Evaluation of the Transforming the 
Assessment and Inspection of Food 
Businesses (TAIB) in Egypt Project
Midterm Evaluation
11/5/2021
DISCLAIMER: This publication was produced at the request of the United States Department of 
Agriculture. It was prepared by an independent third-party evaluation firm. The author’s views 
expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Department of 
Agriculture or the United States Government.
Evaluation of the Transforming the Assessment and Inspection 
of Food Businesses (TAIB) in Egypt Project
Agreement Number: FCC-263-2018/003-00
Funding Year: Fiscal Year 2018
Project Duration: September 30, 2018 – June 30, 2024
Implemented by: Land O’Lakes Venture37
Evaluation Authored by: Clifford Zinnes, Ali Protik, Ridhi Sahai, and Jessica Wallach
Acknowledgement 
This report would not have been possible without the efforts and contributions from a number of 
people. First, we would like to thank our colleagues at Land O’Lakes Venture37 for providing valuable 
information regarding the TAIB project that were key in our planning, data collection, and analysis. We 
are especially grateful for the inputs and comments we received from Meredith Saggers, Alexander 
Samel, Khaled Abdel Monem, and Sadie Paschke at various stages of this report. We are grateful for the 
superb qualitative data collection efforts by Zeinab Khadr from Cairo University and Mohamed Hassan 
Hosni from American University at Cairo. Finally, we would like to thank Sewit Tesfaselassie for her 
diligence in formatting the report.
Table of Contents Acknowledgement......................................................................................................................................... i
Table of Contents.......................................................................................................................................... ii
List of Acronyms........................................................................................................................................... iv
Executive Summary....................................................................................................................................... v
Project Background and Purpose.............................................................................................................. v
Evaluation Questions, Design, Methods and Limitations......................................................................... v
Findings: Trade Analysis........................................................................................................................... vi
Findings: Performance Evaluation .......................................................................................................... vii
Recommendations.................................................................................................................................. vii
1. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................1
1.1. Background: Country Context.......................................................................................................1
1.2. Food-Inspection Practices Prior to the TAIB Project.....................................................................3
1.3. Food Safety in Egypt......................................................................................................................3
1.4. The Egypt TAIB Project..................................................................................................................4
1.5. Theory of Change..........................................................................................................................5
1.6. Overview of Evaluation Methods and Questions.........................................................................6
2. Midline Analysis of Trade......................................................................................................................8
2.1. Impacts on Exports and Imports...................................................................................................8
2.1.1 Outcome Indicators and Data Sources ........................................................................................8
2.1.2 Methodological Approach............................................................................................................9
2.1.3 Findings: Prediction Accuracy of the Counterfactual.................................................................12
2.1.4 Findings: Impact of TAIB on Exports and Imports......................................................................16
2.2. Movement toward increasing trade ...........................................................................................20
2.3. Mitigating COVID-19 bias from trade-impact estimates ............................................................21
3. Performance Evaluation......................................................................................................................22
3.1. Methodology...............................................................................................................................22
3.1.1 Data Sources for the Performance Evaluation...........................................................................22
3.1.2 Data Collection and Analysis......................................................................................................23
3.2. Performance Evaluation Findings ...............................................................................................24
3.2.1 Alignment with Key Stakeholders..............................................................................................24
iii
3.2.2 Progress and Impacts of TAIB activities and Effectiveness in Reaching Targets........................26
3.2.3 Evaluation of TAIB efficiency......................................................................................................35
3.2.4 Key Success Factors and Challenges for the TAIB project..........................................................36
3.2.5 Sustainability of TAIB Project Activities.....................................................................................39
4. Conclusions and Recommendations...................................................................................................40
4.1 Trade Analysis Findings.....................................................................................................................40
4.2 Performance Evaluation Findings .....................................................................................................41
4.3 Recommendations............................................................................................................................42
Annex I. TAIB Performance Indicators and Targets for FY2021 and Life of the Project .............................44
Annex II. List of Treated and Untreated Categories....................................................................................46
Annex III. Supplement to Midline Trade Analysis.......................................................................................50
Annex to 2.1.2: Econometric estimation of ITSPO framework impact estimates..................................50
Annex to 2.1.3: Prediction accuracy of counterfactual for country-level matching...............................52
Annex to 2.2: Movement toward increasing trade................................................................................54
Annex to 2.3: Mitigating COVID-19 bias from trade-impact estimates.................................................56
Annex IV. Data Collection Tools..................................................................................................................60
NFSA KII Questionnaire - Midline............................................................................................................60
TAIB Staff KII Questionnaire - Midline ....................................................................................................62
Chamber of Food Industries KII Questionnaire - Midline .......................................................................65
3rd Party Certification Companies KII Questionnaire - Midline...............................................................67
Food Businesses KII Questionnaire – Midline.........................................................................................69
USDA: KII Questionnaire – Midline .........................................................................................................71
FGD Guide for NFSA Inspectors - Midline...............................................................................................73
Annex V. COVID-19 Safety Protocols..........................................................................................................76
iv
List of Acronyms Acronym Full Term
CFI Chamber of Food Industry
DID Difference-in-differences model
FDA US Food and Drug Administration
FE Final Evaluation
FGD Focus group discussion
GDP Gross domestic product
GOE Government of Egypt
HS Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding Systems
IFPTI International Food Protection Training Institute
ITSPO Interrupted time-series analysis within potential outcomes
KII Key informant interview
MTE Midterm evaluation
NFSA National Food Safety Authority
NORC National Opinion Research Center
SITCSITC Standard international trade classification
SOP Standard Operating Procedure
TAIB Transforming the Assessment and Inspection of Food Businesses in Egypt
UNSD United Nations Statistics Division
USDA The United States Department of Agriculture
USG United States Government
v
Executive Summary 
Project Background and Purpose 
In Egypt, until as recently as 2016, oversight of food laws and regulations was spread across 17 agencies 
and 7 ministries. The responsibilities of each agency were overlapping, leading to inefficiencies and 
inconsistencies in enforcement. On January 2, 2017, the Parliament of Egypt passed law number 1/2017 
establishing the National Food Safety Authority (NFSA) and on February 19, 2019, the government 
issued and published NFSA’s Executive Regulations, promulgating the agency’s authority. The law and 
executive regulations empower NFSA with the sole mandate to control and regulate food in Egypt, over￾seeing food safety from harvest to the Egyptian consumer. NFSA’s main responsibilities include food law 
and regulation harmonization, establishment of industry-specific protocols for regulations, food-industry 
inspection and approvals, risk assessments, crisis management, and consumer outreach.
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is supporting the development of NFSA through the 
Food for Progress Program: Transforming the Assessment and Inspection of Food Businesses in Egypt 
(Egypt TAIB), awarded in 2018 and implemented by Land O’ Lakes Venture37 (Venture37) and the 
International Food Protection Training Institute (IFPTI). The program was originally 5 years but has been 
extended to five-years and 9 months, with a budget of $8.5 million. Egypt TAIB is implemented through 
three distinct activities that is designed to: 1) enhance the organizational capacity of NFSA, including 
supporting the creation of administrative and regulatory policies and procedures; 2) develop a 
workforce training program for NFSA modeled after USDA and the US Food and Drug Administration 
(FDA), leveraging existing training curricula offered throughout the US to food safety regulatory 
personnel; and 3) promote improved policy and regulatory frameworks, to align Egypt’s food safety 
standards with international best practices that promote increased trade. The TAIB project is expected 
to result in expanding the domestic and international trade of Egyptian food products.
Evaluation Questions, Design, Methods and Limitations 
Venture37 has contracted NORC @ the University of Chicago to conduct the evaluation of the Egypt 
TAIB project. To evaluate the TAIB project, NORC employed a mixed-method approach with quasi-exper￾imental and non-experimental designs. In particular, we are using two separate evaluation methods:
(1) Macro-level evaluation: quasi-experimental interrupted time-series analysis within a potential 
outcomes framework (ITSPTO) using trade data to examine impacts of TAIB on the values of 
exports and imports for the food subsectors that are subject to NFSA oversight.
(2) Performance evaluation: assessments based on document reviews, reviews of project 
monitoring data and assessment tools, key informant interviews, and focus group discussions.
We conduct a quasi-experimental impact evaluation to determine whether we can detect changes in the values 
of exports and imports that can be attributed to the TAIB project. The evaluation design requires comparing
actual trade to its counterfactual, that is, whattrade would have been without the TAIB intervention. The 
approach involves comparing trade values of specific product categories subject to NFSA inspection – the 
intervention group – to counterfactual values synthesized from trade categories not regulated by NFSA but 
containing products with characteristics of differing degrees of similarity to those in the intervention group –
vi
the comparison group. The latter synthesis is carried out using a statistical matching technique. This approach is 
called the interrupted time-series analysis within a potential outcomes (ITSPO) framework.
