnerships with the NIPC, the BOI, FERMA, the NEPC, NAFDAC and the NCS appeared to be more established, with these MDAs sharing the vision for improvement and taking feedback on board indicating that learnings were institutionalized and that plans were made to use available budgets to adapt learnings. The Activity invited the BOI to be a member of the PDF selection panel. The BOI reported that it had funded seven of the eight PDF applicants who applied for debt financing because the BOI’s participation in the process assured the bank that the firms had adopted best practices. The NIPC was also a strong partner with NEXTT. Under this partnership, a director at the NIPC was seconded to the NEXTT activity to support advocacy efforts on the LAKAJI corridor and to galvanize the buy-in of both businesses and government agencies at the sub-national level. The NIPC reported that, through its engagement with the Activity, it gained insights into opportunities for domestic investments, thereby expanding its strategy from solely focusing on Foreign Direct Investments, to include domestic investments by encouraging investors at home and those living abroad to invest in Nigeria. The NIPC has developed an Investment Facilitation Fund (IFF), a replication of the PDF, which focuses on assisting early stage business expansion and Greenfield projects within and outside the LAKAJI corridor. The IFF was developed through a public-private advocacy platform and includes the provision of support services for existing domestic investments and start-up businesses. The IFF represents a new frontier in the mandate of the NIPC as the program seeks to decrease the investment risks for early stage businesses. The NIPC was also a member of the PDF selection committee and is currently working to link Activity beneficiaries to the Small and Medium Enterprise Development Agency of Nigeria (SMEDAN) and the Nigerian Export Import (NEXIM) bank. The NEXTT Activity had extensive interaction and engagement with FERMA and provided significant support in developing the Public Private Partnership (PPP) procurement frameworks for FERMA, for trailer parks and for a performance-based contracts model for road maintenance. FERMA’s partnership with NEXTT on the LAKAJI corridor predates the Activity. According to FERMA, the partnership built upon the pre-existing engagement the agency had with USAID’s Maximizing Agricultural Revenue and Key Enterprises in Targeted Sites (MARKETS) Project. Under MARKETS, FERMA, in partnership with other agencies and stakeholders, formed the LAKAJI CMG to bring together private- and public-sector stakeholders on the LAKAJI corridor. Under the framework of the CMG, and with the support of NEXTT, two studies on the LAKAJI corridor were conducted to identify areas of intervention which would minimize or remove barriers to trade and transportation along the corridor. One intervention was the establishment of trailer parks, a rest hub for haulage companies plying the corridor. The idea of the hub came from the observation of double-parked motor trailers along the Federal Road Network of the LAKAJI corridor, which constitutes a safety hazard and limits traffic flow. Also, by parking on the sides of the roads, trailers damage the road infrastructure. One outcome of the studies was the identification of a location for a trailer park on the road to Maraba Jos on the outskirts of Kaduna State. Following the identification of this location, NEXTT worked with FERMA to develop a PPP procurement model for the trailer parks. Under this engagement, NEXTT supported trainings of FERMA’s procurement unit on PPP models and processes, developed a PPP model for trailer parks, and designed sample documentation for private sector investors. However, the trailer park model was not implemented because the Ministry of Works believed it was beyond the scope of the agency. However, FERMA are currently seeking funding for the performance-based contract model, another initiative developed by the Activity, to improve the conditions of road infrastructure in Nigeria. 33 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY In addition, the Activity partnered with FERMA in an evaluation on regional trade corridors, conducted in partnership with the ECOWAS. FERMA noted that the evaluation helped identify multiple regional trade corridors that transverse several African countries. This evaluation supported the design of the ECOWAS Trans African Highway Project. FERMA noted that national corridors are a subset of regional corridors and that the interaction with ECOWAS on the identification and development of these corridors (of which LAKAJI is a subset) would increase regional trade within ECOWAS and beyond. The NEXTT Activity also supported reforms in the NCS despite the challenges that arose when the Customs and Excise Management Act (CEMA) was reenacted18. In its engagement with the NCS, the NEXTT Activity provided technical assistance for the improvement of the NCS Fast Track System (FTS), including trainings on risk management. The FTS concession platform was created as a component of the enhanced NCS PAAS. The FTS is an automated system to clear goods more quickly at the ports. NEXTT supported the government’s agenda to diversify the economy by providing capacity building and technical support to the NEPC for its Zero to Export Initiative through classroom trainings and one-on-one assistance with Nigerian exporters. In its technical assistance to the NEPC, the Activity reviewed the NEPC’s training curriculum and made recommendations based on international best practices on food safety and quality standards. In addition, NEXTT provided technical support to the NEPC for a one-day technical workshop for exporters in Kano. The technical sessions, attended by over 100 commodity exporters and other stakeholders, focused on understanding the dynamics of the global export market, with an emphasis on the US market under AGOA. NEXTT collaborated with the NEPC on international market linkages for Nigerian cashew exporters. The Activity also collaborated with the NEPC and the African Cashew Alliance to conduct trainings for exporters. NEXTT and the NEPC conducted capacity building sessions for 12 Nigerian export companies ahead of their participation at the World Cashew Convention (WCC) in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. NEXTT prepared the participants for the convention by holding pre-session interviews and training for each of the 12 firms on how to participate at international trade shows. Due to the Council’s engagement with the NEXTT Activity, shea and cashew were listed on the priority list of export products in Nigeria. Currently, shea butter and cashew are in Category B of the Zero-Oil Plan, a roadmap for economic recovery through non-oil exports over the next decade. Furthermore, the Activity collaborated with members of the NFSMC, including NAFDAC, to inaugurate the committee, develop a work plan for the committee, and develop the National Food Safety Policy. NAFDAC, a member of the NFSMC, reported that the committee is currently functioning and has trained food handlers. The committee is currently supported by the FAO and UNIDO to perform its activities. Regarding registration with the Agency, NAFDAC noted that NEXTT’s activities – advisory visits to beneficiary sites and trainings on food safety – have increased awareness of the Agency’s certification requirements, thereby increasing SMEs’ compliance with certification. In addition, the Executive Order by the Nigerian Vice-President, Professor Osinbajo, which mandated a dedicated export terminal for agricultural products, also contributed to improvements in trade facilitation. The Executive Order was a result of the work of one of several committees at the Vice President’s office, the Vice President’s Office on Small and Medium Scale Enterprises. The Activity partnered with this committee to conduct “Care Clinics” along the LAKAJI corridor. The Care Clinics, which are a partnership between the office of the Vice President and the FMITI, were inspired by NEXTT’s October 2016 exhibition of PDF companies. The clinics address obstacles to the growth of SMEs in Nigeria. The Activity also had a significant relationship with the FMITI and was active in the ratification, implementation, and monitoring of the TFA. Through this interaction, the FMITI received technical 18 The CEMA act regulates the management and collection of customs duties and excise. 34 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY support to design an action plan to develop software for the TFA monitoring and evaluation (M&E) framework. This framework has improved the efficiency of monitoring implementation through its use of a traffic light scoring system of Red, Amber, and Green (RAG). Each scoring category indicates the level of implementation progress. The Ministry reported that the software has increased the efficacy of the institution, as it also generates progress reports which provide information for evidence-based policy-making in the trade sector in Nigeria. However, it is not clear if the Ministry has the funding to independently implement the actions initiated by the Activity, as the Ministry routinely receives support from donors and has come to depend on funding from donor agencies to implement some of its programs. The Ministry has noted the need for additional funding for equipment and staff to run the NTFC secretariat. Additionally, the Ministry mentioned that capacity building sessions would be better received if the location was away from their offices (a reference to monies being paid as a result of them leaving their workplace for trainings). The Activity engaged with the Standards Organisation of Nigeria (SON) on the Food Safety Policy to develop standards19 for cashew and kola nut, production and to outline a code of practice for cold room storage. However, the Organisation noted that although several stakeholder meetings were held with staff from the NEXTT Activity, support was not provided to SON to develop standards for products. SON noted that donors who are interested in the development of certain standards (not currently included in the SON standards) may have to sponsor a technical committee meeting, which will entail bringing in foreign technical experts on the subject matter. Otherwise, the formulation of standards will be done within SON’s work plan based on the available budget. In conclusion, the Activity established meaningful relationships with GON agencies that are key to facilitating trade in Nigeria and provided technical assistance to improve their capacity to deliver services. 5.5 RESULTS Another question the evaluation sought to answer is results; that is, what difference has the Activity made in building the capacity of beneficiaries’ abilities to export. NEXTT made a significant difference in the capacity of beneficiaries to export. The project indicators show that by the end of the second quarter of 2017, 1,209 firms had attended US Government (USG) supported trade and investment trainings facilitated by NEXTT, 705 firms had received capacity building assistance from the Activity to export, 122 BDSPs had received USG assistance to build the capacity of export firms, and nine firms had obtained certifications from the FDA. In addition, NEXTT client firms had exported products totaling $39.3 million by the second quarter of 2017. These exports were primarily agricultural produce such as shea, cashew, honey, yam flour, and spices. The specific volume of each type of agricultural produce was not specified in the Activity’s documents. NEXTT provided technical support to the NEPC for a one-day technical workshop for exporters in Kano. The technical sessions, which were attended by over 100 commodity exporters and other stakeholders, focused on understanding the dynamics of the global export market, with an emphasis on the US market under AGOA. NEXTT also collaborated with the NEPC on international market linkages for Nigerian cashew exporters and with the NEPC and the African Cashew Alliance to conduct trainings for exporters. NEXTT and the NEPC provided capacity building to 12 Nigerian exporting companies ahead of their participation at the WCC in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. NEXTT prepared the participants for the convention by holding pre-session interviews and training sessions for each of the 12 firms on how to participate at international trade exhibitions. 19 Standards ensure that products and services are fit for purpose and are comparable with best practices and international standards. 35 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY In addition, the Activity provided capacity building sessions to SMEs on product packaging, and beneficiaries reported an improvement in packaging and acceptance of their products, leading to an increased customer base and turnover. Because of the trainings on export procedures NEXTT facilitated, BDSPs supported by the Activity reported an improvement in their technical expertise, enhanced knowledge on export processes, better understanding of the export regulatory frameworks, insights into the exportation of agricultural products, and the insurance required for certain export items. One BDSP respondent, who previously worked at a commercial bank, reported that NEXTT negotiated a temporary reduction in the interest rate of a major commercial bank: from 17-18 percent to 16 percent with a concessionary rate of nine percent for large agricultural investors along the corridor. NEXTT also conducted workshops to create awareness of local and international certifications required for exports, and in some cases facilitated access to these certificates. NEXTT was instrumental in reducing the NAFDAC registration fee by 50 percent and funded the registration of products for some firms after conducting advisory visits to beneficiary factories. NEXTT also facilitated the process of obtaining FDA certifications for export firms such as Easy Sauces and Atajere Global Concepts, both of which are interested in exporting products to the US; respectively, ready-to-use tomato sauces and the processing and packaging of yams. Similarly, all export-oriented respondents interviewed reported that market linkages made a huge difference in their capacity to export because of their improved visibility to domestic and international audiences from their participation at international exhibitions and trade shows organized by the Activity. One respondent noted that the exporting of cashews, which was previously dominated by foreign companies trading in Nigeria, now has national companies operating in the sector because of market linkages facilitated by NEXTT with the Vietnamese market. This firm is now one of the major players in cashew exporting in Nigeria and reported that it exported over 15,000 MTs and brought in $17 million in revenue in 2017, compared to 2012’s domestic sales of 1,000 MTs with a revenue of $3 million. In addition, the firm noted that training sessions organized by NEXTT on Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) for cocoa had improved their cocoa sales. 