During the midline, we also conducted a non-experimental performance evaluation using document 
reviews, key informant interviews (KIIs) and focus-group discussions (FGDs). The goal of the performance 
evaluation is to provide a wholistic account of TAIB project’s progress on its activities to date, assesses its 
impacts, and how it has performed against its targets. We also examine the success factors to TAIB’s 
performance, key challenges that it faced, and the extent to which the TAIB activities are sustainable. 
Findings: Trade Analysis 
We analyze the impacts on TAIB on Egyptian exports and imports based on two outcome indicators1
:
• Value (in millions of 2010 constant US Dollars) of exports; and
• Values (in millions of 2010 constant US Dollars) of imports.
The data on trade flows come from the United Nations International Trade Statistics Database or UN
Comtrade Database (https://comtrade.un.org/data/), the largest depository of international trade data,
where data on the trade values (in US dollars) and volumes (net weight) of various commodities (including
food products) are available on a quarterly and annual basis. This database, going back as far as 1962, is
maintained by the United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD), to whom over 170 countries report annual
international trade statistics data detailed by partner countries and commodities/service categories.
The findings from the trade analysis are summarized below:
• TAIB has had an impact on exports in 2019 that were almost 12-percent higher than what they 
would have been had TAIB not been implemented. This effect translates into a US$ increase in 
exports of almost 293 million (constant 2010).
• TAIB has had an impact on imports in 2019 that were ten-percent higher than what they 
would have been had TAIB not been implemented. This effect translates into a US$ increase in 
imports of almost one billion (constant 2010).
Thus, TAIB had an attributable impact of US$ 1.25 billion on total trade of NFSA-regulated products in 
2019 (10.4% higher than what they would have been had TAIB not been implemented).
• TAIB’s has had an impact on exports in 2020 that were almost 8-percent higher than what they 
would have been had TAIB not been implemented and the COVID-19 pandemic not occurred. 
This effect translates into a US$ increase in exports of almost 185 million (constant 2010).
• TAIB’s impact on imports in 2020 is uncertain. Despite the evaluation team’s best effort, we 
could not calculate a credible estimate for TAIB’s impact on imports in 2020. The issue may be 
that some of the comparison imports experienced infrequent trade flows over the analysis 
period, resulting in significant volatility. 
One of the biggest challenges facing the present impact evaluation is that the onset of the pandemic 
took place between the start-up of TAIB and (for now) the midline. This requires that we statistically dis￾entangle the COVID-19 effects on Egypt’s trade flows from those of TAIB for detecting actual impacts on 
1At baseline, we used trade volumes as additional outcomes. However, our exploration of the available data for 
the volume of trade indicated that the data is of poor quality and any analysis conducted with trade volume as the 
outcome indicator will not be reliable. As such, we recommended and agreed with USDA to use trade values as the 
only outcome indicator for the midline and endline analysis.
vii
trade. While we developed analytic tests to disentangle the TAIB effects from the COVID effects, key 
data elements from 2020 and 2021 required to carry out the tests were not publicly available at this 
time. While we have more confidence in the impact estimates for 2019, we recommend caution in using 
and interpreting the impacts estimates for 2020.
Findings: Performance Evaluation 
TAIB has made significant progress in almost all activity areas against its targets for Activity 1, 
institutional capacity building. TAIB developed an assessment tool to track the progress in increasing 
NFSA institutional capacity that the evaluation team found very useful. By the end of project year 3, the
score exceeded the Project Year 3 target and represents 85.7% of the target for the life of the project. One 
of the significant achievements in this activity was the development of inspection protocols.
TAIB successfully developed trainings and adopted a train-the-trainer approach that was lauded by 
NFSA staff, inspectors, and other trainees. TAIB brought, for the first time, a suite of food safety 
training programs approved by the FDA to a foreign food competent authority leveraging the expertise 
of American food safety professionals to strengthen Egypt’s food inspectorate workforce. Although the 
COVID-19 pandemic was disruptive, TAIB was able to continue work on activities thanks to pre￾pandemic investments in digitization and further measures such as setting up institutional zoom 
accounts for NFSA staff and creating an online Learning Management Platform (LMS) to continue 
trainings digitally. TAIB has been able to train close to 1,500 people in many different areas over the life 
of the project. Although the project is on track to meet its year 3 target, it must accelerate the rate of 
training to meet the target of training 2,821 people by project’s end. 
TAIB’s support has been enormously impactful in the realm of policies and regulations. As of the first 
half of year 3, TAIB has achieved the passage of 12 policies, regulations, and administrative procedures, 
that surpassed the original target. The most significant regulations supported by TAIB was Decision No. 7 
of 2020, which was the technical regulation for the risk-based design of food import control, and 
Decision No. 13 of the Year 2020, which removed Egypt’s zero tolerance on Ractopamine.
The flexibility of the TAIB project has been a key factor in the success of the project despite the 
challenge of frequently pivoting strategies and priorities. Expanding the reach of the project to the 
Chamber of Food Industries (CFI), shortening the duration of plans submitted to NFSA, and forging 
strong working relationships with mid-level NFSA staff have been effective strategies to ensure progress.
There are substantial internal and external challenges that may impede the progress of the project 
and/or impact its sustainability. There remains a lack of cultural awareness around food safety in the 
broader Egyptian community that hampers both the inspection process and the general demand for safe 
products.
Recommendations 
Continue to work with the entire system of stakeholders such as CFI to lay the groundwork for 
implementation of new regulations and policies. This was an effective strategy for TAIB to continue 
improving food safety in Egypt despite external challenges outside of their control. This strategy is also 
important to create a conducive environment for new regulations to be implemented; the CFI is a key 
stakeholder that can facilitate communication between NFSA and the food industry.
viii
Increase the engagement of private sector stakeholders in the regulation development process with a system 
that allows them to comment on drafts and communicate more directly with NFSA. Improving feedback 
processes between NFSA and the food industry would help align regulations and policies with the needs and 
incentives of private businesses, which in turn will make their implementation smoother and more effective.
TAIB is already planning to develop standard operating procedures for new channels of communication, and 
this will be very helpful in facilitating businesses to register with NFSA and provide feedback.
Improve inspection trainings by including more demonstrations of application of theory. Inspectors 
explained that it was difficult to bridge theory and practice, and that the virtual format of trainingstook away 
opportunities for individual guidance. NFSA staff requested more videotaped trainings so their trainers can 
continue using them as resources past the end of the project.
Scale up consumer awareness activities around the importance of food safety, especially in agricultural 
regions where inspectors frequently work. Inspectors described confusion from business owners that did 
not understand why they were being asked to make improvements. This was especially an issue in more 
rural areas. TAIB should work with NFSA to better communicate with food businesses and raise awareness 
around food safety in the Egyptian community in general.
Continue to seek out and build relationships with middle management at NFSA. TAIB has implemented 
a strategy of building relationships and establishing technical working groups with middle management 
to spread out responsibilities. This has been a successful approach and should be continued to avoid 
delays and to keep work flowing as much as possible.
1
1.Introduction 
1.1. Background: Country Context 
Egypt has the largest population in the Arab world, 106,437,241 as of July 2021, and is a central power in 
the North Africa and Middle East region. It is also the third most populous country in Africa, behind 
Nigeria and Ethiopia.2 Despite multiple major political and economic crises since the turn of the century, 
from the global food price crisis of 2007/2008 to the Arab Spring political crisis in 2011, Egypt is growing 
economically and seeing an expansion of its middle class. Egypt’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per 
capita has risen from $7,744.7 (constant 2011 International $) in 2000 to $11,951.4 in 2020.3 Egypt has 
the advantage of a young and productive population; the median age in Egypt is 24.1 years, and the 
total labor force is 24.1 million people as of 2020 with an unemployment rate of 7.86% (as of 2019).4
Egypt’s population is also steadily urbanizing; in 2021 the urban population represented 42.9% of the 
total population and is predicted to grow at an annual rate of 1.9% between 2020 to 2025 (ibid). 
Both imports and exports of food are central to Egypt’s economy and the food and nutrition security of 
its citizens. Egypt relies on imports for over 50% of its food and agricultural product needs5 and is import 
dependent on certain staple goods like wheat. It is the world’s largest wheat importer with imports for 
the current 2020/21 marketing year estimated at 13.5 million tonnes.6 With a population of more than 
100 million that is growing at a rate of 2% per year, Egypt is the US’ largest food export market in Africa 
and the Middle East.7 The top exporters of food products to Egypt in 2019 were Brazil, Thailand, the 
United States, and France.8 The United States is the second largest agricultural supplier to Egypt with 
14% market share as of 2020; in 2020 the US exported $1.9 billion USD in agricultural products to 
Egypt.9 Looking ahead, strong economic growth and an expanding middle class will continue to increase 
demand for imported agricultural goods in Egypt. 
While Egypt imports much of its food, agriculture is also a key sector in the Egyptian economy. High 
levels of solar radiation, the Nile River, and counter-seasonality of production provide comparative 
advantages for Egypt’s agricultural sector. Egyptian producers export food goods primarily to other 
countries in the North Africa and Middle East region, the United States and Russia. US total imports of 
agricultural products from Egypt totaled $220 million in 2020, an increase of 22% from 2019.10 As of 
2 CIA World Factbook, Egypt https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/egypt/ 3 FAO Statistics: https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#home 4 CIA World Factbook, Egypt https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/egypt/ 5 USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, US Department of Agriculture, Egypt 2019 Export Highlights 
https://www.fas.usda.gov/egypt-2019-export-highlights 6 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Global Information and Early Warning System (GIEWS) 
https://www.fao.org/giews/countrybrief/country.jsp?code=EGY&lang=en 7 TAIB Policy Brief: Effect of Egypt’s Modernized Food Import Control Strategy on U.S. Exporters & Producers by 
Sydney Maanibe and Alex Samel, Land O’Lakes Venture37 (Link). 8 World Bank World Integrated Trade Solution Statistics (WITS), Food Products Imports and Exports, Egypt, Arab 
Rep. 2019 https://wits.worldbank.org/CountryProfile/en/Country/EGY/Year/2019/TradeFlow/Export/ 9 USDA Foreign Agricultural Service Egypt 2020 Export Highlights, https://www.fas.usda.gov/egypt-2020-export￾highlights
10 American Chamber of Commerce in Egypt Webinar: “US-Egypt-Partnership, and the outlook for 2021”, 
https://dailynewsegypt.com/2021/02/23/egypts-agricultural-exports-to-us-rise-22-to-220m-in-2020/
2
2020, the agriculture sector contributed 11.3% of Egypt’s gross domestic product, and accounted for 
28% of all jobs, and over 55% of employment in Upper Egypt.11 Main agricultural products produced 
include sugar cane, sugar beet, wheat, maize, tomatoes, rice, potatoes, oranges, onions, and milk.12
Egypt’s young, large, and growing population provides a large and growing market for convenience and 
quality differentiated retail foods sold through the country’s approximately 119,000 grocery retailers, 
including formal and informal businesses. Grocery retailers grew in number by 4.3% over the past five 
years (2015-2020). Traditional grocery retailers still represent 96.6% of total grocery retailers’ outlets in 
Egypt, with sales estimated at $25.1 billion, about 74% of total sector sales. (ibid) It was also anticipated at 
the inception of the project that the number of food-processing and manufacturing companies in Egypt is 
likely to grow beyond the current 7,000 as a result of the country’s growing population with a taste for 
processed foods, as well as increasing demand from the 339 million consumers in the Middle-East region 
that these companies supply.13
The COVID-19 pandemic was tremendously harmful for Egypt’s economy. A 2020 report from the 
International Food Policy Research Institute estimated pandemic-related losses in Egypt’s agri-food 
system at about $611 million USD (EGP 9.6 billion).14 However, most of these losses are in food services 
sectors, especially those related to tourism15 The government responded to COVID-19 by suspending all 
flights and shutting down hotels, restaurants, and cafes in March 2020 and the Egyptian Center for 
Economic Studies estimated losses from the tourism sector at one billion US dollars per month.16
However, the agriculture sector has been the most resilient component of Egypt’s food system during 
the pandemic with estimated increases in output at about $191 million USD (3 billion EGP). (ibid). This is 
due in large part to increased exports and some substitution of domestic production for imports. 
Despite this substitution, imports of staple foods remained steady during the pandemic; between July 
2020 and June 2021, wheat imports grew by 1.57% from the 2019/2020 marketing year, and in the same 
time period corn imports grew by 4.76% from the 2019/2020 marketing year.17 In terms of exports, total 
agricultural exports actually increased during the pandemic; according to a report from the Central Plant 
Quarantine Administration, total agricultural exports between January and July 2021 totaled 4.0179 
million tons, a 15% increase from the total volume exported during the same period of 2020.18 This is 
11 US Agency for International Development Egypt Fact Sheet for Agriculture, 
https://www.usaid.gov/egypt/agriculture-and-food-security 12 CIA World Factbook, Egypt https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/egypt/ 13 USDA Foreign Agricultural Service (2017). GAIN Retail Foods 2017 Annual:
https://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent%20GAIN%20Publications/Retail%20Foods_Cairo_Egypt_12-21-2017.pdf 14 Breisinger, Clemens; Raouf, Mariam; Wiebelt, Manfred; Kamaly, Ahmed; and Karara, Mouchera. 2020. Impact of 
COVID-19 on the Egyptian economy: Economic sectors, jobs, and households. MENA Policy Note 6. Washington, 
DC: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). https://doi.org/10.2499/p15738coll2.133764 15 Salem IE, Elkhwesky Z, Ramkissoon H. A content analysis for government’s and hotels’ response to COVID-19 
pandemic in Egypt. Tourism and Hospitality Research. April 2021. doi:10.1177/14673584211002614
16 CGTN (2020) Egyptian tourism bets on domestic tourists to reduce COVID-19 impacts. Available at: 
https://news.cgtn.com/news/2020-05-07/Egyptian-tourism-bets-on-domestic-tourists-to-reduce-COVID-19-
impacts-Qi8FyE6TW8/index.html 17 Egypt: Despite the COVID-19 Pandemic, Egypt’s Wheat and Corn Imports Hold Steady – Grain and Feed Update 
2020, https://www.fas.usda.gov/data/egypt-despite-covid-19-pandemic-egypt-s-wheat-and-corn-imports-hold￾steady-grain-and-feed 18 https://www.freshplaza.com/article/9336384/egypt-agri-exports-up-to-4-million-tons-from-january-to-june/
3
due to pandemic impacts in competing countries that export to the Arab and East Asia regions, namely 
India and Pakistan.19
1.2. Food-Inspection Practices Prior to the TAIB Project 
Prior to the establishment of NFSA in 2017, oversight of food safety laws and regulations was spread 
across 17 agencies and 7 ministries in Egypt. The responsibilities of each agency were overlapping,
leading to inefficiencies and inconsistencies in enforcement. Additionally, Egypt’s technical regulations 
around food safety were outdated, complex, and generally not based in current science.20 A mandatory 
100% sampling rate at the border was a barrier to trade, especially for importers (ibid). While large food 
companies had the resources and expertise to comply with international best practices, small and 
informal businesses did not always implement standardized food safety systems. Some food industry 
businesses were visited multiple times by inspectors from different agencies and given contradictory 
findings, and some regulations were not enforced. The distribution of responsibilities across different 
agencies sometimes limited investment in modernizing practices, reduced incentives for private sector 
compliance and contributed to a poorly informed industry and consumer base. 
1.3. Food Safety in Egypt 
Poor food safety can have a significant negative human and financial impact on an economy. This effect 
can be insidious and difficult to measure, as the health consequences of food safety pathogens can 
range from mild to life-threatening and are highly variable given the diversity of micro-organisms that 
are harmful to humans. However, numerous recent food safety studies in Egypt point to persistent 
problems with such pathogens, often caused by preventable hygiene issues. A 2021 study published in 
the Advances in Animal and Veterinary Sciences journal tested 100 samples of local and imported beef 
meat from El- Moneeb, El- Waraq and El- Basateen in Cairo and from Swiss canal, Aswan and Giza 
governorates and found that they were contaminated with several serovars of E. coli and Staph. aureus., 
as well as Salmonella in varying percentages.21 The authors concluded that this may be due to neglected 
sanitary measures adopted during slaughtering, dressing, evisceration, storage, transportation, and 
distribution of cattle carcasses. They recommended the application of Hazard Analysis and Critical 
Control Points (HACCP), a methodology that has been adopted by NFSA and one that the TAIB project 
has already trained some inspectors to use. 