5.6 SUSTAINABILITY Another question the evaluation sought to answer is sustainability; that is, to what extent are any results achieved likely to be sustained after the Activity ends? What is the likelihood that beneficiaries will employ their acquired export capacity once the Activity ends? What, if any, were the key components of the Activity’s approach and programming that have contributed to sustainability? SUSTAINABILITY OF THE RESULTS AFTER THE ACTIVITY ENDS LAKAJI CORRIDOR The Nigeria Economic Summit Group (NESG), a private sector think-tank and policy advocacy group, is now leading advocacy efforts for improvements in the corridor. The group has signed an MOU with the Governors’ Forum to engage with the northern governors to improve the corridor. It also plans to source funds to continue monitoring the transport infrastructure along the corridor. However, the NESG’s success may depend on its relationship with the NIPC. Without coordinated interaction between the NESG and the NIPC, efforts might be duplicated, as the NIPC had hoped it would be the institution that took the lead on this NEXTT Activity when the Activity ended. As a GON agency, the NIPC can assist with GON investment support in the corridor by engaging with other agencies such as SMEDAN, the NEPC, as well as collaborating with public finance institutions such as the BOI, the Bank of Agriculture, and NEXIM. Also, the NIPC was a leading agency at the start of the Activity and was pivotal in the implementation of NEXTT’s interventions at the Northern end of the LAKAJI corridor. The NIPC’s access to such a vast network means its support is a critical factor in the NESG’s agenda to ensure the sustainability of the NEXTT Activity. USAID’s EGE team’s assistance may be required to gain the support of the NIPC. They may need to hold 36 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY discussions with the agency to draw-up a framework of engagement that will motivate or commit the NIPC to collaborating with the NESG. Since this intervention has only recently been taken over by the group, findings can only speak to planned actions by the NESG for the sustainability of the Activity. TRADE POLICY AND TRADE FACILITATION The NESG is also taking the lead on this component and plans to work with the FMITI to identify avenues to finance the establishment of the TFA secretariat, as well as to convene public-private sector advocacy groups. The group is currently undertaking an independent assessment and review of the TFA. Similarly, as the MoU between the NESG and NEXTT was signed about three weeks before the start of this evaluation exercise, findings only address planned actions for the sustainability of the Activity. EXPORT SUPPORT NEXTT conducted workshops to create awareness of local and international certifications required for exports, and, in some cases, facilitated access to these certificates. The Activity created market linkages through international exhibitions and trade shows. All export-oriented respondents interviewed reported that these exhibitions/trade shows improved their visibility to domestic and international audiences and made a marked difference in their capacity to export. Creating new and sustaining existing market linkages are critical factors for the success of export-oriented businesses, together with access to finance, information, and technical support. A major challenge reported by businesses, particularly new businesses along the corridor, is access to regulatory frameworks, standards and policies on specific value chains, and knowledge of certification procedures required for their products. Market linkages, trainings, and exposure visits facilitated by NEXTT had a significant impact on the success of businesses and the effects are likely to be sustained far beyond the lifetime of the Activity. However, sustained export support is hugely dependent on favorable supporting policies (such as currency stability), as well as the ability of regulatory bodies such as the NCS to conform to best practices. LIKELIHOOD OF EXPORT CAPACITIES BEING EMPLOYED AFTER THE ACTIVITY ENDS It is very likely that beneficiaries will continue to employ their acquired export capacities after the NEXTT Activity ends. Increased market linkages, and the opening-up of the Nigerian cashew value chain, has increased international markets’ interest in Nigerian shea butter. The listing of shea and cashew on the priority list of export products in Nigeria are indications of the continued use and further expansion of the export capacities built during the NEXTT Activity. Furthermore, with the ratification and implementation of commitments under the TFA, conducting business in Nigeria is expected to improve. Improvements in the regulatory frameworks for exports and increased efficiency in custom processes should further reduce the time and resources expended in export processing, providing incentives to businesses to increase their exports. An unintended effect of NEXTT’s interventions was the improvement in linkages and business arrangements between traders in the cashew and shea value chain and the farm gate. Respondents reported that traders and businesses, in a bid to be competitive in the market, started to provide agricultural products (seeds and fertilizer) to farmers in these communities. This support could improve the production capabilities of farmers in these two value chains, with multiplier effects on the volume of products available for export. KEY COMPONENTS OF THE ACTIVITY THAT HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO SUSTAINABILITY 37 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY The MoU signed by NEXTT with the NESG is key to the continuation of efforts initiated by the Activity. The NESG is an influential private sector advocacy group who stated that advocacy for improvements in trade in Nigeria and along the corridor fall within the NESG’s mandate and vision. The Activity’s support to the FMITI on the TFA, especially for the implementation monitoring software, will provide visual evidence of Nigeria’s implementation status, and could potentially result in actions being taken to improve implementation. The software for the M&E framework for the TFA, developed by NEXTT for the FMITI, uses a traffic light scoring system of red, amber, and green. Each scoring category indicates the level of implementation progress. The Ministry reported that the software has increased institutional capabilities, as it also generates progress reports that provide information for evidence-based policy-making in the trade sector in Nigeria. Based on feedback from beneficiaries, market linkages facilitated by the Activity and support provided to businesses for domestic and international certifications of their products are key to ensuring that beneficiaries have a market for their exports and that they meet the necessary exportation requirements. 5.7 BEST PRACTICES The final question the evaluation sought to answer is best practices; that is, what are the key strategic, programmatic, technical, and managerial features of the Activity that should be considered when designing and implementing a new trade and investment activity in Nigeria. WHAT WORKED Strategic, needs-based, and timely technical assistance provided by consultants and the funding of training sessions, are key to obtaining the buy-in of stakeholders. The FMITI noted that the technical assistance NEXTT provided to develop the progress tracking software, as well as the trainings delivered to FMITI staff on the TFA, were not only within the mandate of the Ministry, but were for the activity for which the Ministry required assistance, and were therefore timely. Similarly, the involvement of private sector advocacy groups, such as BMOs who can advocate for change and lobby the Government, is essential. The partnership with the NESG, which is extremely committed to making improvements in the economic sector, was invaluable in achieving improvements in the corridor. In addition, creating market linkages between beneficiaries and potential buyers to ensure that exporters have a market for their products, was reported to be the most valuable intervention NEXTT facilitated for beneficiaries. Finally, Activity beneficiaries reported that the implementing staff were clearly knowledgeable about their intervention areas, supported them, and were accessible when beneficiaries required help. AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT A major concern reported by PDF beneficiaries was that the Activity did not follow-up to ensure that beneficiaries secured suitable financing after receiving their business plans, particularly considering the amount of money both parties invested in producing the businesses plans. PDF beneficiaries also believed that the amount of money they were required to pay as a counterpart contribution for the documents was too high and that the money would have been better invested in their businesses. Also, they noted that they should have been consulted in negotiations with the BDSPs for the fees charged. It should be noted that although Palladium was not complicit in the issue raised above, the organization has a responsibility to ensure that third party organizations who serve as brokers between itself (Palladium) and beneficiaries, correctly and effectively communicate project objectives, as well as expected outputs and outcomes. This is especially crucial given the Nigerian context 38 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY where there is the propensity for beneficiaries to trust information (even when conflicting) from a perceived authority figure or decision-maker affiliated with project, over printed or published information shared with them. Therefore, a robust stakeholder and beneficiary engagement and communication strategy is recommended as an important component of future projects. Although the Activity established relationships and held meetings with key GON stakeholders, in some cases these meetings were not at a level that ensured swift and independent decision-making. For example, although FERMA is a GON agency, it was noted that engagement with the parent Ministry would have ensured the implementation of the trailer parks model because discussions and approval would have been sought at the highest level. The LDA was set up to drive private sector investment in the region. Members of this now defunct group reported that they had lined up high net worth individuals, such as Aliko Dangote and Umaru Muttalab, interested in investing in the region. However, the LDA reported that they did not get the financial commitment they needed and expected from NEXTT when they embarked on projects, which caused these individuals to lose interest in the venture. Members of the implementing team explained that USAID’s core focus at the time was on operationalizing the LAKAJI CMG, a public sector driven group, which had made little progress in the years that the Activity had supported it. The Activity developed eight business model plans for key products including sesame oil, biodiesel and oleoresin targeted at attracting investors interested in growing these value chains. Stakeholders, however, believe that these plans may never be used without any proof of concept. One respondent noted that facilitating small-scale pilot models of these business plans such as the one implemented by the NEPC in Saki, Oyo State, for shea, would have been instrumental in attracting investment for the identified value chains. The capacity of Activity staff was somewhat inadequate, considering the scope and intended reach of the Activity. The absence of staff in the north, particularly people who were familiar with the cultural nuances of the area, may have contributed to NEXTT’s limited reach in the Northern states. Meetings with the implementing team also revealed that the Activity did not have a resident M&E officer to ensure best practices were being followed or to verify figures from information sources. The COP reported that, at times, he played the role of M&E Manager, Technical Director, and COP. 39 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY SECTION 6: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 CONCLUSION RELEVANCE The NEXTT Activity was generally successful in resolving the trade capacity challenges it had identified in the different component areas. The evaluation team rated the Activity somewhat successful in its efforts on LAKAJI corridor improvements, and very successful in its work on trade policy and trade facilitation and in its efforts around expanding export support. PARTNERSHIP AND COOPERATION The Activity engaged with several GON MDAs over its lifetime and established meaningful relationships and partnerships with GON agencies that were instrumental in facilitating trade in Nigeria. The Activity also provided technical assistance to improve their capacity to deliver services. The majority of agencies interviewed during this evaluation reported that they had made changes in their processes because of their association with NEXTT. RESULTS NEXTT made a significant difference in the capacity of beneficiary firms to export. The Activity provided capacity building sessions to firms on product packaging, facilitated access to local and international certifications required for exports, and facilitated market linkages between beneficiary firms and local and international buyers. Firms reported increased customer bases and revenues due to NEXTT’s interventions in this area. SUSTAINABILITY The NESG is now leading the advocacy efforts for improvements in the LAKAJI corridor and in trade facilitation. The group has signed an MoU with the Governors forum to engage governors in the Northern corridor and is undertaking a review of the current TFA. However, since the agreement between the NESG and NEXTT was signed shortly before this evaluation exercise, findings can only speak to the potential for sustainability based on planned actions by the group to expand interventions in these areas. Regarding the sustainability of export support, market linkages, trainings, and exposure visits facilitated by NEXTT are likely to be sustained far beyond the lifetime of the Activity. However, sustainability is largely dependent on favorable supporting policies (such as currency stability), as well as the ability of regulatory bodies to conform to best practices. It is very likely that beneficiaries will continue to use their acquired export capacities. Increased market linkages, the opening-up of the Nigerian cashew value chain, heightened interest from international markets for Nigerian shea butter, and the listing of shea and cashew on the priority list of export products in Nigeria are indications of the continued use and further expansion of the export capacities built during the NEXTT Activity. In addition, with the implementation of commitments under the TFA, conducting business in Nigeria is expected to improve, with a further reduction in the time and cost to export. Key components of the Activity that have contributed to sustainability include: (1) the agreement between NEXTT and the NESG to continue efforts initiated by the Activity, (2) the Activity’s support to the FMITI on the TFA, especially on the implementation monitoring software which will provide visual evidence of Nigeria’s implementation status and may result in actions to improve implementation, (3) the creation of market linkages by the Activity, and (4) the support provided to businesses for domestic and international certification of their products. 40 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY BEST PRACTICES Technical and managerial features of the program that clearly worked include the strategic, needs￾based, and timely technical assistance provided by the Activity: an example is the technical assistance provided to the FMITI to develop progress tracking software, as well as trainings delivered to the FMITI staff on the TFA. This technical assistance was not only within the mandate of the Ministry but was in areas where the Ministry required assistance at the time. Additionally, the involvement of private sector advocacy groups, such as the NESG who can advocate for change and lobby the Government, is essential. Also, facilitating market linkages between beneficiaries and potential buyers to ensure that exporters have a market for their products, was reported to be a key intervention that NEXTT facilitated. Finally, Activity beneficiaries reported that the implementing staff were clearly knowledgeable about their intervention areas, supported them, and were accessible when they required help. Areas which need to be improved when designing and implementing a new trade and investment activity in Nigeria are transparency in the PDF process, ensuring that the development of business plans culminate in beneficiaries accessing finances, engaging with GON agencies at the senior level to ensure swift and independent decision-making, and ensuring Activity offices are adequately staffed with a minimum of one M&E officer. 6.2 RECOMMENDATIONS RELEVANCE Future trade-related projects should strongly consider the involvement of the private sector and other relevant advocacy groups to achieve sustainable change. These groups have an incentive to lobby for the government's support needed to bring about change in the sector. The achievements of the NESG since they have taken over Components One and Two are indicative of the type of change which can be affected by advocacy groups. The recent push for internally generated revenue by states has placed an enormous burden on SMEs and entrepreneurs. Currently the government has imposed multiple levies and taxes at the subnational level. A private sector advocacy group could be supported to collect and aggregate information on the effects of internally generated revenue and present this information to government officials to advocate for reforms, as well as be involved in policy-making processes. SUSTAINABILITY 1. To enhance the performance of NEXTT beneficiary businesses, subsequent projects should undertake an assessment of existing beneficiaries from the NEXTT Activity, select a few businesses, identify their challenges, and provide them with further assistance to ensure that they are able to sustainably address the challenges they face along the LAKAJI corridor. 2. The Mission, and future trade-related programs, should consider piloting business models to demonstrate their viability and thereby attract investment. NEXTT commissioned the development of eight business model plans for potential investors and distributed these business plans to key MDAs, including the NIPC and the NEPC. However, there is the potential that investment in these business plans may never occur without proof of concept. 