Similarly, a 2021 study of shawarma from fast food restaurants in Dakahlia Governorate, Egypt found 
that histamine levels in most samples exceeded international acceptable limits, although they differed 
significantly based on the hygienic level of the restaurants.22 These food safety issues were not limited 
19 Korean Institute for Economic Policy Paper: Nashwa Mostafa Ali Mohamed, Egypt’s Trade During COVID-19 
Crisis: An Assessment of Responses and Implications, 
https://www.kiep.go.kr/galleryExtraDownload.es?bid=0026&list_no=9311&seq=7 20 TAIB Policy Brief: Effect of Egypt’s Modernized Food Import Control Strategy on U.S. Exporters & Producers by 
Sydney Maanibe and Alex Samel, Land O’Lakes Venture37 (Link). 21 Sayed HK, Tolba KS, Sobhy HM, Hekal SHA (2021). Assuring the safety of local and imported beef meat from 
different slaughterhouses in egypt. Adv. Anim. Vet. Sci. 9(9): 1472-1482.
DOI | http://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.aavs/2021/9.9.1472.1482 22 Khalid Ibrahim Sallam, Samar Elaraby Mohammed Morgan, Mohamed Zakaria Sayed-Ahmed, Saad Saeed 
Alqahtani, Samir Mohammed Abd-Elghany, Health hazard from exposure to histamine produced in ready-to-eat 
4
to meat; a 2020 study of fluid cream, Laban Rayeb, pasteurized milk, and ultra-high temperature milk 
produced in El Fayoum province, Egypt found high microbial counts of TBC, E.coli and S. aureus in the 
fluid cream that present a health hazard to consumers.23
The establishment of the NFSA and subsequent improvements in the enforcement of food safety 
regulations, as well as updated and improved regulations themselves, has the potential to address these 
problems and enhance public health outcomes for Egyptian consumers.
1.4. The Egypt TAIB Project 
Following nine years of collaboration among government ministries, parliamentarians, and the private 
sector, on January 2, 2017 the Parliament of Egypt passed law number 1/2017 establishing the National 
Food Safety Authority (NFSA). On February 19, 2019, the government issued and published NFSA’s 
Executive Regulations, promulgating the agency’s authority. The law and executive regulations empowers 
NFSA with the sole mandate to control and regulate food in Egypt, overseeing food safety from harvest to 
the Egyptian consumer. While transitioning the responsibilities from multiple governmental agencies 
presents short-term challenges with regard to the allocation of human and financial resources, in the long￾run, as the sole regulator of food within Egypt, NFSA should bring improved oversight, food safety, and 
increased trade to the country. NFSA’s main responsibilities include food law and regulation 
harmonization, establishment of industry-specific protocols for regulations, food-industry inspection and 
approvals, risk assessments, crisis management and consumer outreach.
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is supporting the development of NFSA through the 
Food for Progress Program: Transforming the Assessment and Inspection of Food Businesses in Egypt 
(Egypt TAIB), awarded in 2018 and implemented by Land O’ Lakes Venture37 (Venture37) and the 
International Food Protection Training Institute (IFPTI). The program was originally 5 years but has been 
extended to five-years and 9 months, with a budget of $8.5 million. 
Egypt TAIB’s implementation is organized into three categories of activity: 1) organizational capacity 
building for NFSA to allow it to grow sustainably and effectively to fulfill its mandate as the sole entity 
responsible for food safety in Egypt; 2) training programs for inspectors and other NFSA staff that 
include training of trainers and leverage existing curricula from the US Food and Drug Administration 
(FDA) and the Codex Alimentarius, a collection of food safety international standards, guidelines and 
codes of practice based in current science (from here on, CODEX); and 3) support for technical 
regulations and other regulatory measures to align them with international standards and improve 
clarity, transparency, and ease of implementation. Additionally, TAIB has worked with other 
stakeholders in the food safety space such as the Chamber of Food Industries to improve the 
implementation environment for new regulations, registration requirements and inspection protocols, 
and has produced numerous tools and publications (such as re-designing NFSA’s website, or publishing a 
brochure for consumers) to disseminate information about these changes and improve consumer 
shawarma widely consumed in Egypt, Journal of Food Composition and Analysis,Volume 97, 2021,103794, ISSN 
0889-1575, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2020.103794. 23 Zeinhom, Mohamed M. A. and Meshref, Arafa Meshref Soliman and Akl, Mohamed A. R. and Abdel-Rahman, Aya 
A. M., Bacteriological quality and safety of four fluid dairy products sold in El Fayoum governorate, Egypt, Future of 
Food: Journal on Food, Agriculture & Society,2020, doi:10.17170/kobra-202011192209
5
awareness of food safety. TAIB is expected to expanded domestic, Middle-East regional, and 
international trade.
Specifically, Egypt TAIB implements the following activities:
ACTIVITY 1. CAPACITY BUILDING: GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS. Egypt TAIB is building the capacity of 
NFSA to regulate and enforce food safety in Egypt. Egypt TAIB provides technical assistance to NFSA that 
includes developing inspection protocols, standard operting procedures (SOPs) to harmonize NFSA’s 
workflow, a code of ethics, job descriptions for needed positions, and trainings in administration, soft 
skills, and management for staff, as well as numerous other organizational capacity building activities in 
response to the evolving needs of the Authority.
ACTIVITY 2. TRAINING: FOOD SAFETY AND MANAGEMENT. Egypt TAIB has built a competency-based
curriculum framework tailored to NFSA and is using the framework to train a core cadre of senior-level
inspectors. TAIB will also use this framework to support NFSA to transition towards a risk-based
approach to inspection and support the development of food safety training courses to be offered at
local universities to prepare individuals for entry into the food safety regulatory profession.
ACTIVITY 3. CAPACITY BUILDING: PROMOTE IMPROVED POLICY AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS.
Egypt TAIB supports NFSA to modernize and harmonize its food safety legislation and technical
regulations with international standards and to promote compliance from the private sector. The central
reform on this front has been transitioning NFSA away from 100% consignment to a risk-based sampling
approach. TAIB has drafted many technical regulations that are in various stages of passage, including 12
that have been fully passed and are being implemented.
1.5. Theory of Change 
The expected result is an increase in domestic and international trade of Egyptian food products. The
theory of change shown in Figure 1, developed in consultation with TAIB staff at baseline by the
evaluation team, describes the pathways hypothesized to lead to increased exports/imports and
domestic sales of safer food products. These are the changes expected on the supply side following the
implementation of the project.
As a trained food-protection regulatory workforce conducts regular inspections, thereby enforcing new,
more-stringent food-safety standards according to an inspection policy and supported by technical
regulations, we anticipate businesses to change their perceptions of the likelihood of enforcement of
the food-safety regulations and fines for non-compliance. It may also lead to their overall perceptions of
the importance of food safety in general. Thus, the affected businesses are expected to increase their
awareness and knowledge of food-safety practices as well as compliance, changing the perceptions of
profitability of raising the safety of their food products, in the short run. This in turn may stimulate
investments in food safety practices and equipment in the medium or longer term.
Consequently, these investments should improve the safety of food produced and/or supplied through
the food value chain for domestic consumption and exports. Similarly, these investments should also
improve the safety of food products supplied to the domestic market through imports.
6
At the same time, the TAIB project will directly improve consumer awareness of the importance of food
safety through publications and improvements to NFSA’s website. Thus, demand for safer food products
will be positively affected as a result of the project. Improved demand of consumers for food safety will
further incentivize businesses to improve the food safety of their products. Eventually, the changes in
both the supply and the demand sides will complement and reinforce each other to increase and sustain
the sales of safer food products within and outside of Egypt.
Figure 1: Theory of Change – TAIB Project
1.6. Overview of Evaluation Methods and Questions 
Venture37 has contracted NORC @ the University of Chicago to conduct the baseline, midterm 
evaluation (MTE), and final evaluation (FE) of the Egypt TAIB project. To evaluate the TAIB project, we
employ a mixed-method approach with quasi-experimental and non-experimental designs. In particular, 
we are using two separate evaluation methods:
(1) Macro-level evaluation: quasi-experimental interrupted time-series analysis within a potential 
outcomes framework (ITSPTO) using trade data to examine impacts of TAIB on the values of 
exports and imports for the food subsectors that are subject to NFSA oversight; 
(2) Performance evaluation: assessments based on document reviews, reviews of project 
monitoring data and assessment tools, key informant interviews, and focus group discussions.
This evaluation will answer evaluation questions related to the relevance, impact, effectiveness,
efficiency, and sustainability of the project. In Table 1, we list the key evaluation questions and the 
evaluation method we are using for each of them.