3. A point to be noted by future trade projects operating in the cashew value chain, is that respondents in this sector requested storage support to allow for continuous access to cashew nuts after the peak season between February and May each year. They noted that the storage support could be in the form of a large storage facility or a trading board that procures large quantities of cashew, where traders can purchase cashew nuts at a slightly lower price. They noted that this sort of buffer is important because the quality of cashew 41 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY nuts reduces over the course of the season and traders will willingly pay the additional cost in return for continuous access to high grade cashew nuts. 4. The Mission should incorporate activities to ensure that the public has access to the provisions of the TFA, in the terms of reference of future trade-related projects. The FMITI has requested financial support for the development and dissemination of information materials for public sensitization about the TFA. They also suggested that future projects could support the creation of a hotline-based feedback system, through which traders could directly register complaints to the TFA secretariat. BEST PRACTICES 1. Future trade and investment projects should include a monitoring activity of the GON’s strategic interests through regular visits and interaction with partner GON agencies. This will ensure the continuous alignment of project activities with partner agencies’ strategic interests. In addition, to ensure buy-in, consultations with key GON and private sector stakeholders is crucial during the project design phase of subsequent programs. 2. Future trade and transport interventions in Nigeria should be needs-based and focus on the strategic interests of the GON in power over the life of the project and not the broad mandates of respective MDAs. Study findings show that there is minimal inter-agency communication or collaboration on service delivery in Nigeria. Furthermore, the MDA mandates are formulated at the inception of the MDAs, while the specific strategic interests of the GON within the overall mandates of the MDAs change with every administration. Therefore, there is a potential for a disconnect between the mandates and strategic interests of GON MDAs. Engagements with the FMITI, for example, were successful because it aligned with their strategic needs at the time. Future trade and investment projects should include a monitoring activity of the GON’s interest areas for the project period through regular visits and interactions with partner GON agencies. This will ensure the continuous alignment of NEXTT’s interventions with partner agencies’ strategic interests. 3. To mitigate financial constraints faced by MSMEs, the Mission should embark on an intervention which promotes access to equity funding for MSMEs’, since debt financing is risky for start-ups and agriculture-related businesses that are susceptible to weather and environmental hazards. An alternative to businesses accessing individual finance could be to support the formation of cooperative unions that allow exporters to pool resources to set￾up a processing facility. These exporters usually specialize in both agricultural products and value chains. Respondents noted that similar cooperative groups exist in China and India. This proposal is corroborated by Jia et al (2010),20 which shows that professional farmer cooperatives foster increased access to markets for farmers. The evaluation by Jia et al (2010) also supports the conclusion from Ito et al (2012)21 that agricultural cooperatives have a positive impact on the economic empowerment of participants in agricultural production. A similar model was set up by the NEPC in Saki, Oyo State, for the processing of shea. The community in Saki provided land, the local government provided some infrastructure, and the NEPC (the implementing agency for the project) provided the building to shelter the processing equipment. In addition, realizing that the local cooperative that owned the facility lacked the capital, technical experience, and know-how to sustainably manage the facility, the NEPC brought in domestic investors from the shea butter sector with proven track records of working with rural producers to manage the facility. According 20 Jia, Xiangping, Jikun Huang, and Zhigang Xu. "Marketing of farmer professional cooperatives in the wave of transformed agrofood market in China." China Economic Review 23, no. 3 (2012): 665-74. doi: 10.1016/j.chieco.2010.07.001. 21 Ito, Junichi, Zongshun Bao, and Qun Su. "Distributional effects of agricultural cooperatives in China: Exclusion of smallholders and potential gains on participation." Food Policy 37, no. 6 (2012): 700-09. doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2012.07.009. 42 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY to the NEPC, production volumes increased by over 40 percent (July 2014 to February 2015), with a sale price increase of 20 percent to 25 percent, recorded from its inception. 22 4. It might be beneficial for the Mission to ensure that subsequent projects targeted at assisting beneficiaries to access finance, include non-disclosure agreements to protect the intellectual property of business plans submitted to participating financial institutions for funding. NEXTT beneficiaries expressed a reluctance to approach banks for financing due to the potential theft of their business ideas by banks, after their requests for finance had been turned down. 5. The Mission should ensure that if BDSPs are used in future Activities, their services are tailored to the needs, size, and nature of MSMEs; and beneficiary firms should be given the opportunity to have a say in what BDSPs are paid if counterpart payments are required. Also, to ensure beneficiary firms get value for their counterpart contributions, (1) future PDF processes should culminate in BDSPs facilitating access to funds for their clients, and (2) payment to BDSPs by clients should be tied to the funds that are received by the client from the financial institution. One BDSP reported that this is the current practice used by the BOI for BDSPs that facilitate access to loans from the bank for firms. 6. When training GON agency staff, future projects should keep in mind that there is the potential for senior staff or political appointees to either be transferred or retire, so it is important that middle cadre staff are included in initiatives with MDAs. This will help to build institutional memory. The NCS reported that staff had been moved to other departments. Also, the new comptroller stated that he was unaware of the activities conducted by NEXTT with the service under the previous comptroller. 7. Future trade-related projects should work with institutions, including NAFDAC, to ensure that clear guidelines exist for registration processes and procedures and ensure that these are made publicly available. In addition, future projects should lobby the government to streamline product registration with NAFDAC, so that only one certificate is required for a single product, regardless of how many different sizes of the product the firm wishes to sell. 8. It is important that future trade projects recruit the required number of staff to adequately carry out project activities, as well as staff who are aware of the contextual nuances and sociocultural considerations of the project intervention locations, as this will promote stakeholder buy-in and adoption of activity objectives. 9. The Mission should ensure that the final evaluation of projects is conducted some months before the end of the project. The evaluation should be implemented late enough to capture most of the project’s achievements but early enough to ensure that members of the implementation team, with whom beneficiaries have interacted, are still available. A requirement to share financial information with evaluation teams should be included in the MoUs signed between the beneficiaries and the implementing partner. Alternatively the evaluation team could carry out a validation of the figures reported ahead of the actual evaluation. 22 http://www.intracen.org/news/itc-impact-nigeria/ 43 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY ANNEX I: EVALUATION SCOPE OF WORK I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. PROJECT IDENTIFICATION DATA Project Title: Nigeria Expanded Trade and Transport (NEXTT) Development Objectives: Increase Nigeria’s capacity to trade agricultural products domestically, within the ECOWAS sub￾region, and beyond; and improve trade efficiency and inclusiveness. Award Number: NO. AID-620-C-13-00002 Award Dates: 11 October, 2012 - 10 October, 2016 Extension: 10 October, 2016 - 9 October, 2017 Funding: $14,820,178 (Ext. value: $1,799,876) Total LOP: $16,620,054 Implementing Partner(s): Palladium (formerly Carana Corp.) COR/Activity Manager: Roland Oroh B. DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT Trade policy and facilitation, and transport infrastructure all significantly impact on food security in Nigeria. Rapid and efficient transport from farms to consumers is essential to preserve agricultural products and to deliver them to the market. Inadequate transport and inconsistent trade policy increases the time and cost that it takes for goods to get to the market. Higher transportation costs translate into a higher cost of trading, which impacts on food security by raising the price of food and reducing the ability of many people (over 50 percent of whom live in poverty) to purchase nutritious food. Food security is therefore weakened without effective transport and trade policies to improve the trading and investment environments for trade-related infrastructure. USAID/Nigeria designed NEXTT to support the Nigerian government’s efforts to expand trade domestically, within the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) sub-region and beyond and improve efficiencies so that trade, particularly in agricultural products, contributed to inclusive economic growth and the development of Nigeria. NEXTT also aimed to facilitate investments in value-added agricultural produce along the Lagos-Kano-Jibiya (LAKAJI) corridor, the country’s primary trade corridor. Within the context of Nigeria’s international commitments under ECOWAS and the World Trade Organization (WTO), NEXTT was designed to facilitate Nigeria’s compliance with international agreements and adherence to international protocols. C. PROJECT SUMMARY The NEXTT activity had three integrated components that worked in sync to make Nigeria’s trade more competitive and to expand it within the sub-region and to overseas destinations. Component One focused on improving the time and cost to trade goods along the LAKAJI corridor by building consensus among stakeholders to advocate for improving the corridor’s performance and reducing the time and cost that it took to move goods along the corridor. Component Two focused on 44 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY improving trade policy and facilitating trade, including building Nigeria’s capacity to implement the WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA). An expected outcome of this component was to decrease hold time (or release time) at the ports in Lagos and at the Seme border post to make cross border trade quicker and easier. The third and last component focused on increasing the capacity of export-ready firms (or those that were close to being export-ready) to expand their exports within the West African region and to international markets. Over the life of the activity, NEXTT was expected to build on past USAID trade capacity building programs23 and those of the Government of Nigeria to realize the following performance targets: 1. Facilitate a 30 percent reduction in transport costs along the LAKAJI corridor. 2. Facilitate the investment of $69.5 million24 in projects along the LAKAJI corridor. 3. Improve the capacity of Government of Nigeria (GON) officials to address Nigeria’s trade policy and trade facilitation constraints. 4. Support Nigeria’s commitments to implement the Trade Facilitation Agreement. 5. Support the capability of small and medium enterprises to generate $50 million in exports of agricultural products. 6. Strengthen the capacity of export service providers and the Nigeria Export Promotion Council to better support exporters. These targets were expected to lead to sustainable impacts in the reduced cost and higher quality of food available in the domestic market, and generate income and job opportunities for people linked to firms exporting goods abroad. NEXTT’s role included providing technical assistance and direct support (including trainings and expert consulting) to beneficiary enterprises and to Government of Nigeria (GON) institutions. D. GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS The map below shows the NEXTT activity’s key geographical focus of Jigawa, Kaduna, Kano, Katsina, Kwara, Lagos, Niger, Ogun, and Oyo States, all located along the LAKAJI corridor. USAID chose to include Osun State because of NEXTT’s cocoa activities, and Enugu and Kogi States because of their activities in the cashew sector. The LAKAJI corridor is the most important transportation route in Nigeria from a food security perspective. In prior USAID/Nigeria projects, such as the Maximizing Agriculture Revenue in Key Enterprise and Target Sites (MARKETS), project stakeholders had identified the corridor as an area where interventions were critical due to its importance for food security and that it was a trade link between the North and the South of the country. About 60 percent of Nigeria’s population resides along the corridor, further highlighting its potential as a key enabler for economic growth. The aim of focusing on the trade corridor was to concentrate the efforts of public and private sector stakeholders to facilitate the establishment of new agribusinesses and other value added projects. These stakeholders were expected to leverage the critical mass of industry players to improve logistics infrastructure such as cold storage and warehousing facilities, which would make trading more efficient and reduce the cost of transporting goods along the corridor. 23 Under MARKETS 2009 to 2010; and the Nigeria Expanded Export Program (NEEP), implemented from January 2010 to December 2011. 24 This figure is a consolidated target for all investments facilitated over the life of the project and includes the Project Development Facility. 45 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY E. DEVELOPMENT HYPOTHESIS The development hypothesis is based on the premise that by linking increased agricultural competitiveness to improvements in trade and transport, economic opportunities in rural communities will increase, leading to inclusive economic growth. In addition, by working to create a business enabling environment in Nigeria through reforms and modernizing and streamlining customs operations at the port, the cost of trading and conducting business in Nigeria will reduce. NEXTT was designed to address trade and transport constraints in ways that were catalytic, transformative, and aligned with the efforts of the GON and the private sector. NEXTT aimed to achieve its objective of supporting Nigeria’s capacity to expand trade by focusing on the following three components: 1) affecting improvements in the Lagos-Kano-Jibiya corridor; 2) supporting trade facilitation and the development of trade policy; and 3) supporting the expansion of exports. F. COUNTRY DEVELOPMENT AND COOPERATION STRATEGY (CDCS) The goals of the NEXTT activity fed into the USAID/Nigeria Country Development Cooperation Strategy (CDCS), contributing to sub IR 1.1.2, “Trade and Transportation Improved”, which in turn contributes to IR 1.1, “Agricultural Competitiveness Increased” and IR 1.2, “Business Environment Improved”. The CDCS Development Objective (DO) 1 hypothesis states that if agricultural productivity, market linkages, and private sector participation increase, then the overall competitiveness of the agricultural sector will be enhanced, thereby increasing rural employment and incomes. Also, if the legal and regulatory environment and access to finance are improved, then the business environment will be enhanced to promote private sector investment. Below is a schematic diagram showing how the NEXTT project contributed to DO 1, “Broadened and Inclusive Economic Growth”. Figure 2. NEXTT Geographic Focus 46 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY G. THE NIGERIA EXPANDED TRADE AND TRANSPORT (NEXTT) PROJECT RESULT FRAMEWORK Figure 3. NEXTT Project Results Framework The activity’s intended results were to: ● Reduce delays and bottlenecks from the ports in Lagos through to Kano up to Jibiya at the Niger border (the LAKAJI corridor) by 30 percent. ● Support the establishment of new agribusinesses valued at $69.5 Million along the LAKAJI corridor over the life of the project. ● Improve the capacity of GON officials to address Nigeria’s trade policy and trade facilitation constraints, and address implementation issues including supporting the customs reform program. ● Support Nigeria’s commitments to implement the World Trade Organization’s Trade Facilitation Agreement. ● Support the capability of small and medium enterprises to contribute to Nigeria’s non-oil export revenues by helping firms generate $50 million from exports of cashew, cocoa, sesame seeds, shea, and processed agricultural foods to regional and international markets. ● Strengthen the capacity of export service providers and the Nigerian Export Promotion Council to better support exporters. 47 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY H. APPROACH AND IMPLEMENTATION The approach to implementing the NEXTT activity involved the following five steps: 1) Establishing an advocacy oversight organization to facilitate transportation improvements along the Lagos-Kano-Jibiya corridor. 2) Facilitating agribusiness investments by establishing an agricultural growth corridor initiative around the LAKAJI corridor. 