7
Table 1: Key Evaluation Questions
Criteria Evaluation Questions Evaluation 
Method
Relevance • How well aligned are the Egypt TAIB activities with the goals, objec￾tives and strategies of USDA, USG, and the Egyptian Government 
and the needs of NFSA and the broader Egyptian community?
PE
Impact • How has the project affected macro-level imports, exports of food 
products? 
Macro
• How has TAIB support affected progress of laws, policies, and 
regulations?? 
• How has capacity building by Egypt TAIB affected the organizational 
capacity of NFSA?
• How has training of NFSA staff affected their knowledge and ability 
to carry out their work?
• How has the private sector been impacted by NFSA regulations?
• What policies or actions have been effective in enforcing food safety 
standards to ensure public health and nutrition security? What role 
can various actors, including government, exporters, processors and 
the private sector play to enforce food safety standards to ensure 
public health and nutrition security?
PE
Effectiveness • To what extent are the program targets and outcomes likely to be 
achieved by project end, specifically expanded trade and improved 
capacity of NFSA? 
• What key successes should be replicated, or key improvements 
made to the implementation to maximize the results?
• What internal and external factors have influenced the ability of the 
project to meet expected results and targets?
• How has COVID-19 impacted project implementation?
• Has the project improved distribution of funding across project 
activities to maximize impact?
PE and 
Macro
Efficiency • Were program activities carried out in a timely manner and with 
effective use of resources? 
• How well has the project been managed and MEL data used to 
make programmatic decisions?
PE
Sustainability • Which project benefits are likely to be sustained or not past the 
project lifespan and why? 
PE
Notes: PE = Performance evaluation based on document reviews, key informant interviews, and focus-group 
discussions; Macro = Quasi-experimental approach using trade data.
The next two chapters discuss the methodology and findings of each evaluation method. Chapter 2 explains 
the methodology for the macro-level trade analysis and presents the findings. Chapter 3 discusses the 
performance evaluation methodology and findings. And finally, Chapter 4 summarizes the conclusions from 
the macro-level trade analysis and the performance evaluation and provides some recommendations. 
Supplementary materials and technical details of the trade analysis is presented in the Annex. 
8
2.Midline Analysis of Trade The current chapter presents empirical findings from our analysis of trade data using econometric 
approaches to measure changes in Egyptian trade. The chapter is divided into three sections. In the first 
section, we present findings from our analysis using a quasi-experimental impact evaluation to examine
changes in the values of exports and imports that can be attributed to the TAIB project. In the second 
section, we present empirical strategies developed to examine intermediate indicators that suggest 
movements towards trade. In the final section, we discuss the implications of COVID-19 for the analysis 
of trade and econometric strategies we develop to mitigate biases in our empirical findings of impacts
on exports and imports. 
2.1. Impacts on Exports and Imports 
We present the empirical findings from our analysis of trade data on exports and imports in this section. 
First, we describe the two outcome indicators that we use to examine impacts of the TAIB project on 
exports and imports along with the data sources to measure these outcomes and for the analysis. We 
them provide details of our quasi-experimental evaluation design and the methods used for the 
econometric analysis of impacts, followed by the empirical findings.
2.1.1 Outcome Indicators and Data Sources 
The two main outcomes of interest are:24
• Value (in millions of 2010 constant US Dollars) of exports; and
• Values (in millions of 2010 constant US Dollars) of imports.
To measure the outcomes on targeted trade flows we create variables of total value for imports and
exports at the two-digit Harmonized System (HS) code25 for the particular food-product subsectors
subject by government mandate to NFSA regulatory oversight. We refer to this group of HS codes as the
treatment group. For each treatment HS code, we also create a corresponding analogous observation
with the counterfactual total value constructed from other importing and exporting subsectors not
currently subjected to NSFA oversight. We refer to these two groups of constructed counterfactuals as
the “synthetic” comparison groups, with one associated with treated imports and the other for treated
exports.26
The data on trade flows come from the United Nations International Trade Statistics Database or UN
Comtrade Database (https://comtrade.un.org/data/), the largest depository of international trade data,
where data on the trade values and volumes (net weight) of various commodities (including food
24At baseline, we used trade volumes as additional outcomes. However, our exploration of the available data for 
the volume of trade indicated that the data is of poor quality and any analysis conducted with trade volume as the 
outcome indicator will not be reliable. As such, we recommended and agreed with USDA to use trade values as the 
only outcome indicator for the midline and endline analysis.
25 The Harmonized System is a global product classification system administrated by the World Customs 
Organization. Trade commodities are classified using HS codes to denote the type of product that is being 
imported or exported. The HS assigns specific six-digit codes for varying classifications and commodities. You can 
use the first 2 digits for the general type of commodity. 26 The reader should note that the synthetic comparison group contains the ultimate counterfactuals; it is 
constructed using comparison subsectors of untreated HS-code transactions. 
9
products) are available on a quarterly and annual basis. This database, going back as far as 1962, is
maintained by the United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD), to whom over 170 countries report annual
international trade statistics data detailed by partner countries and commodities/service categories. The
commodities/services are disaggregated into up to six levels of subcategories and classified using six￾digit codes. The UN Comtrade Database provides data on trade values in US dollars.
As part of the baseline analysis, we extracted detailed annual data on exports and imports of food 
products for the five available years (2014-2018) of pre-treatment data for Egypt as a reporting country, 
disaggregated at the level of two-digit categories. For the MTE, we supplemented this data with two 
years of in-treatment (2019-2020) data. For the purpose of our analysis, we consider all food 
subcategories as treated unless specifically indicated by Venture37 staff as non-treated (e.g., live
animals, live fish, straw and fodder, etc.). Like at baseline, we compute the trade values of various 
commodities in terms of 2010 constant values by adjusting for inflation. The consumer price index data 
for 2010 and the years 2014-2020 are used to adjust the trade values for all years in terms of the 2010 
values.
2.1.2 Methodological Approach 
The quasi-experimental evaluation design requires comparing actual trade to its counterfactual, that is,
what trade would have been without the TAIB intervention. The approach involves comparing trade 
values of specific product categories subject to NFSA inspection – the intervention group – to 
counterfactual values synthesized from trade categories not regulated by NFSA but containing products 
with characteristics of differing degrees of similarity to those in the intervention group – the comparison 
group. The latter synthesis is carried out using a statistical matching technique.
The method essentially utilizes the pre-intervention values of the comparison group to construct a 
“synthetic” counterfactual for each intervention-group product category. For the midline impact evaluation 
we use the actual midline values of the comparison group of trade categories to compute the midline values 
of a synthetic counterfactual for each intervention-group product category. We then compare the midline 
value of these (now synthetic) counterfactuals to the actual observed values of the corresponding trade 
categories subject to NFSA regulation. Any difference is considered an impact of TAIB.27 This approach is 
called the interrupted time-series analysis within a potential outcomes (ITSPO) framework.
We implement the ITSPO approach in two steps: (i) use statistical matching to create a counterfactual 
group of traded commodities not subject to NFSA that are statistically similar as a group to the group of 
commodity categories subject to NFSA oversight; and (ii) estimate an attribution equation to detect 
whether there is a statistical difference between the counterfactual and intervention groups after the 
start-up of NFSA – the impact. The first step was carried out during baseline and repeated using updated 
Comtrade data to take advantage of any revisions the UNSD had made over the intervening two years. 
The MTE involves the second step of estimating impacts two years after the beginning of the TAIB 
intervention. We provide details of each of the two steps below. However, first we define the treatment 
variable for the purpose of the trade analysis.
27 The goal of matching is to remove any observable baseline systematic differences between the two groups being 
matched so that any post-baseline observed systematic differences can be attributed to treatment, in this case 
TAIB. 
10
Treatment Variable. We defined the treatment variable as equal to 1, if the import or an export was
within a two-digit HS category associated with the products under the NFSA mandate, and 0 otherwise.
Creating a counterfactual. We started the matching process by identifying a set of commodity categories
that are not subject to NFSA oversight but have some proximate characteristics that suggest they might,
when taken as a group, roughly track the commodity categories that are subject to NFSA oversight.28
This turned out to be quite problematic because it led to a tradeoff: it required splitting two-digit HS
categories into their four-digit components and at that level of disaggregation the time series were
rather sparse and noisy. Fortunately, a practical alternative was identified. It comprised selecting all
two-digit HSs not targeted by the TAIB intervention as the input sectors for synthesizing comparison
observations with entropy matching—a statistical matching approach of Hainmueller (2009). The
treatment HS codes (as identified at baseline) and input comparison HS categories for the matching are
listed in Annex II.