3) Supporting GON efforts to coordinate trade facilitation by offering direct technical support to the Ministry of Industry, Trade, and Investment’s Trade Facilitation Task Force. 4) Promoting the use of Business Development Service Providers (BDSPs) to export￾oriented enterprises in-order-to increase the quantity of goods exported. 5) Providing institutional capacity building to public sector agencies such as the Nigeria Export Promotion Council, public-private sector groups such as the LAKAJI Corridor Management Group, and industry associations such as the National Cashew Association of Nigeria. The project experienced certain implementation challenges soon after it started. Within the first two years, the Contractor replaced two Chiefs of Party (COP) and there was significant staff turnover. The COPs were replaced because of poor performance; as a result, the activity could not meet some of its key performance targets in its first two years. A midterm evaluation25 recommended some important actions that needed to be taken, which were implemented by USAID/Nigeria and the Contractor. They included increasing project oversight and increasing the project’s activities in northern Nigeria. I. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS USAID has approved eight modifications to date to the contract to administratively support implementation and to change the focus of the project so that it will achieve its goals and objectives. Major modifications approved include: ● Modification 4: Extending the scope to include the Project Development Facility (PDF) and increase the project’s Total Estimated Cost (TEC) from $11,817,598 to $14,820,178. The PDF supported the establishment of agribusinesses (value addition projects) along the LAKAJI corridor. The PDF was launched to mobilize private capital for high-priority investments along the corridor at a more rapid pace. ● Modification 6: Revising the contract’s scope of work to allow the Contractor to work with institutions other than the CMG26 to address challenges along the LAKAJI corridor and to realign the award’s budget for the remaining life of the project. The Contracting Officer approved the modification to give the Contractor the flexibility of working with stakeholders other than the CMG when it became apparent that it had organizational challenges that would prevent NEXTT from achieving its objectives. ● Modification 7: a) a revision to increase the total estimated cost of the contract by $1,799,876, from $14,020,178 to $16,620,054; b) realigning the contract’s budget; c) extending the contract’s performance period by one year from October 10, 2016 to 25 A copy of the evaluation report will be provided to the evaluation team. 26 The Corridor Management Group was initiated during the MARKETS project (and inherited by NEXTT) through a stakeholder led process as a veritable public-private sector group that would drive reform and advocate for improvements in the performance of the Lagos-Kano-Jibiya corridor. The group was led by the Council for the Regulation of Freight Forwarders of Nigeria, a subsidiary agency under the Federal Ministry of Transport. 48 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY October 9, 2017; and d) revising the scope of work for the remaining life of the activity. At the request of the Contractor, USAID approved a costed extension to extend the activity to allow it to capture the results and investments from the PDF. USAID/Nigeria justified the extension by citing major delays in project implementation with the Ministry of Trade and Investment following the transition in government after the general elections in 2015. Progress suffered because the GON did not appoint a Minister to approve proposed joint activities and engage with the Ministry until several months after the election. Other modifications not listed here are administrative in nature, such as incremental funding. J. EXISTING DATA A detailed list of documents, including revised scopes of work following the modifications, will be made available to the evaluation team. The list of documents can be found in Annex 2. II. EVALUATION RATIONALE This final performance evaluation is intended to provide an independent examination of the overall progress and accomplishments of the NEXTT activity. The purpose of the evaluation is to assess the activity’s performance by comparing achievements against expected results; and to determine the likelihood that beneficiaries will employ the capabilities acquired once the project ends. The evaluation will also provide useful guidance to USAID/Nigeria and other stakeholders in designing future trade capacity building activities. A. PURPOSE The services of a lead evaluator and a team of technical and evaluation experts will be procured for this scope of work. They will conduct a participatory program evaluation of the Nigeria Expanded Trade and Transport (NEXTT) activity in partnership with USAID/Nigeria. The purpose of the evaluation is to assess the activity’s performance by comparing achievements against expected results; and to determine the likelihood that beneficiaries will employ the capabilities acquired once the project ends. The evaluation will also provide useful guidance to USAID/Nigeria and other stakeholders in designing future trade capacity building activities. B. AUDIENCE AND INTENDED USERS The findings, conclusions, recommendations, and lessons learned from the evaluation will be used to inform the USAID/Nigeria Mission regarding the achievement of goals and will inform the implementation of future USAID/Nigeria trade programs. The findings and lessons learned will be communicated to the Government of Nigeria, other USAID Offices and Bureaus as appropriate, and other donors to build knowledge about trade facilitation activities in the country. It will also be shared with the Contractor. C. EVIDENCE OF A PARTICIPATORY APPROACH The evaluation team should involve direct and indirect beneficiaries of the activity from both the public and private sectors during the evaluation. A detailed list of key stakeholders can be found in Annex 1. 49 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY D. DISSEMINATION PLAN The final report will be published in hard and electronic copies, and distributed to USAID/Nigeria; other USAID Offices and Bureaus as appropriate; the USAID/West Africa Trade and Investment Office; Palladium International; the Development Exchange Center; the USAID/Nigeria M&E assistance activity, DevTech Systems, Inc., which implements the Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Program for USAID/Nigeria; and relevant primary stakeholders including the Nigeria Export Promotion Council; the Nigeria Investment Promotion Commission; the Bank of Industry; the Federal Ministry of Industry, Trade and Investment; and other selected recipients. The dissemination plan may also extend an invitation to selected stakeholders to attend a conference at the Mission to discuss the key findings from the evaluation. E. EVALUATION QUESTIONS The following key evaluation questions should be answered: Relevance 1) To what extent did NEXTT resolve the trade capacity challenges that it aimed to address, including but not limited to the three stated objective areas? Partnership and Cooperation 2) To what extent have partnerships between NEXTT and GON agencies been fostered and established, and what efficiencies have been created to deliver services? Best Practices 3) What are the key strategic, programmatic, technical, and managerial features of the activity that should be considered when designing and implementing a new trade and investment activity in Nigeria? Results 4) What capacity has the Activity built in beneficiaries’ abilities to export? Sustainability 5) To what extent are any results achieved likely to be sustained after the activity ends? a. What is the likelihood that beneficiaries will employ their acquired export capacities once the project ends? b. What, if any, were the key components of the activity’s approach and programming that have contributed to sustainability? III EVALUATION DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY A. EVALUATION DESIGN The evaluation design will use a mixed-methods approach - using primary and secondary data - to collect, analyze and, interpret data in-order-to answer the evaluation questions. The evaluation design will involve document reviews, key informant interviews, and focus group discussions in four locations – Abuja, Kaduna, Kwara, and Lagos – where the project has concentrated its activities. Phone calls could be made to other beneficiaries outside of these four locations to elicit their feedback. Secondary data will be collected by reviewing documents related to the Activity. The evaluation will adopt a multi-stage approach. In the first stage, the evaluation team will conduct a document review, including the activity’s deliverables, as well as relevant literature on Nigeria’s trade environment. In the second stage, a Team Plan Meeting will be held, during which the evaluation team will complete tasks, including the following: ● Meet representatives of USAID, including staff of the Office of Economic Growth and 50 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY Environment, to review all aspects of the Scope of Work (SOW). ● Review available information to identify information gaps and refine data collection tasks accordingly. ● Design data collection instruments for individual interviews and focus group discussions. ● Design discussion guides for stakeholder roundtable meetings. ● Develop outlines for the deliverables detailed in the SOW and assign responsibilities among team members, including for report writing. ● Finalize the SOW, including needed clarification or refinement of the evaluation questions. ● Develop a detailed work plan for USAID approval. ● Plan the logistics of the evaluation field work. In the third stage, two sets of activities (on which additional information is provided below in the sections on data collection and analysis) will be undertaken concurrently after the planning meeting: ● The team will conduct individual interviews with NEXTT activity stakeholders who are identified in the target areas and groups section of this SOW. ● Focus group discussions (roundtable discussions) will take place. These group discussions will seek to answer the evaluation questions and bring together stakeholders involved with the project. B. DATA COLLECTION METHODS Evaluation questions will be answered using a qualitative approach using: ● Key informant interviews ● Focus group discussions. The team will collect secondary data through a review of all project-related information, including its deliverables, to be provided by USAID/Nigeria. C. DATA ANALYSIS METHODS Data from the individual interviews with both NEXTT stakeholders and roundtable participants will be analyzed using standard qualitative data methods. USAID expects the Evaluation Team to develop an analysis plan and review it with USAID/Nigeria. The plan should detail the types of analyses and analytical software to be used. For each question, the Evaluation Team will explain how evaluation data will be analyzed. Data tables, as agreed upon in the analysis plan, will also be generated and analyzed. D. METHODOLOGICAL STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS The evaluation methodology has several strengths. One is the availability of baseline information on the Lagos-Kano-Jibiya (LAKAJI) corridor that will assist in measuring the changes that have occurred over time. Another advantage is the opportunity to interview several key informants and hold focus group discussions with several project beneficiaries that will be selected from a broad list of beneficiaries. The ability to select study participants from a broad beneficiary list reduces any possible limitation of selection bias that may have resulted if the implementing partner had recommended participants. However, a possible limitation may be the unavailability of selected beneficiaries, which could limit the number of responses, and by extension, the quality of information provided by the respondents. Table 3. Methodology Matrix EVALUATION QUESTIONS TYPE OF ANSWER SOURCE DATA COLLECTION METHOD SAMPLING Relevance 1. To what extent did NEXTT resolve relevant trade capacity challenges that it aimed to address? Normative and Descriptive Statement of Work; Section C of Contract; Document review; Individual interviews; Purposive/ convenience by location and Qualitative data analysis 51 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY MEL Plan; Work Plans; Progress Reports; Project staff; USAID staff. Focus Group Discussions (FGDs). stakeholder group. Partnership and Cooperation 2. To what extent have partnerships between NEXTT and the GON agencies been fostered and established, and what efficiencies have been created to deliver project services? Normative and Descriptive Statement of Work; Work Plans; Progress Reports; Project staff; USAID staff. Document review; Individual interviews; FGDs. Purposive/ convenience by location and stakeholder group. Qualitative data analysis Best Practices 3. What are the key strategic, programmatic, technical, and managerial features of the activity that should be considered when designing and implementing a new trade and investment activity in Nigeria? Normative and Descriptive Project beneficiaries; Statement of Work; Work Plans; Progress Reports; Project staff; USAID staff. Document review; Individual interviews; FGDs. Purposive/ convenience by location and stakeholder group. Qualitative data analysis Results 4. How has the activity built the capacity of beneficiaries’ abilities to export? Normative and Descriptive Project beneficiaries; Statement of Work; Work Plans; Progress reports; Project staff; USAID staff. Document review; Individual interviews; FGDs. Purposive/ convenience by location and stakeholder group. Qualitative data analysis Sustainability 5. To what extent, if any, are results achieved (impact, if any, and outcomes) likely to be sustained after the activity ends? a. What likelihood is there that beneficiaries will employ these export capacities once the project ends? b. What, if any, were the key components of the activity’s approach and programming that have contributed to sustainability? Normative and Descriptive Project beneficiaries; Statement of Work; Work Plans; Progress reports; Project staff; USAID staff. Document review; Individual interviews; FGDs. Purposive/ convenience by location and stakeholder group. Qualitative data analysis IV EVALUATION PRODUCTS A. DELIVERABLES The following deliverables will be submitted to USAID/Nigeria. The timeline for submission of deliverables will be finalized and agreed upon with the Contractor. 1. Evaluation work plan and timeline: The evaluation work plan and timeline will be developed in consultation with USAID/Nigeria. 2. Detailed report outline: This will be agreed upon during the team presentation meeting. 3. Questionnaire/guidelines for conducting key informant interviews/focus group discussion guides: These documents will be prepared and submitted to USAID/Nigeria for review and approval prior to the initiation of key informant interviews and site visits. 4. Other evaluation materials (list of proposed sites, and list of respondents): Some of these materials, such as the list of sites to be visited, will be shared with USAID/Nigeria prior to visiting the field. The list of respondents interviewed as key informants will also be provided upon return from field visits. 52 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY 5. Interview notes and completed surveys: All interview notes and completed survey instruments used for the evaluation will be submitted to USAID/Nigeria. The data used for analysis will also be submitted to USAID/Nigeria. 6. Debriefing(s): The Team Leader will regularly debrief USAID/Nigeria on the progress of the evaluation during field work. At the end of the field work, an in-person debriefing meeting will be held with USAID/Nigeria (EGE Team), which will include the evaluation team’s findings, conclusions and recommendations. PowerPoint presentations (one electronic copy as well as hard copies) for the debriefing will summarize findings, conclusions, and recommendations, and will be distributed during the meeting. 7. Draft Evaluation Report: A synthesized draft report will include, at a minimum, the following: scope and methodology used; important findings (empirical facts collected by evaluators); conclusions (evaluators’ interpretations and judgments based on the findings); recommendations (proposed actions for management based on the conclusions); and lessons learned (key features that should be incorporated into the future designs of similar programs). The evaluation team will provide USAID/Nigeria with a draft report that includes all the components of the final evaluation report within 10 days after their departure from Nigeria. USAID/Nigeria will provide written comments on the draft report to the evaluation team within 10 working days of receiving the draft report. 8. Final Evaluation Report: The final report will address the comments provided by USAID/Nigeria and other stakeholders on the draft report. The Evaluation Team Leader will revise the draft report and deliver a final revised version to USAID/Nigeria within three weeks of receiving USAID’s feedback. The final report, in both hard and electronic format, will be submitted to USAID/Nigeria for approval before submission to the Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC). B. REPORTING GUIDELINES USAID’s evaluation policy requires that all evaluation’s SOW includes USAID’s Criteria to Ensure the Quality of the Evaluation Report (see USAID Evaluation Policy, Appendix I). The policy also indicates that the report will outline in detail, any additional expectations that USAID has regarding a report’s structure, format, and length. The format for the evaluation report is as follows (number of pages is illustrative): ● Executive Summary (2 pp.) ● Table of Contents (1 pp.) ● Introduction (1 pp.) ● Background (2-3 pp.) ● Methodology (1 pp.) ● Findings/Conclusions (17-20 pp.) ● Issues and Challenges (1-2 pp.) ● Recommendations/Future Directions (10 pp.) ● References 53 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY ● Annexes ● Data set Draft reports will be submitted in two hard copies and one electronic copy. The final report will be submitted in five hard copies and one electronic copy. All reports will be in the English language. The report must: ● Distinguish clearly between findings, conclusions (based strictly on the findings) and recommendations (based clearly on the evaluation findings and conclusions). ● Comply with USAID’s Evaluation Policy. ● Be submitted to the DEC after finalization. ● Include a Table of Contents; a list of acronyms; an Executive Summary; a section describing the project to be evaluated and the purpose of the evaluation; a section on the methodology employed; a section discussing the findings and conclusions; a section on recommendations; and a section on lessons learned. ● Include Annexes: vital source documents consulted and any other relevant materials that are not part of the body of the report, including this SOW, tools/data, and sources cited. V TEAM COMPOSITION The Evaluation Team will consist of four members, including at least one (1) international consultant (who will lead the team) and two or three local consultants. The team members should have a balance of types of knowledge and expertise related to trade capacity and transport/corridor improvement, trade facilitation and investment facilitation in Nigeria and/or West Africa. The team should include an individual with a good understanding of the cultures and traditions of the various states within the project’s geographical focus. The technical team members must all have significant national and international trade facilitation and trade capacity building experience. They should have some experience in Nigeria (preferred) or in Africa, along with demonstrated experience in trade capacity, transport, and corridor improvement. Team Leader/Senior Evaluator (International): The Team Leader will be responsible for the overall management of the evaluation, including coordinating and packaging the deliverables. The Team Leader will develop the outline for the draft report, present the report, and after incorporating USAID/Nigeria staff comments, submit the final report to USAID/Nigeria within the prescribed timeline. In addition to the responsibilities outlined above, the Team Leader will: Preparations 1. Finalize and negotiate the team’s work plan with USAID/Nigeria. 2. Establish assigned roles, responsibilities, and tasks for each team member. 3. Ensure that the logistics arrangements in the field are complete. Management 1. Take the lead on preparing, coordinating team member input, submitting, revising and finalizing the assignment report. 2. Manage the report writing process. 54 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY 3. Manage team coordination meetings in the field. 4. Coordinate the workflow and tasks and ensure that team members are adhering to the schedule. Communication 1. Ensure harmony within the team. 2. Serve as the primary interface with USAID/Nigeria and serve as the spokesperson for the team. 3. Debrief USAID/Nigeria as the evaluation progresses and organize a final debriefing. 4. Keep USAID/Nigeria apprised of progress challenges, work changes, team travel plans in the field, and report preparation via phone or email at least once a week. 5. Serve as the primary interface with USAID/Nigeria for the submission of the draft and final reports, and other deliverables to USAID/Nigeria. 6. Make decisions in conjunction with USAID/Nigeria about the safety and security of the team. Direction 1. Assume technical direction lead, as required, in-order-to ensure the quality and appropriateness of the assignment and the report contents. Skills and Experience Qualifications for the Team Leader: ● A graduate degree in Economics, Business Administration, Agriculture, or a related field. ● At least ten years of experience assessing or evaluating USAID-supported trade and investment, transport corridor improvement, and agricultural value chain projects. ● Previous experience serving as an evaluation Team Leader on a USAID-supported trade and investment project. ● Previous experience working in Africa. ● Experience facilitating and providing leadership in collaborative and participatory evaluations with multiple stakeholders. ● Excellent writing, communication and presentation skills. ● The ability to produce preliminary and final reports on time. Deputy Team Leader: H/she should have a general understanding of trade capacity building systems in Nigeria. Qualifications for the Deputy Team Leader: ● A graduate degree in Economics, Business Administration, Agriculture, Sociology, or a related field. ● At least five years of experience in evaluating USAID-supported trade capacity building projects. ● Previous experience in evaluating development projects in Nigeria or any other African country would be preferred. ● Excellent verbal and writing skills. 55 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY Data Collectors: will support data collection and note-taking during focus group discussions and interviews. Experience working with beneficiaries from project focus areas is essential. Ideally, interviews and focus group discussions will be led by members of the same gender as the participants. The presence of an evaluation specialist in the team may be an added advantage. 56 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY VI BUDGET A. LEVEL OF EFFORTS AND DURATION The expected in-country timeframe for this task is approximately September to October 2017. Specific start and end-dates, travel dates, and due dates for deliverables will be determined in collaboration with USAID/Nigeria based on the availability of the consultants. The Level of Effort (LOE) for the Team Leader, Deputy Team Leader, and data collectors are indicated in the Table below. Table 4. Levels of Effort (LOE)/Work Days and Timeline Tasks DATE INTERNATI ONAL TEAM LEADER LOCAL/ DEPUTY TEAM LEADER LOCAL/DATA COLLECTOR LOCAL/ DATA COLLECTOR Review of project documents (pre￾travel task) Sep 18- 21 4 4 N/A N/A Submission of draft evaluation protocol and data collection tools Sep 22 Travel to Abuja (International Consultant/Team Leader) Sep 23 N/A 1 N/A N/A Review of project documents and consultation with USAID/Nigeria Sep 25 1 1 1 1 Briefing with USAID/Nigeria - EGE team, and request for the letter of introduction Sep 26 1 1 0 0 Develop evaluation work plan including list of interviewers, data collection & analysis methods, report outline Finalize logistical/administrative arrangements Develop data collection instruments Submit work plan and instruments to USAID for approval Sep 27- 28 2 2 2 2 Pre-test and finalize data collection tools Sep 29- Oct 02 2 1 1 1 Travel to the field Oct 3 1 1 1 1 Visit field sites and interview beneficiaries and other key stakeholders, and collect data Oct 4- Oct 19 12 12 12 12 Review data collected, analyze and prepare a presentation and debrief for USAID/Nigeria Oct 20- 25 4 4 3 3 Presentation of preliminary findings to USAID (at the Mission/Morning) Presentation/debrief to other key stakeholders (Venue - TLP Offices/ Afternoon) Oct 26 1 1 N/A N/A Draft report Oct 27- Nov 01 5 4 N/A N/A International (Out of Nigeria/Abuja) Nov 02 1 N/A N/A N/A Draft report submitted to USAID by TLP Nov 03 N/A N/A N/A N/A USAID/Nigeria reviews comments Nov 3 - 10 N/A N/A N/A N/A Finalize report (Also incorporate USAID comments) Nov 13 - 15 3 1 N/A N/A Submit final report for approval (By Nov 17 N/A N/A N/A N/A 57 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY TLP) TOTAL 37 32 20 20 VII CONTACT INFORMATION Mr. Roland Oroh (NEXTT Project COR - roroh@usaid.gov), and Mr. James Lykos (NEXTT Project Alternate COR - jlykos@usaid.gov) will be the Points of Contact for this evaluation. 58 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY ANNEX II: LIST OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR STAKEHOLDERS Table 5. List of Stakeholders for Components 1, 2 and 3 PUBLIC SECTOR PRIVATE SECTOR Federal Ministry of Industry, Trade and Investment Members of the LAKAJI Corridor Management Group Federal Ministry of Agriculture & Rural Development African Women Entrepreneurship Program (AWEP) Nigeria Export Promotion Council Borderless Alliance Nigeria Investment Promotion Commission African Cashew Alliance National Agency for Food and Drugs Administration and Control Valency International Limited Federal Ministry of Transport AVM Consults Kwara State Government Connect Rail Services Limited Niger State Government National Association of Chambers of Commerce, Industry, Mines and Agriculture (NACCIMA) Kano State Government Nigerian-American Chamber of Commerce Nigerian Shippers Council Lagos Chamber of Commerce Federal Ministry of Communications Technology Manufacturers Association of Nigeria Council for the Registration of Freight Forwarders of Nigeria Flour Mills of Nigeria Plc. Nigeria Customs Service Legacy Investments Limited Bank of Industry National Cashew Association of Nigeria NEXIM Bank Shea Nut Association of Nigeria Federal Ministry of Finance Shea Radiance Limited Kaduna State Government Foodpro Limited Federal Roads Maintenance Agency Integrity Farms Limited Central Bank of Nigeria Esteema Global Diamonds Limited Small and Medium Enterprises Development Agency (SMEDAN) Ethnocentric Limited Office of the Vice President, Federal Republic of Nigeria Strange Industries Limited LAKAJI Development Alliance Global Shea Alliance West Africa Trade Hub Thrunate Nigeria Limited Ita-Obe Freshfields Limited A & Shine Limited Jon Tudy Interbiz Nigeria Ltd 59 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY VOC Royal Foods ANNEX III: LIST OF DOCUMENTS Table 6. List of Documents S/N DOCUMENT TITLE SOURCE 1. Country Development and Cooperation Strategy (CDCS) 2015-2019 USAID 2. Modification 4: PDF Statement of Work (SOW) USAID 3 Modification 6: Revised NEXTT Project SOW USAID 4. Modification 7: Technical Approach for the Extension Period USAID 5. Work Plans: Years 1-5 USAID 6. Annual Reports: Years 1-4 USAID 7. Quarterly Reports USAID 8. List of beneficiaries with contact details USAID/NEXTT 9. Technical reports from project implementation USAID/NEXTT 10. Mid-term evaluation report USAID 60 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY ANNEX IV: EVALUATION RESPONDENTS Table 7. Evaluation Respondents S/N ORGANIZATION NAME CONTACT STATE EXPORT/PDF COMPANIES 1 Suken Company Ltd. Suleiman Bello Sukenco@gmail.com FCT 2 Societi Foods Industries Limited Ronke Oyetunji Societifoods@gmail.com FCT 3 Coco Botanicals Limited Oduneyi Okonkwo Oduenyi@icloud.com FCT 4 Pack and Seals Victoria Ironbar Packandseals2010@gmail.com FCT 5 Ahamira Farms Limited Halima Hanafi Saad Ahamirafarms@gmail.com FCT 6 Kaduna Foods Garba Dikko Kadunafoods@yahoo.com Kaduna 7 Manjadda Industries Limited Aminu Mohammed Ashiru Manjaddaindustries@gmail.com Kaduna 8 Tahir Farms and Agro-Allied Industries Limited H. S. Tahir Hstahir2010@gmail.com Kaduna 9 Intercity Ventures Limited Idris Muhammad Barau, Director Beekeepers2002@yahoo.com Kaduna 10 Plethora Farms Limited Mrs. Opeoluwa Fayomi Opefayomi@gmail.com Kaduna 11 Belphins Nig Ltd. General Nom Belphins99@gmail.com Kaduna 12 Matankadi Farms Limited Comfort Henry Danjuma Henrydanjuma@gmail.com Kaduna 13 Musa Dankano Farms Shehu Musa Malumfashi Shehumalumfashi@gmail.com Katsina 14 Wahan Foods Big Ltd. Daramola Akanni Abdulhannon Wahan.Foods@yahoo.com Kwara 15 Royal Dynasty Limited Femi Ogunje Smaadeyemo@yahoo.com Kwara 16 Food Pro Ayodele Olajiga Aolajiga@Foodpro-Group.com Kwara 17 Tripplesea Group Leo Atueyi Leo.Atueyi@Trippleseagroup.c om Lagos 18 Starlink Global Ideal Ltd. Adeyemi Adeniji Adeadeyemi2000@yahoo.com Lagos 19 Atajere Global Concepts Limited Pst. Faith Afolayan Fafolayan@gmail.com Lagos 20 Shea Blossom Mrs. Olasumbo Adeleke Sales@Sheablossom.com.Ng Lagos 21 Julia Manny Product Bayo Osiberu Juliemannyproductsltd@gmail.c om, Bayoosiberu@gmail.com Lagos 22 Seyi Oduntan Farms Ltd. Gbemi Oduntan Gbemistic@gmail.com Lagos 23 Esteema Diamond Ltd. Lekan Balogun Lekanbalogun2000@yahoo.co m Lagos 24 Jon Tudy Jon Tudy Kachikwu Jontudy2001@yahoo.com Lagos 25 Royal Soul Nigeria Limited Adeola Oyelade Ladeola100@gmail.com Lagos 26 Ksa Services Limited Adetunji Jalaosho Meattekpros@gmail.com Lagos 27 Envirogrow Farms Limited Nkiru Okpareke Nkiruokpareke@gmail.com Lagos 61 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY S/N ORGANIZATION NAME CONTACT STATE 28 Kaptain Foods Limited Onyekachi Okezie Onyekachi@Kaptainfoods.com Lagos 29 Easy Sauces Nigeria Limited Dr. Jide Adedeji Jideadedeji@yahoo.com Lagos 30 ICN Technologies Engr. Chinedu I. Nworji Icncomputech@gmail.com Lagos 31 Oklan Best Limited Lanre Nwankwo Oklan2000@yahoo.com Ogun 32 Haycountry Foods Mr. Abiola Agbeniga Ceo@Haycountrylimited.com Ogun 33 Omonide Farms Limited Funke Adepoju Adepoju.Funke@yahoo.c om Ogun BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT SERVICE PROVIDERS 34 Ideanest Investment Services Ms. Uche Ilonah Uilonah@yahoo.com Lagos 35 Agroec Consultants Chief Abayomi Adewunmi Yomiadewunmi@yahoo.com Lagos 36 Pearl Enterprise & Allied Resources Ltd. Mr. Jimi Adeyemo Jadeyemo@yahoo.com Lagos 37 Stevenson Associates Olanrewaju Timothy Ajiboye Olanreji@gmail.com Lagos 38 Belvyna Global Nigeria Ltd. Yemisi Akibu Yemisiakibu@gmail.com Lagos 39 Sophamis Consult Aderonke Awomolo. Aderonkeawomolo@yahoo.co m Lagos 40 Ht-Limited Nigeria Feyikemi Odunuga Feyikemi@Ht-Limitedng.Net, Feyikemiodunuga@yahoo.com Lagos 41 First Fiducia Limited Shuaibu A. Ottan Ottans@yahoo.com Lagos 42 Export Research and Training Limited Omowunmi Osibo Biketoniosibo@gmail.com Lagos 43 Rofenik Associates Bukola Elizabeth Olunlade Bets742002@yahoo.co.uk Lagos 44 Success Edge Int'l Ltd. Success Edge Gosuccessedge@gmail.com Lagos 45 Toki Mabogunje & Co (Tmc) Ade Laja, Toki Mabogunje Ade.Laja@Tmc.com.Ng Lagos GOVERNMENT OF NIGERIA 46 Bank of Industry (BOI) Jack Kings Regional Head, North Central Division FCT 47 Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) Engr Emeka Agbasi Head PPP/Multilateral Agencies Department, FERMA FCT 48 Nigeria Investment Promotion Council (NIPC) Aminu Takuma Deputy Director, Dept. Of State Coordination FCT 49 Federal Ministry of Industry, Trade and Investment (FMITI) Mr. M. A. Abubakar, Mr. A. M. Abdulhamid, Mrs. Foluke Deputy Director, Trade FCT 50 Nigeria Customs Service (NCS) Retired Comptroller Eton Retired Head of Resource Department FCT 51 Standards Organisation of Nigeria (SON) Margaret Eshiett Head, Business Support Services FCT 62 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY GOVERNMENT OF NIGERIA 52 National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) Vera Ezeh Deputy Director, One-Stop Investment Center FCT 53 Nigerian Export Promotion Council (NEPC) Mr Ezeagu Director, Product Dev. Department FCT OTHER NEXTT PARTNERS 54 LAKAJI Corridor Management Group (LCMG) Mike Jukwe Chairman FCT 55 LAKAJI Development Alliance (LDA) Edeme Kelikume Chairman Lagos 56 Nigerian Economic Summit Group (NESG) Henry Agbonika FCT 57 Manufacturers Association of Nigeria (MAN) Ambrose Oruche Director, Resource Centre/Sectorial Matters Lagos IMPLEMENTING STAFF 58 NEXTT Cecilia Baso, Katie Paguaga Technical Directors USA 59 NEXTT Marc Shiman Chief of Party (COP) FCT 60 NEXTT Isaac Adegun Deputy COP FCT 61 NEXTT Amos Sunday Samson PDF Manager FCT 62 NEXTT Aniekan Trade Policy and Capacity Building Manager FCT 63 NEXTT Bukola Sotunbo Food Safety Specialist/ Export Component Manager FCT 63 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY ANNEX V: NEXTT ORGANIZATION CHART 64 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY ANNEX VI: DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR NEXTT STAKEHOLDERS DATE: LOCATION: INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE NAME: NAME OF ORGANIZATION: DESIGNATION WITHIN ORGANIZATION: TYPE OF RESPONDENT: (BUSINESS, GON, BDS, BMO ETC.) CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT GROUP (CMG)/LAKAJI DEVELOPMENT ALLIANCE (LDA) 1. Has doing business in the corridor evolved over the past 2 years? If yes how has it evolved; what changes (positive and negative) have occurred? Have the trading costs (transport, fees and levies (number and cost) on the corridor changed (how?) - on average what was it before, what is it now? Why has it changed? Has the time to transport goods along the corridor changed (how?) - on average what was it before, what is it now? Why has it changed? Is there any difference in the number (new businesses coming in) and type of businesses that operate in the region; as well as changes in the scope of existing businesses? Could you provide examples of how infrastructure along the corridor (such as ICT, warehousing, cold storage etc.) have improved (if at all)? What factors are responsible for these changes in the corridor? 