We use statistical matching for each treatment-group HS code to create its “synthetic” comparison
group.29 These groups, once constructed, should be both statistically similar (“balanced”) on
characteristics of interest as well as not be subject to NFSA oversight (they must be “untreated”).30 We
conduct robustness tests to check that results are not sensitive to the time-series period for the sample
or the unit of matching (HS vs country).31 Likewise, we checked for statistical balance (to ensure good
matches) – comparing the means of each year of the treatment HS to that of the synthetic comparison
observation. (In fact, as per Hainmueller (2009), synthetic matching leads to near-perfect matches.).
32
The idea is that once NFSA begins its program of regulatory compliance, the synthesized comparison
group will continue to mirror what the treated trade categories would have experienced had NFSA not
existed. That way, in the attribution step we can compare that counterfactual experience to that which
the treatment group actually exhibited. Any statistical differences would be “impacts” that the analysis
would attribute to the existence of NFSA. Figure 2 conceptually illustrates the calculation of impact.
28 The proximate characteristics include similar degrees of processing, similarity in markets and use of market 
infrastructure, cold-chain requirements, input sourcing, energy intensiveness, value-added per kilo, as well as 
similar capital and labor requirements. 29 We conduct matching separately for each treated HS code so the sample contains 5 treatment observations 
against approximately 76 comparison HS codes (each also with five observations). Matching was limited to the top 
20 trading partners to ensure data availability for the complete sample and evaluation period. Once matched there 
is one synthetic comparison observation for each treatment observation. To ensure the statistical matching 
process was not influenced by the volume of trade of a particular HS category, each two-digit HS trade-flow was 
first deflated by its mean value over the period, 2014-2018. (Those deflators were also applied to the HS’s 2019 
and 2020 values.)
30 By statistically balanced we mean that the means and standard deviations of characteristics thought to influence 
outcomes are statistically same for both groups. 31 In addition to conducting the matching and subsequent analysis at the two-digit HS level we also conducted it at 
the country trading-partner level (i.e., for each direction of trade, matching a country’s treated transactions to its 
own comparison transactions across HS codes and years). While these results were not as precise, they generated 
similar estimates. This suggested that the results we present, below, for the HS-analysis are indeed robust to unit 
of matching. 
32 Essentially, the robustness tests comprised examining whether the impacts detected depended on the sample 
used (e.g., with/without 2014 and with/without the outlier HS codes). 
11
Figure 2: Illustration of how the ITSPO approach can capture the TAIB-intervention effects 
Note: The upward-pointing kink (“curvature”) in the outcome trajectory between t1 and t3 is simply illustrative. In reality, we may 
find it to be upward, downward, or nonexistent (linear), each bearing its own policy implications Likewise, the dips and their 
relative size are purely illustrative. Their actual sizes will be econometrically estimated at endline.
Detecting an impact. Having established the comparison group in the first step through statistical 
matching, the second step in the ITSPO framework is to estimate an attribution equation to detect 
whether there is a statistical difference between the counterfactual and intervention groups after the 
start-up of NFSA, or in other words the impact. We estimate the impacts of TAIB in two different ways:
• Unconditional impact estimates (without control variables). The unconditional impact 
estimates are computed as the difference between the counterfactual (the synthetic 
comparison) outcomes and the actual treated-group outcomes in 2019 and in 2020.33 We refer 
to these as estimates as unconditional since the calculation does not involve any control 
(conditioning) for other post-baseline influences that might have asymmetrically affected the 
treated and the comparison products. Since in the first step of the ITSPO framework, the 
counterfactual group was constructed by removing any systematic differences between it and 
the treatment group, it represents an estimate of what would have happened without TAIB. This 
implies that the only difference between the treated group and the synthetic comparison group 
is the fact that the former is exposed to TAIB and the NFSA mandate and that the latter is not.
Thus, where the actual trade value is larger than the counterfactual, we can potentially attribute 
that difference as an “impact” of TAIB. 
33 The astute reader may wonder why no difference-in-differences estimator was calculated. This is because at 
baseline each treatment category and its synthetic comparison (counterfactual) had essentially the same value, so 
no double-differencing was required.
 = Treated products
 = Possible treated trajec￾tory under Covid-19
 = Comparison products
 = Possible counterfactual 
trajectory under Covid-19
 Gap at t = Δ𝑋𝑋𝑡𝑡,𝑠𝑠
T − Δ𝑋𝑋𝑡𝑡,𝑠𝑠
C
Δ𝑋𝑋𝑡𝑡
T, change in 
treated products at 
time t
3
Δ𝑋𝑋𝑡𝑡,𝑠𝑠
C , change 
in synthetic 
comparison 
group at time t3
without Covid￾19
End of evalua￾tion period, t
3
𝑋𝑋𝑡𝑡,𝑠𝑠
C
𝑋𝑋𝑡𝑡,𝑠𝑠
T
Outcome
Start of 
TAIB, t1
Start of histori- Midline, t2
cal period, t
0
12
• Conditional impact estimate (with control variables).34 A more sophisticated approach to 
estimating impacts would be to employ an econometric approach to control for various sources 
that might influence intertemporal variation in the trade values (export or import) specific to a 
sector or at the macro level.35 At the macro level, examples of such influencing factors can be 
exchange-rate, and interest-rate fluctuations, and political and policy shocks (e.g., strikes, 
changes in government). The maintained assumption under the unconditional estimates, above,
is that these would affect all sectors – and, therefore, treatment and comparison groups –
roughly equally. In that sense, the conditional impact estimates will not be different from the 
unconditional impact estimates. However, the precision of the estimates would likely improve 
as a results of taking the influence of these intertemporal variations explicitly.36 If, however, the 
maintained assumption is unsound (Covid-19 being an example) then the conditional 
(econometric) approach would likely remove the ensuing bias. For this reason – and as 
documented in Annex III – we estimated a series of econometric models with alternative 
specifications. Unfortunately, we were not able to utilize these economic models yet for two 
reasons . First, the main potential source of asymmetric influence – Covid-19 – only occurred in 
2020, the last year of the midline period, giving us just one observation per HS category with 
which to statistically disentangle TAIB from Covid-19 contributions. Second, Covid-19 greatly 
slowed down statistical reporting and access to data for 2020 (and for 2019, as well), hobbling 
efforts to draw on other data sources. As a result, we were not able to generate estimates of 
sufficient precision to warrant reporting, so the impact findings presented, below, are based on 
the unconditional approach.37
2.1.3 Findings: Prediction Accuracy of the Counterfactual 
As in the baseline stage, once the matching was done using the revised Comtrade data, we tested the 
prediction accuracy of our approach by measuring the in-sample prediction error and the quality of the 
predicted counterfactual. 
Testing in-sample prediction error. Conceptually, if the synthetically matched comparison group 
predicted the actual trade values observed in the pre-intervention sample period (2014-2018) with 
minimal errors, then we could be more confident that they would also predict the no-intervention trade 
flows during the post-intervention period that we can then use to compare the actual treatment-period 
trade values to estimate impacts. We compute the mean in-sample absolute prediction errors by two￾digit trade category over time. These statistics allowed us to determine whether certain trade categories 
are responsible for the significant prediction error, should we observe any. 
34 See Annex III for the technical details. 35 Since the construction of the counterfactual group removed sources of systematic differences between it and 
the treatment group over the sample period (2014-2018 in our case), asymmetric influences on the two groups 
from these macro factors would come from sources that either did not vary during the sample period, only 
emerged post-baseline (e.g., Covid-19), or were not taken into account. 36 In other words, the standard errors of the impact estimates would be smaller. 37 Fortunately, by endline we will both have two additional years of data as well as access to some of the additional 
covariates sought to overcome the aforementioned impediments.
13
The results of these tests were uniformly excellent with very low forecast errors over the sample period 
for exports (see Figure 3) and imports (see Figure 4) by HS category. Let us describe how to interpret 
these graphics as we examine their findings.
Figure 3 and Figure 4 present the within-sample forecast errors for exports and imports, respectively, for 
each of the 18 treatment HS trade categories.38 These graphs indicate the degree to which matching 
reproduces the actual historical trade flows of the baseline period. Each value displayed represents the 
forecast error for the respective year. The forecast error is calculated as:
Forecast error = (Synthetic comparison trade value – Actual trade value) / (Actual trade value)
We see that the synthetic counterfactuals are generally within one percent of the associated actual 
treatment value for each HS code, both for exports (Figure 3) and imports (Figure 4). This reinforces our 
confidence in the analysis approach.
Figure 3: Within-sample (2014-2018) forecast error for exports, by HS code
Note: The forecast error is the percent-difference between the actual and the synthetic comparison created through the 
statistical matching process, i.e., (Synthetic comparison – Actual)/Actual. Matching was conducted on the trade flow deflated 
by the within-HS, across-year mean.