2. What effect has the Project Development Facility (PDF) had on the growth of the corridor? What is your sense of how high or low firms’ access to the fund has been to the facility? Do firms have equal opportunities to access it or are there barriers to access? How viable is the facility for initiating/catalyzing growth in the corridor? How sustainable do you think the facility is? Has sufficient capacity been built for the fund to be sustained- access to it and funding for it, after NEXTT? 3. Can you describe the support provided to the group by NEXTT? 65 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY What role has it played in the development of the corridor (Probe: advocating for infrastructural/tariff/efficiency improvements, etc.) - Please explain. 4. In your opinion, how successful has the Group been in its advocacy? How many issues has the group advocated for? How were the outcomes? 5. Can you describe the challenges the group faced in carrying out its role in the development of the corridor? Are there any challenges you currently face that have limited your capacity to translate the technical skills, business support and export capacity building to implement support received from NEXTT? What forms of support would have been the most beneficial but were not provided to the council? What specific benefits have accrued to the council as a result of your participation in capacity building efforts under the NEXTT project? What other forms of support (beyond those provided under the NEXTT project) would you have found useful? 6. What do you think about the role NEXTT has played in the LAKAJI corridor? In your opinion, what impact has their role had on the business environment/facilitating trade in the region? Do you believe the activities organized by NEXTT in which you have participated will lead to improved capacity to trade in Nigeria? Please explain. Do you believe changes that have occurred in the corridor will persist after the Project ends? QUESTIONS FOR THE MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION OF NIGERIA (MAN) 1. What is the general experience of doing business in the LAKAJI trade corridor? What opportunities exist for new businesses in the region? What challenges do businesses face? 2. Has doing business in the corridor evolved over the past 2 years? If yes how has it evolved; what changes (positive and negative) have occurred? Have the trading costs (transport, fees and levies (number and cost) on the corridor changed (how?) - On average what was it before, what is it now? Why has it changed? Who benefitted from the change? Has the time to transport goods along the corridor changed (how?) - on average what was it before, what is it now? Why has it changed? Who benefitted from the change? Is there any difference in the number (new businesses coming in) and type of businesses that operate in the region; as well as changes in the scope of existing businesses? Could you provide examples of how infrastructure along the corridor (such as ICT, warehousing, cold storage etc.) have changed? What new forms of financing are available to businesses operating in the LAKAJI corridor? 66 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY What forms of businesses benefit the most from current financing options? What forms of businesses do you think are excluded? What suggestions would you proffer for more inclusiveness of the financing options? Have these changes mentioned earlier affected business operations in the corridor? How? What factors are responsible for these changes in the corridor? 3. What support (such as capacity building, linkages, membership growth, etc.) did NEXTT provide you with? What impact has the support had on association, as well as on businesses operating in the region? Has the association been able to apply any of these learnings? How? What changes were observed following applications of learnings? 4. What do you think about the role NEXTT has played in the LAKAJI corridor? In your opinion, what impact has their role had on the business environment/facilitating trade in the region? Do you believe changes that have occurred in the corridor will persist after the Project ends? Do you believe the activities organized by NEXTT in which you have participated will lead to improved capacity to trade in Nigeria? Please explain What more should Trade and Investment Projects like NEXTT do to ensure the buy-in of relevant stakeholders and sustainability? 5. Given your participation in the NEXTT Project, what are some strategic recommendations you would give for similar projects targeting Trade and Transport in Nigeria? QUESTIONS FOR FEDERAL ROAD MAINTENANCE AGENCY (FERMA) 1. Can you please describe your partnership with NEXTT? Is the partnership aligned with the priority/areas of interest of the Agency? What changes, if any, have been made to the Service’s processes because of this partnership (Probe: concessions for trailer parks in LAKAJI), capacity building on PPP? How has the partnership impacted on the operations of the Agency? Have learnings from the partnership been operationalized? How has the partnership impacted on the operations of the Agency? What skills and techniques has the Agency gained that it didn’t have before? Has the support contributed to the enactment of new policies or laws? Does the Agency need further support to implement/sustain areas in which capacities have been built by NEXTT, or is it now equipped to implement/sustain these areas? 2. What do you think about the role NEXTT has played in the LAKAJI corridor? In your opinion, what impact has their role had on the business environment/facilitating trade in the region? Do you believe changes that have occurred in the corridor will persist after the Project ends? 67 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY Do you believe the activities organized by NEXTT in which you have participated will lead to improved capacity to trade in Nigeria? Please explain. What more should Trade and Investment Projects like NEXTT do to ensure the buy-in of relevant stakeholders and sustainability? 3. Given your participation in the NEXTT Project, what are some strategic recommendations you would give for similar projects targeting Trade and Transport in Nigeria? QUESTIONS FOR LAGOS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY (LCCI) 1. What is the general experience of doing business in the LAKAJI trade corridor? What opportunities exist for new businesses in the region? What challenges do businesses face? 2. Has doing business in the corridor evolved over the past 2 years? If yes how has it evolved; what changes (positive and negative) have occurred? Have the trading costs (transport, fees and levies (number and cost) on the corridor changed (how?) - On average what was it before, what is it now? Why has it changed? Who benefitted from the change? Has the time to transport goods along the corridor changed (how?) - on average what was it before, what is it now? Why has it changed? Who benefitted from the change? Is there any difference in the number (new businesses coming in) and type of businesses that operate in the region; as well as changes in the scope of existing businesses? Could you provide examples of how infrastructure along the corridor (such as ICT, warehousing, cold storage etc.) have changed? What new forms of financing are available to businesses operating in the LAKAJI corridor? What forms of businesses benefit the most from current financing options? What forms of businesses do you think are excluded? 3. What suggestions would you proffer for more inclusiveness of the financing options? Have these changes mentioned earlier affected business operations in the corridor? How? 4. What factors are responsible for these changes in the corridor? 5. What support (such as capacity building, linkages, membership growth, etc.) did NEXTT provide you with? What impact has the support had on the chamber, as well as on businesses operating in the region? Has the association been able to apply any of these learnings? How? What changes were observed following applications of learnings? 6. What do you think about the role NEXTT has played in the LAKAJI corridor and in exports? In your opinion, what impact has their role had on the business environment/facilitating trade in the region? Do you believe changes that have occurred in the corridor will persist after the Project ends? 68 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY Do you believe the activities organized by NEXTT in which you have participated will lead to improved capacity to trade in Nigeria? Please explain. What more should Trade and Investment Projects like NEXTT do to ensure the buy-in of relevant stakeholders and sustainability? 7. Given your involvement with the NEXTT Project, what are some strategic recommendations you would give for similar projects targeting Trade and Transport in Nigeria? QUESTIONS FOR MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATIONS AND TECHNOLOGY 1. What do you think about the role NEXTT has played in the LAKAJI corridor? In your opinion, what impact has their role had on the business environment/facilitating trade in the region? Do you believe changes that have occurred in the corridor will persist after the Project ends? Do you believe the activities organized by NEXTT in which you have participated will lead to improved capacity to trade in Nigeria? Please explain What more should Trade and Investment Projects like NEXTT do to ensure the buy-in of relevant stakeholders and sustainability? 2. Does the Ministry play any role in supporting agribusiness? What role does it play? What about in stimulating or facilitating agribusiness ICT investment? Please explain. 3. Describe any support the Ministry has received from NEXTT to play this role and its partnership with NEXTT. What support has it received from NEXTT (Probe: the inclusion of an agribusiness element in its Techlaunchpad initiative) So far, how has the Techlaunchpad initiative supported agribusinesses? What specific activities organized by NEXTT have benefited the Ministry? What skills and techniques has the ministry gained that it didn’t have before? Has the support contributed to the enactment of new policies or laws? 4. Is support to agribusiness in line with the mandate of the Ministry or has it been embedded in its mandate? 5. What plans does the Ministry have to continue its support to agribusinesses? QUESTIONS FOR NIGERIA INVESTMENT PROMOTION COMMISSION 1. Can you please describe your partnership with NEXTT (Probe: capacity development to serve/prioritize local investment, support with refining roles/processes within the commission, etc.)? Is the partnership aligned with the priority of /areas of interest to the Commission? Have learnings from the partnership been operationalized? How has the partnership impacted on the operations of the Commission? 69 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY What changes, if any, have been made to the Commission’s processes as a result of this partnership? What skills and techniques has the commission gained that it didn’t have before? Has the support contributed to the enactment of new policies or laws? How has the commission incorporated the Project Development Facility (PDF) in its investment promotion? In your opinion, what impact will the PDF have on investments and the business environment in general? Do you think the effects will be sustained after NEXTT ends? 2. Does the Commission need further support in-order-to implement/sustain areas in which capacities have been built by NEXTT, or does it believe it is now equipped to implement/sustain these areas? 3. What do you think about the role NEXTT has played in the LAKAJI corridor? In your opinion, what impact has their role had on the business environment/facilitating trade in the region? What new investment opportunities have occurred in the region as a result of NEXTT? Do you believe changes that have occurred in the corridor will persist after the Project ends? Do you believe the activities organized by NEXTT in which you have participated will lead to improved capacity to trade in Nigeria? Please explain What more should Trade and Investment Projects like NEXTT do to ensure the buy-in of relevant stakeholders and sustainability? 4. Given your participation in the NEXTT Project, what are some strategic recommendations you would give for similar projects targeting Trade and Transport in Nigeria? QUESTIONS FOR BANK OF INDUSTRY 1. Please describe the Bank’s partnership with NEXTT (Probe: capacity development on African Growth Opportunities Act, development of financial products for shea, cashew, and cocoa)? Is the partnership aligned with the priority of/areas of interest to the Bank? Have learnings from the partnership been operationalized (e.g. making funds available to firms in the shea, cashew, and cocoa value chains)? How has the partnership impacted on the operations of the Bank? What changes, if any, have been made to the Bank’s processes as a result of this partnership? What skills and techniques has the bank gained that it didn’t have before? Has the support contributed to the enactment of new policies or laws? How many firms has the bank disbursed funds to/approved funds for disbursement, as a result of NEXTT’s activities, and in what value chains? How has the Bank incorporated the Project Development Facility (PDF) in financing firms? In your opinion, what impact will the PDF have on investments and the business environment in general? Do you think the effects will be sustained after NEXTT ends? 70 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY 2. Does the Bank need further support in-order-to implement/sustain areas in which capacities have been built by NEXTT, or does it believe it is now equipped to implement/sustain these areas? 3. What do you think about the role NEXTT has played in the LAKAJI corridor? In your opinion, what impact has their role had on the business environment/facilitating trade in the region? Do you believe changes that have occurred in the corridor will persist after the Project ends? Do you believe the activities organized by NEXTT in which you have participated will lead to improved capacity to trade in Nigeria? Please explain. What more should Trade and Investment Projects like NEXTT do to ensure the buy-in of relevant stakeholders and sustainability? 4. Given your participation in the NEXTT Project, what are some strategic recommendations you would give for similar projects targeting Trade and Transport in Nigeria? QUESTIONS FOR NIGERIAN ECONOMIC SUMMIT GROUP (NESG) 1. What do you think about the role NEXTT has played in the LAKAJI corridor? In your opinion, what impact has their role had on the business environment/facilitating trade in the region? Do you believe changes that have occurred in the corridor will persist after the Project ends? 2. Please describe the Group’s partnership with NEXTT? Is the partnership aligned with the priority of/areas of interest to the Group? How? What changes, if any, have been made to the group’s processes as a result of this partnership? What skills and techniques has the group gained that it didn’t have before? Do you believe the activities organized by NEXTT in which you have participated will lead to improved capacity to trade in Nigeria? Please explain. What plans does the group have to drive advocacy for improvements and investment in the LAKAJI corridor? What specific activities would the NESG undertake? 3. What were the institutional and management failures in previous coordinating arrangements and how does NESG hope to avoid similar issues? 4. What processes or frameworks does NESG have in place to engage GON agencies, the private sector and businesses in the LAKAJI Trade Corridor? 5. The Northern end (Kano, Sokoto) of the LAKAJI corridor has not featured prominently in activities of the previous coordination arrangement. Is there going to be a change with NESG? 6. What targets does the NESG have in its coordination role of the LAKAJI Trade corridor? 7. What forms of support has NESG gotten from the USAID Nigeria Mission, the NEXTT project and the CMG? 8. What forms of support would be helpful to the NESG in this new role? 71 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY 9. Is there any interface between the NESG and members of the previous coordination arrangements (e.g. CMG, LDA)? 10. What more should Trade and Investment Projects like NEXTT do to ensure the buy-in of relevant stakeholders and sustainability? 11. Given your involvement with the NEXTT Project, what are some strategic recommendations you would give for similar projects targeting Trade and Transport in Nigeria? QUESTIONS FOR FEDERAL MINISTRY OF INDUSTRY, TRADE AND INVESTMENT 1. What processes does the ministry have in place for engaging with the private sector on trade￾related issues (including the inclusion of the private sector in formulating policy)? Were these processes in place before the partnership with NEXTT? If yes, were they functional? If the processes were in place, what changes, if any, have been made to the processes because of the partnership (any changes in the Enlarged National Focal Point/Trade Facilitation Task Force and National Food Safety Management Committee)? 