38While the graphs appear to show 22 categories, in fact several intervening categories are missing because they 
are not subject to NSFA regulation. Also note that for two-digit codes 02 to 09 the leading zero is dropped from the 
value’s label.
14
Figure 4: Within-sample (2014-2018) forecast error for imports, by HS code
Note: The forecast error is the percent-difference between the actual and the synthetic comparison created through the 
statistical matching process, i.e., (Synthetic comparison – Actual)/Actual. Matching was conducted on the trade flow deflated 
by the within-HS, across-year mean.
Testing the quality of the predicted counterfactual. Another useful test of the quality of the baseline 
synthetic-control counterfactuals is to consider how good a one-year-out forecast would be over the 
pre-treatment period. We therefore check how good the approaches would be to forecast 2018 had we 
used the approaches in 2017 using just our data for 2014-2017. Toward this end, we re-compute the 
synthetic weights by repeating the matching process using just four years (2014 to 2017) of data and 
then used the new weights to predict the import values for 2018. As shown in Figure 5 for exports and 
Figure 6 for imports, in both cases the results showed that the matching approaches generated robust 
counterfactuals of one-year-out trade. No forecast error is greater than two-fifths of one percent.
15
Figure 5: Forecast error using 2014-17 data to predict 2018 NFSA-regulated exports (by HS code)
Source: Authors’ calculations based on UN Comtrade Database. 
Notes: Forecast error is the percentage difference between the actual total of partner trade with Egypt for 2018 and HS 
category regulated by the NFSA and the associated values constructed through entropy matching restricted to 2014-17 data on 
comparison HS categories exempt from NFSA oversight. It is measured as the mean in-sample forecast error.
Figure 6: Forecast error using 2014-17 data to predict 2018 NFSA-regulated imports (by HS code)
Source: Authors’ calculations based on UN Comtrade Database. 
Notes: Forecast error is the percentage difference between the actual total of partner trade with Egypt for 2018 and HS 
category regulated by the NFSA and the associated values constructed through entropy matching restricted to 2014-17 data on 
comparison HS categories exempt from NFSA oversight. It is measured as the mean in-sample forecast error.
16
2.1.4 Findings: Impact of TAIB on Exports and Imports 
The impacts of TAIB for 2019 and 2020 by HS code, as estimated using the ITSPO approach, are 
presented in Figure 7 for exports and Figure 8 for imports. As described above, a negative value 
indicates a positive impact of TAIB on trade and a positive value indicates a negative impact of TAIB on 
trade. We indicate estimates for 2019 by blue circles and for 2020 by red diamonds. 
The mostly negative values of the circles in Figure 7 and Figure 8 suggest that in 2019 most HS 
categories experienced a greater amount of trade than their matched historical performance would 
suggest – i.e., an indication of impacts on specific HS-level exports (Figure 7) and imports (Figure 8). On 
the other hand, the opposite story appears to be the case for 2020 as illustrated by the diamond-shaped 
values in the figures: actual exports and imports across the HS categories are all lower than what their 
counterfactual values (i.e., matched historical performance) would suggest. In other words, at first blush 
impacts would appear negative (making trade worse). However, this may be because, unlike 2019, the 
presumed positive impact of TAIB was overwhelmed by the presumed negative effects of COVID-19. The 
apparent asymmetric effect of Covid-19 on NSFA-regulated products and the other products used to 
construct the synthetic comparison may be due to the matching only picking up systematic sources of 
variation operating during the pre-treatment sample period and extreme adverse health influences 
would not have been one of those. At endline when more midline data become available we will be able 
to utilize econometric analysis to disentangle the TAIB effect from the Covid-19 effect).39
Figure 7: Unconditional impact estimates for 2019 and 2020 on exports, by HS code
Note: The forecast error is the percent-difference between the actual and the synthetic comparison created through the 
statistical matching process, i.e., (Synthetic comparison – Actual)/Actual. Hence, a negative (positive) value implies a positive 
(negative) impact. Matching was conducted on the trade flow deflated by the within-HS, across-year mean.
39 This more sophisticated approach utilizes a model specification and conditioning covariates based on an 
interrupted time series analysis within a potential outcomes (ITSPO) framework and estimates the impact drawing 
on a sample for the combined pre-intervention and intervention period, 2014-2020. The details of these models 
are described in Annex III.
17
Figure 8: Unconditional impact estimates for 2019 and 2020 on imports, by HS code 
Note: The forecast error is the percent-difference between the actual and the synthetic comparison created through the 
statistical matching process, i.e., (Synthetic comparison – Actual)/Actual. Hence, a negative (positive) value implies a positive 
(negative) impact. Matching was conducted on the trade flow deflated by the within-HS, across-year mean.
While the above two graphs present the impacts in terms of percentage change, they can also be 
presented in US$ terms, as shown in Figure 9 for exports and Figure 10 for imports.
Figure 9: Comparison of actual-to-(unconditional)-counterfactual exports, 2014-2020, by HS code (in 
2010 constant US$)
Notes: For 2014 through 2018, the model’s counterfactuals (synthetic comparisons) are so precise that they appear in the graph 
as single points (though in color the discriminating reader may detect both of them). Values are for the Egypt’s top-twenty 
trade partners (see Footnote 29) Also, for 2020, we omit the counterfactual from the graph; it is roughly 3.0 x e+10 so scaling 
the vertical axis to include this point would have obscured variation in the values for the other years.
18
Figure 10: Comparison of actual-to-(unconditional)-counterfactual imports, 2014-2020, by HS code (in 
2010 constant US$)
Notes: For 2014 through 2018, the model’s counterfactuals (synthetic comparisons) are so precise that they appear in the graph 
as single points (though in color the discriminating reader may detect both of them). Values are for the Egypt’s top-twenty 
trade partners (see Footnote 29).
We summarize the impact findings using the unconditional impact estimates under the ITSPO 
framework, below, and in Table 2: 
• TAIB has had an impact on exports in 2019. When compared to the corresponding total value 
of counterfactual exports in 2019, we find that the actual total value of Egypt’s NFSA-regulated 
exports in 2019 were almost 12-percent higher than what they would have been had TAIB not 
been implemented. In other words, TAIB appears to have had an attributable positive impact on 
NFSA-regulated exports in 2019. This effect translates into a US$ increase in exports of almost 
293 million US$ (constant 2010).40
• TAIB’s has had an impact on exports in 2020. When compared to the corresponding total value 
of counterfactual level of exports in 2020, we find that the actual total value of Egypt’s NFSA￾regulated exports in 2020 were almost 8-percent higher than what they would have been had 
TAIB not been implemented and the COVID-19 pandemic not occurred. In other words, until we 
conduct the procedures to mitigate COVID-19 bias (see below) we cannot say whether TAIB has 
had an attributable positive impact on NFSA-regulated exports in 2020.
• TAIB has had an impact on imports in 2019. When compared to the counterfactual level of 
imports in 2019, we find that the actual total value of Egypt’s NFSA-regulated imports in 2019 
were ten-percent higher than what they would have been had TAIB not been implemented. In 
other words, TAIB appears to have had an attributable positive impact on NFSA-regulated 
imports in 2019. This effect translates into a US$ increase in imports of almost one billion US$ 
(constant 2010).
40 For the top-twenty trading partners. 
19
• TAIB’s impact on imports in 2020 is uncertain. Comparing the corresponding total value of 
counterfactual imports in 2020 to that of the actual total value of Egypt’s NFSA-regulated 
imports in 2020 we were confronted with a rather large, suspect result.41 The team worked 
extremely hard to identify the source of the (presumed) error, but so far to no avail. As such, 
we have reached out to Comtrade, the source of the trade data for some clarifications. At 
the same time, we have been digging into each step of the complex entropy-matching￾assisted forecast model and believe the issue may be that some of the comparison-HS-code
imports experienced infrequent trade flows over the analysis period, resulting in significant 
volatility. In the meantime, we have not reported the 2020 imputed import impact.42
Regardless, until we conduct the procedures to mitigate COVID-19 bias (see below) we will 
not be able say whether TAIB has had an attributable positive impact on NFSA-regulated 
imports in 2020.
Table 2: Total impact of TAIB on Egypt's exports and imports, 2014-2020 (20 countries)
Total impact (2010 constant USD)(a)
Exports Imports Total(d)
Year Value (mln) Share of 
total(b) Value (mln) Share of 
total(b) Value (Bln) Share of total 
trade
2019 293 11.7% 960 10.0% 1.25 10.4%
2020 185 7.8% [TBD](c) [TBD](c) [TBD](c) [TBD](c)
Source: Authors’ calculations based on Comtrade data downloaded June 2021.