2. Please describe the Ministry’s partnership with NEXTT as well as any support received (probe for support with capacity building including training on tariff analysis, institutionalization of ENFP, TFTF and NFSMC, implementation of trade strategy/tariff analysis unit, AGOA strategy for agric. exports). Is the partnership aligned with the priority of/areas of interest to the ministry? Have learnings from the partnership been operationalized (e.g., the involvement of the private sector in policy formulation and in determining priority trade issues to address, compliance with international trade agreements/implementation of the World Trade Organization Facilitation Agreement (TFA), reforming investment laws etc.) How has the partnership impacted on the operations of the ministry? What skills and techniques has the ministry gained that it didn’t have before? Has the support contributed to the enactment of new policies or laws? Does the ministry need further support to implement/sustain areas in which capacities have been built by NEXTT, or does it believe it is now equipped to implement/sustain these areas? 3. What do you think about the role NEXTT has played in the LAKAJI corridor? In your opinion, what impact has their role had on the business environment/facilitating trade in the region? Do you believe the activities organized by NEXTT in which you have participated will lead to improved capacity to trade in Nigeria? Please explain Do you believe changes that have occurred in the corridor will persist after the Project ends? 4. What specific indicators were developed by NEXTT for the implementation of the TFA action plan in Nigeria? 5. What metrics does these indicators use? Is there any publication of results? 6. Could you explain some of the problems encountered by implementing agencies of the TFA? 7. What processes has been put in place for the implementation of the TFA? 8. In what ways has NEXTT supported the NCTF/Ministry in bridging identified gaps in the implementation of the TFA? 72 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY 9. Does the Ministry face any challenges in designing the TFA Monitoring Plan? 10. Do you foresee any challenges in measuring effects of the TFA implementation using the Monitoring Plan, Red Amber Green (RAG)? 11. Are there unique situations peculiar to the Nigerian environment that affects production and export capacity of business - especially in the shea and cashew sector? 12. In the course of your interaction with program staff of the NEXTT project, what were some issues/concerns you thought better attention could have been given to? 13. What other forms of support (beyond those provided under the NEXTT project) would you have found to be impactful? 14. Given your participation in the NEXTT Project, what are some strategic recommendations you would give for similar projects targeting Trade and Transport in Nigeria? 15. What more should Trade and Investment Projects like NEXTT do to ensure the buy-in of relevant stakeholders and sustainability? QUESTIONS FOR NATIONAL AGENCY FOR FOOD AND DRUGS ADMINISTRATION AND CONTROL (NAFDAC) 1. Can you please describe your partnership with NEXTT as well as any support you have received (Probe: Capacity building on: curriculum development/training domestic traders and exporters on the compliance process for agricultural products, accreditation and certification procedures, lab certification training (particularly for cashew production, processing and trade) on international quality standards and system development for international certification￾ISO:17,025)? Is the partnership aligned with the priority/areas of interest of the Agency? What changes, if any, have been made to the Agency’s processes as a result of this partnership, in the areas mentioned (and the adoption of the National Food Safety Policy)? Have learnings from the partnership been operationalized - (probe: implementation of international quality standards)? How has the partnership impacted on the operations of the Agency? What skills and techniques has the agency gained that it didn’t have before? Has the support contributed to the enactment of new policies or laws? Does the Agency need further support to implement/sustain areas in which capacities have been built by NEXTT, or is it adequately equipped to implement/sustain these areas? Have you noticed any changes in firms’ compliance with standards for agricultural products? What do you attribute to this change? 2. What do you think about the role NEXTT is playing in quality standards for domestic agricultural products? In your opinion, what impact has their role had on the business environment, such as an increase in the number of export firms complying to international standards? Do you believe the activities organized by NEXTT in which you have participated will lead to improved capacity to trade in Nigeria? Please explain. Do you think these changes will persist after the Project ends? Please explain 73 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY 3. Given your participation in the NEXTT Project, what are some strategic recommendations you would give for similar projects targeting Trade and Transport in Nigeria? QUESTIONS FOR STANDARDS ORGANISATION OF NIGERIA (SON) 1. Can you please describe your partnership with NEXTT as well as any support you have received (Probe: Capacity building on: lab certification on international quality standards and system development for international certification - ISO:17,025, code of standard, GAP standards for exporters, food safety)? Is the partnership aligned with the priority/areas of interest of the organization? What changes, if any, have been made to the organization’s processes as a result of this partnership, in the areas mentioned (and the adoption of the National Food Safety Policy)? Have learnings from the partnership been operationalized? How? How has the partnership impacted on the operations of SON? What skills and techniques has SON gained that it didn’t have before? Has the support contributed to the enactment of new policies or laws? What policies Does SON need further support to implement/sustain areas in which capacities have been built by NEXTT, or is it adequately equipped to implement/sustain these areas? 2. Have you noticed any changes in firms’ compliance with standards for agricultural products? What do you attribute to this change? 3. What do you think about the role NEXTT is playing in quality standards for domestic agricultural products? In your opinion, what impact has their role had on the business environment, such as an increase in the number of export firms complying with international standards? Do you believe the activities organized by NEXTT in which you have participated will lead to improved capacity to trade in Nigeria? Please explain. Do you think these changes will persist after the Project ends? Please explain 4. Given your participation in the NEXTT Project, what are some strategic recommendations you would give for similar projects targeting Trade and Transport in Nigeria? QUESTIONS FOR NIGERIAN CUSTOMS SERVICE 1. Can you please describe your partnership with NEXTT (Probe: Capacity building on risk management, tariff analysis, international clearance procedures, post clearance audit, Authorized Economic Operators Program (AEO), etc., new CEMA implementation procedures)? Is the partnership aligned with the priority/areas of interest of the Service? What changes, if any, have been made to the Service’s processes because of this partnership (Probe: any changes in port/border clearance times/hold and release times, extension of the Lagos port fast track option, automated processes)? How has the partnership impacted on the operations of the Service? Have learnings from the partnership been operationalized? 74 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY How has the partnership impacted on the operations of the Service? What skills and techniques has the Service gained that it didn’t have before? Has the support contributed to the enactment of new policies or laws? Does the Service need further support to implement/sustain areas in which capacities have been built by NEXTT, or is it now equipped to implement/sustain these areas? 2. What do you think about the role NEXTT has played in the import/export reforms? In your opinion, what impact has their role had on the business environment/facilitating trade for imports and exports? Do you believe the activities organized by NEXTT in which you have participated will lead to improved capacity to trade in Nigeria? Please explain. Do you believe changes that have occurred will persist after the Project ends? 3. Given your participation in the NEXTT Project, what are some strategic recommendations you would give for similar projects targeting Trade and Transport in Nigeria? QUESTIONS FOR BUSINESSES IN LAKAJI 1. How long have you been doing business in the LAKAJI corridor? Type of business activity? 2. What challenges do you face, if any, doing business in this region? 3. Have there been any changes (improvement or deterioration) in the business environment since you started trading? Please explain (Probe: changes in the cost of doing business (transport, fees and levies (number and cost)), ICT infrastructure, warehousing, cold storage, etc.). Is it easier or more difficult to do business in this region now? Please explain. 4. Have you expanded your business since you started? What is the nature of the expansion? Why did you expand? Did you receive any support for the expansion - What kind of support? From whom? What specific support did you receive from NEXTT (e.g. training, facilitating certification etc.) and how has the support impacted on your business? (Please what is the total value of investment in your business facilitated by NEXTT from the time you started receiving support until now?) What changes have you made to your business as a result of the support you received? Would you have been able to make changes/expand without the support you received? Please explain. How has this change/expansion affected your business operations? Did you hire more staff as a result of the change/expansion? 75 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY Do you feel well equipped (in terms of capacity built, funds invested etc.) to sustain the change/expansion? Do you know how to access additional support if you need it - please explain? 5. Do you know about the Project Development Facility and its purpose? Have you accessed funds from the facility? If yes, how much did you get, what was your experience accessing the facility? Were the amount and conditions suitable for your purposes? If you accessed funds, how did the funds accessed impact on your business? If you did not access the facility, why did you not access it? Do you know how to access funds from the facility if you need to? If you are a trader: Where do you sell your goods (Nigeria and/or outside Nigeria)? - If you sell your goods in Nigeria 6. Where do you buy the goods you sell from? 7. If imported, can you please describe your experience with importing goods into Nigeria? Have you noticed any changes with the import process at the ports/borders, including the length of time and procedures to clear your goods? 8. If locally produced, are you interested in accessing markets outside Nigeria? If yes, why are you not currently exporting your goods outside Nigeria? Do you know how to access international markets if you want to/are you aware of any business that supports people who want to export goods (also aware of standards/certifications required)? Please explain - If you sell your goods outside Nigeria 9. When did you start exporting goods outside Nigeria? 10. How did you access the foreign market you export to? 11. Did you receive any support to export to foreign markets? What type of support (Probe: certification with internal quality control and requirements for Nigerian standards organizations (such as NAFDAC food safety certification)/international standards certification (such as America’s FDA certification for entry to the US) or access to new foreign markets or investment for value addition, through networking activities, etc.) How did the support impact your business (please explain value of exports before and after support and reasons for any change)? Please what is the total value of your exports from the time you started receiving support till now? Have you been applying/will you be able to apply the support (such as capacity built) you received to other aspects of your business or subsequent exports? 12. Please describe your experience with exporting goods outside Nigeria (before and after any support received)? What challenges do you face? How were the challenges overcome? 76 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY Please explain any changes you have noticed with the exporting process at the ports/border, including the length of time it takes to export goods? Are you a member of any export group (such as the Nigerian borderless alliance)? 13. Please describe any support you receive from this group to help with your export business. 14. Do you plan to continue exporting goods? Please explain. 15. Do you feel you will be able to sustain your export business with the support you have received so far? 16. If you need additional support for your business do you know how to access this support? 17. Given your participation in the NEXTT Project, what are some strategic recommendations you would give for similar projects targeting Trade and Transport in Nigeria? QUESTIONS FOR BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT SERVICE PROVIDERS 1. Can you please describe any support you have received from the NEXTT activity to provide business development services to firms in the Agricultural sector (Probe: business linkages, capacity building to identify business opportunities within a market system/value chain, value chain analysis etc.). How has this support impacted on your business? 2. Were you providing support to firms in this sector before your engagement with NEXTT? Please describe the kind of service you have provided to firms in the agricultural sector. 3. Have you been able to use the support you have received from NEXTT to provide BD service to any firm in the Agricultural sector? Please explain how (you have facilitated access to credit and finance for MSMEs, including access to the Project Development Facility). How many businesses have you supported? 4. What skills and techniques have you gained that you didn’t have before? 5. What challenges if any, have you faced in your provision of BD services to firms in this sector? How were the challenges resolved? 6. So far, do you believe providing BD services to firms in the agricultural sector is profitable/beneficial to your business - please compare to your provision of BD services to firms in other sectors you work with, including the number of firms served and the average price paid for services in comparison with the agricultural sector. Are firms in the agricultural sector willing and able to pay for BD services? 7. Do you see yourself providing/continuing to provide BD services to firms in the agricultural sector in the future? Please explain your reasons. 8. Would you be able to identify funding sources and other business opportunities without support from NEXTT? Please explain how you would do this. 9. Do you believe the activities organized by NEXTT in which you have participated will lead to improved capacity to trade in Nigeria? Please explain. 77 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY 10. Given your participation in the NEXTT Project, what are some strategic recommendations you would give for similar projects targeting Trade and Transport in Nigeria? QUESTIONS FOR NIGERIA EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL 1. Can you please describe your partnership with NEXTT (Probe: development of investment promotion strategy, on international trade procedures, AGOA desk capacity support, etc., capacity building)? Is the partnership aligned with the priority/areas of interest of the Council? What changes, if any, have been made to the Council’s processes as a result of this partnership (Probe: any changes to support provided to local firms for exports etc.)? Have learnings from the partnership been operationalized? How has the partnership impacted on the operations of the Council? What skills and techniques has the council gained that it didn’t have before? What plans does the council have to scale up the support received to increase export capacities? How has the capacity building efforts by NEXTT affected exports and interactions with other key players in government, financial sector, as well as the trade and agricultural sector? Are there any challenges you currently face that could limit your capacity to translate the technical skills, business support and export capacity building to implement support received from NEXTT? What forms of support would have been the most beneficial but were not provided to the council? What specific benefits have accrued to the council as a result of your participation in capacity building efforts under the NEXTT project? What other forms of support (beyond those provided under the NEXTT project) would you have found useful? Has the support contributed to the enactment of new policies or laws? Does the Council need further support in-order-to implement/sustain areas in which capacities have been built by NEXTT, or is it is now equipped to implement/sustain these areas? 2. What do you think about the role NEXTT has played in export reforms? In your opinion, what impact has their role had on the business environment/facilitating trade for exports? Do you believe the activities organized by NEXTT in which you have participated will lead to improved capacity to trade in Nigeria? Please explain Do you believe changes that have occurred will persist after the Project ends? What more should Trade and Investment Projects like NEXTT do to ensure the buy-in of relevant stakeholders and sustainability? 3. Given your participation in the NEXTT Project, what are some strategic recommendations you would give for similar projects targeting Trade and Transport in Nigeria? QUESTIONS FOR NEXTT PROJECT STAFF AND IMPLEMENTING PARTNER 78 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY 1. What was the overall strategic approach for implementing the Project? How were interventions identified? (Probe: feasibility or scoping studies conducted (research) How were they designed? Were gender considerations made in intervention design? How? How were women selected/mobilized to participate in NEXTT’s activities? What role did NEXTT play to ensure women were supported by its activities? Were key stakeholders involved in the design of interventions? Please explain how they were involved and which stakeholders were involved. How were the approaches to solving issues identified selected? What local adaptations were involved? Did the interventions change over time? If so, how and why? How were interventions managed? What worked and what did not work? How were partners selected? What was the rationale for partners selected? What worked with partners and what did not work? Which other donor projects were involved in implementing the project? What was their level of involvement? What contributions did they make? What measures were taken to ensure sustainability and why? 2. How many subcontractors worked on this Project? What contributions did other subcontractors make to the implementation of the project? 3. What challenges did the Project face in achieving its overall objectives? How were they overcome? 4. What key factors drove project performance? 5. How did learning from monitoring and results inform the management approach? 6. What lessons have been learned by NEXTT and how have they been shared? 7. Given your participation in the NEXTT Project, what are some strategic recommendations you would give for similar projects targeting Trade and Transport in Nigeria? 8. What did the Project do to reduce the costs and time of trading in the LAKAJI corridor (what specific activities led to the reduction)? GROUP DISCUSSION GUIDES BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT SERVICE PROVIDERS (BDSPS)/BDOS/BUSINESSES 1. Please describe the support you received from the NEXTT project? What skills and techniques have you gained that you didn’t have before? How has the support provided by NEXTT helped your capacity to source new funds and attract new financiers to your venture? 79 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY Were you able to support any businesses as a result of the support provided by NEXTT? Please describe your experience with supporting businesses. Was it profitable? Are you willing to continue doing it? How are you planning to do this after NEXTT ends? 2. How have you utilized skills (presentation skills for funding requests) gained under NEXTT (such as in the Growth and Economic States Sponsored Forum)? 3. Have you used any of the model business development plans distributed by NIPC, SMEDAN, and NASPAN on specific produce (e.g. shea butter, Biodiesel, Oleoresin) to support businesses for business expansion? 4. What were the challenges of working with public agencies in creating partnerships with financial institutions, venture capitalists and foreign investors before your engagement with NEXTT? 5. How would you describe your experience with working with financial institutions, government agencies and foreign investors as a beneficiary of the NEXTT project now? 6. Do you think the different forms of support you received addressed your most critical needs? 7. What do you think needs to be improved for better translation of skills and support provided under the PDF for increased business development and financing generation? 8. What do you think about the role NEXTT has played in the trade sector in Nigeria? In your opinion, what impact has their role had on the business environment/facilitating trade? Do you believe any changes that have occurred will persist after the Project ends? 9. Do you believe the activities organized by NEXTT in which you have participated will lead to improved capacity to trade in Nigeria? Please explain how support to you will impact businesses and trade in Nigeria. What forms of support or technical assistance or capacity building support would you recommend for future programs focused on the trade and transport sectors in Nigeria? What more should Trade and Investment Projects like NEXTT do to ensure the buy-in of relevant stakeholders and sustainability? 10. Given your participation in the NEXTT Project, what are some strategic recommendations you would give for similar projects targeting Trade and Transport in Nigeria? BUSINESSES (EXPORT, CROSS-REGIONAL TRADE) 1. What distances/states do you generally transport your goods between in the region? What is the typical average number of days for a single journey to transport your goods over this distance? What forms of fees or levies do you pay while transporting goods along the LAKAJI corridor? How much do these fees/levies cost in total? 2. Has doing business in the corridor evolved over the past 2 years? If yes how has it evolved; what changes (positive and negative) have occurred? Have the trading costs (transport, fees and levies (number and cost) on the corridor changed (how?) - on average what was it before, what is it now? Why has it changed? 80 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY Has the time to transport goods along on the corridor changed (how?) - on average what was it before, what is it now? Why has it changed? Is there any difference in the number (new businesses coming in) and type of businesses that operate in the region; as well as changes in the scope of existing businesses? Any change in the number of road-blocks manned by security agencies along the LAKAJI trade route? Any change in the LAKAJI road network? What changes? Could you provide examples of how infrastructure along the corridor (such as ICT, warehousing, cold storage etc.) has changed (if at all)? What factors are responsible for these changes in the corridor? 3. How has the steering committee to drive the LAKAJI Investment Initiative been functioning? What are some of its achievements? What challenges has it faced in facilitating new investments along the LAKAJI corridor? 4. Have you started new lines of businesses or expanded your current venture? What factors supported or impeded the expansion of your business? Where did you get credit or financing from? 5. Are you aware of the Project Development Facility? Have you accessed it or tried to access it? Did you face any challenges? What was your experience? If you have not accessed it, do you know how to access the facility if you want to? 6. Has there been any change in government policies which affect your business? What changes have you noticed? What caused this change? What government trade policies support your job or business? Have they always been in place or were they recently instituted? Have you noticed any change in the charge and diversity of fees and charges collected on trade? What change and how has this change in the charge and diversity of fees and charges collected on trade impacted your business? 7. Did you receive international certifications for export as a result of support from NEXTT? Please describe how you received it - e.g. were you seeking it before and how did NEXTT facilitate it? How has the award of international certifications impacted on your business’ capacity to export to foreign markets? Have these certifications had any effect on your credibility with lenders or business relationships? If yes, how? What other forms of opportunity did you expect these certifications to procure for your business, but have not happened? 8. What new markets have you identified due to the support provided under the NEXTT Project? 9. In the past 24 months, have you expanded your business or commenced any new product lines? 81 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY Have you received any support that has helped your venture in facilitating new or increased businesses in foreign markets? How have the conferences, workshops and conferences helped in facilitating engagement with similar ventures in other West African countries? Have you received any form of financial, regulatory or technical support based on a reference from the NEXTT Project? Has there been a change in your interaction with domestic banks on export financing? What change? 10. How would you describe the availability of new forms of financing for the shea and cashew sector? Please do indicate if your business, organization or agency have gained access to the new financing opportunity/market access? Have you, been able to take advantage of provisions of the AGOA for export to the US? If Yes, in what forms? If No, what were the limitations? Do you think the construction of a state-owned model shea processing center would have any effect on the shea sector? Please give reasons for your opinion? 11. What forms of new information would be beneficial to increase your export capacity or for export promotion? Are there new research studies you would suggest be undertaken? In your opinion, what could have been done better by NEXTT in the form of capacity building, technical assistance, and network opportunities provided to beneficiary businesses, government agencies? In your opinion, what were the key successes in the business support, capacity building or technical assistance that NEXTT provided to your venture? What do you think about the role NEXTT has played in the trade in Nigeria? To what degree would you infer that the NEXTT project contributed to Nigeria’s assent to the TFA? Do you believe the activities organized by NEXTT in which you have participated will lead to improved capacity to trade in Nigeria? Please explain What forms of support or technical assistance or capacity building support would you recommend for future programs focused on the trade and transport sectors in Nigeria? What more should Trade and Investment Projects like NEXTT do to ensure the buy-in of relevant stakeholders and sustainability? 12. Given your participation in the NEXTT Project, what are some strategic recommendations you would give for similar projects targeting Trade and Transport in Nigeria? BUSINESSES (PDF RECIPIENTS) 1. Can you please describe your engagement with NEXTT? What support did you receive from them? Have learnings from the engagement been operationalized? How? How did the support impact your business? 82 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY What skills and techniques did you gain that you didn’t have before? 2. Please describe the specific support you received regarding the Project Development Facility? Have you accessed the facility? If you have, how has the Project Development Facility benefited you or your business? Were you able to get more financing as a result of the PDF? What forms of financing have you received and from where? Is funding or credit easier to get based on the new skills and other competencies provided under the PDF? 3. What have you used the support provided under the PDF for? Have you started new lines of businesses or expanded your current venture? 4. Has there been any change in government policies which affect your business? What changes have you noticed? What government trade policies support your job or business? Have they always been in place or were they recently instituted? Have you noticed any change in the charge and diversity of fees and charges collected on trade? What change and how has this change in the charge and diversity of fees and charges collected on trade impacted your business? 5. What do you think about the role NEXTT has played in the trade sector in Nigeria? In your opinion, what impact has their role had on the business environment/facilitating trade? Do you believe any changes that have occurred will persist after the Project ends? Do you believe the activities organized by NEXTT in which you have participated will lead to improved capacity to trade in Nigeria? Please explain What forms of support or technical assistance or capacity building support would you recommend for future programs focused on the trade and transport sectors in Nigeria? What more should Trade and Investment Projects like NEXTT do to ensure the buy-in of relevant stakeholders and sustainability? 6. Given your participation in the NEXTT Project, what are some strategic recommendations you would give for similar projects targeting Trade and Transport in Nigeria? 83 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY ANNEX VI: TRADE FACILITATION INDICATORS 27 Table 8. Trade Facilitation Indicators INDICATORS DESCRIPTION Advance Ruling Prior statements by the administration to requesting traders concerning classification, origin, valuation method, etc., applied to specific goods at the time of importation, the rules and processes applied to such statements. Appeal Procedures The possibility and modalities to appeal administrative decisions by border agencies. Cooperation - External Cooperation with neighboring and third countries. Cooperation - Internal Cooperation between various border agencies of the country; control delegation to custom authorities. Fees and Charges Disciplines on the fees and charges imposed on imports and exports. Formalities - Automation Electronic exchange of data; automated border procedures; use of risk management. Formalities - Documents Simplification of trade documents; harmonization in accordance with international standards; acceptance of copies. Governance and Impartiality Customs structures and functions; accountability; ethics policy. Information Availability Publication of trade information, including on internet; enquiry points. Involvement of the Trade Community Consultations with traders. 27 Culled from the OECD Trade Facilitation Indicators: http://www.oecd.org/trade/facilitation/indicators.htm. 84 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY ANNEX VII: REFERENCES Federal Government of Nigeria, “Guidelines for Commercial Agriculture Credit Scheme.” Guidelines for Commercial Agriculture Credit Scheme, CBN, 20 May 2014. www.cbn.gov.ng/out/2014/dfd/cacs percent20guidelines percent20new-14th percent20may percent202014.pdf Global Agricultural Information Network (GAIN) Report. https://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent percent20GAIN percent20Publications/Nigeria percent20Inaugurates percent20Committees percent20for percent20Food percent20Safety percent20Management_Lagos_Nigeria_2-17-2015.pdf Ito, Junichi, et al. “Distributional effects of agricultural cooperatives in China: Exclusion of smallholders and potential gains on participation.” Food Policy, vol. 37, no. 6, 2012, pp. 700– 709, doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2012.07.009. Jia, Xiangping, et al. “Marketing of farmer professional cooperatives in the wave of transformed agrofood market in China.” China Economic Review, vol. 23, no. 3, 2012, pp. 665–674., doi:10.1016/j.chieco.2010.07.001. Kazeem, Yomi. “Is It Really Easier To Do Business in Nigeria?” Quartz, 6 Nov. 2017, qz.com/1117210/is-it-really-any-easier-to-do-business-in-nigeria/. “Nigeria Interest Rate 2007-2017 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast.” Nigeria Interest Rate | 2007- 2017 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast, Trading Economics, tradingeconomics.com/nigeria/interest-rate. OECD Trade Facilitation Indicators, OECD, www.oecd.org/trade/facilitation/indicators.htm. “Secured Transaction in Movable Assets Act 2017.” PLAC, The Nigerian Senate, placng.org/wp/2017/06/secured-transactions-in-movable-assets-act-2017/. Key Informant Interviews with NEXTT Beneficiaries NEXTT Project Documents Roundtable Discussions with NEXTT Beneficiaries 85 | FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF USAID/NIGERIA NEXTT ACTIVITY ANNEX VIII: PROJECT DOCUMENTS 1. NEXTT Project Annual Reports (Year 1-Year 5) 2. NEXTT Project Annual Work Plans (Year 1-Year 5) 3. NEXTT Project Quarterly Reports (Year 1-Year 5) 4. NEXTT 2013 Baseline Assessment Report 5. NEXTT 2015 LAKAJI Corridor Performance Assessment Report 6. NEXTT Mid-term Performance Evaluation Report 7. NEXTT PDF Process Overview 8. NEXTT PDF Investment Update 9. NEXTT Beneficiary Database 10. NEXTT PDF Statement of Work 11. NEXTT Contribution to National Output 12. Modification to NEXTT Contract Document 13. USAID/Nigeria Country Development Cooperation Strategy