Notes:
(a) For Egypt’s top-twenty trading partners for each direction of trade.
(b) Total impact summed over all impacted treatment categories divided by total value of the respective direction of 
trade for those categories, then multiplied by 100.
(c) Under revision. These values appeared suspiciously large, so we are reaching out to Comtrade to determine if 
there are reporting errors as well as examining the role of a small number of infrequent comparison-HS trade flows.
(d) Exports plus imports.
In conclusion, while it is relatively clear that in 2019 TAIB had an attributable impact of US$ 1.25 
billion on total trade of NFSA-regulated products (10.4% higher than what they would have been
had TAIB not been implemented), the figures for 2020 must remain uncertain until endline when 
more data become available, permitting the econometric separation of Covid-19 and TAIB effects 
(and until the current temporarily unresolved technical difficulties are addressed). 
41 That said, it is worth noting that The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis estimated the COVID-19 impact for these 
countries as the difference between the actual gross domestic product growth rate in 2020 and the IMF forecast 
for it made in October 2019. Juan M Sanchez (2021) “COVID-19’s Economic Impact around the World”, Web 
Bulletin, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, August 11. Since for low-income countries, GDP growth in 2020 was 
whopping 5.2-percentage-points lower than expected (Sources: IMF World Economic Outlook Reports (April 2021 
and October 2019), Penn World Table/version 10.0, and author’s calculations), this suggests that the impact of 
Covid-19 for Egypt in 2020 was approximately 5 percent of GDP.
42 The investigation has been made all the more challenging since the impact on imports depends on the 
counterfactual forecast for 2020 and that requires not just modeling the effect on imports had TAIB not been 
implemented but also modeling the effect on imports had the COVID-19 pandemic not occurred.
20
2.2. Movement toward increasing trade 
Since often large impacts on trade can be a lagging variable, the evaluation team planned to also measure
some indicators of movement towards increasing trade in the TAIB evaluation. At the outset of the midline
evaluation, NORC developed a formal econometric strategy to analyze several indicators that would
suggest movement towards trade by examining movement in intermediate outcomes that the theory of
change postulates must first occur. For example, a strong increase in trade of agricultural products due to
TAIB would require that firms either increased their production while maintaining constant their export
share, increased their export share without increasing production, or a combination of the two.43 Changes
in production might also be accompanied with an increase in investment.
The econometric strategy involves examining two intermediate outcomes—employment and number of
firms exporting (importing)—to analyze movements towards trade. We expect an increase in 
employment in the sectors that should benefit from the reforms supported by TAIB, at least if such 
movement is the result of an increase in agricultural production relative to employment levels in other 
sectors competing for the same labor. We would also expect sectors that benefit from the reforms
supported by TAIB to manifest movement toward trade by experiencing an increase in the number of
firms involved in exporting and importing relative to what other sectors experience. We provide an 
overview of the econometric strategy below; technical details are provided in Annex III.
We developed two analytic strategies. The first involves comparing the percentage change in employ￾ment (or number of firms) between the twelve months of 2019 and those of July 2020 through June
2021 (aka 2021*) in TAIB-targeted sectors to those of non-TAIB-targeted sectors, statistically accounting
for the extent of the fall in employment (or the fall in number of firms) due to COVID-19 from 2019 to
2020 and changes in an international price index for each traded sector from 2019 to 2021*. The
hypothesis is that the percentage change in employment (or number of firms) in the TAIB-targeted
sectors are higher. The second strategy is similar to the matching strategy employed for the trade
analysis explained, above, to examine the extent to which employment (or number of firms) in
agricultural subsectors exhibits a greater increase (or smaller decrease) than in other sectors. This
entails using non-agricultural sectors as the source of comparison sectors for the synthetic matching.
Once matched, we would generate forecasts for 2020 and 2021* based on pre-intervention data. The
difference between the 2020 forecast and actual employment in 2020 provides an estimate of the
extent to which employment (or number of firms) fell due to COVID-19 in 2020. Likewise, the respective
2021* forecasts provide estimates of the extent to which sector employment (or number of firms) in
2021* recovered from COVID-19, so the differences between them and actual employment (or number
of firms) in 2021* provides an estimate of the increase in employment (or number of firms) due to TAIB.
Unfortunately, these analyses all require data for 2020 and 2021 on sector-level domestic labor 
employment, value of production, and number of firms. Based on our exhaustive search of publicly 
available sources, these data for are currently not yet available. Although we observed some impacts of 
TAIB on trade at midline, NORC proposes to conduct these analyses at endline if strong evidence of 
impacts on exports and imports is not observed (and data from public sources become available), since 
they would still serve to document movement toward trade, whether at midline or endline. We provide 
details about the data availability in Annex III.
43Of course, if the world price of Egypt’s agricultural exports increases then the value of Egypt’s exports could go 
up without any change in the quantity or share of production exported.
21
2.3. Mitigating COVID-19 bias from trade-impact estimates 
One of the biggest challenges facing the present impact evaluation is that the onset of the pandemic 
took place between the start-up of TAIB and (for now) the midline. This requires that we statistically dis￾entangle the COVID-19 effects on Egypt’s trade flows from those of TAIB, both for inferring movement 
toward increased trade as well as for detecting actual impacts on trade. 
In the case of the trade flows, themselves, we base the impact evaluation on the ITPSO framework
(detailed above) using data that we have first synthetically matched. This approach entails two critical 
assumptions. The goal of the synthetic matching approach is to create a comparison group at baseline 
that is statistically similar to the treatment group in the observed characteristics employed in the 
matching process. Hence, our first assumption is that the right characteristics (covariates) were included 
in the matching so that no systematic influences were ignored (i.e., assuming that no “unobservables” 
were omitted). This ensure that the only systematic difference in these two groups is whether their 
trade categories will be subject to the NFSA mandate or not. Thus, any systematic differences in the 
trade values (imports or exports) between the two groups after the start of the intervention should be 
solely attributable to the TAIB intervention. Furthermore, the ITSPO method makes the assumption that 
the effects of external shocks such as COVID-19 are expected to be system wide with symmetric impacts 
on the treatment and synthetic comparison groups, on average. In short, these two assumptions imply 
that COVID-19 effects should drop out of any doubly differenced time-series analysis.
That said, it is possible that the COVID-19 pandemic may have had differential effects on the treatment 
and the synthetic comparison groups’ average trade values. This could occur if the effect of COVID-19 
operates through channels (variables) not captured by those used for matching but effect a firm’s ability 
to trade. This is quite possible since such influences may not have contributed to variation in the short 
historical time-series used in the matching. As part of our midline evaluation we therefore developed –
and intended to carry out – a series of analytic tests and adjustments to purge, if necessary, COVID-19 
impacts from TAIB impacts, which were essentially perfectly correlated. 
The first analytical test is to use a sector’s percentage change in a given direction of trade over the 
period 2020-2021 as a proxy indicator of COVID-19’s effect. This indicator can then be included explicitly 
as a control variable in an attribution equation. The other analytic strategy is to use a two-sided means￾test to examine if the pre-COVID-19 average labor intensity of production across the treatment sectors 
and synthetic comparison sectors is statistically equal. If the test reveals that they are not, then we 
would include the differential labor-intensity along with the sector’s percentage change in trade as 
control variables in the attribution equation.
Unfortunately, these analyses require data on sector-level domestic labor employment for 2020 and 2021, 
which, based on our exhaustive search of publicly available sources, are currently not yet available. It also 
requires data for sectors’ percentage change in trade for 2021, a year still in progress so data is not yet 
available. Practically speaking, then, these analyses could only be carried out in late-2021 or first-quarter 
2022 – too late for the present midline report. Instead, given that the empirical approach have now been 
developed, NORC proposes to conduct these analyses at endline since they would still serve to increase 
the credibility of the estimated TAIB impacts by mitigating potential bias from COVID-19. 
We provide more details about the empirical strategy and data availability in Annex III.
22
3.Performance Evaluation This chapter presents a wholistic account of TAIB project’s progress on its activities to date, assesses its 
impacts, and how it has performed against its targets. We also examine the success factors to TAIB’s 
performance, key challenges that it faced, and the extent to which the TAIB activities are sustainable. 
We begin by describing the methods for the performance evaluation, including the data sources used, 
data collection methods, and analytic approach. We then present the findings of the performance 
evaluation in detail. 
3.1. Methodology 
During the midline, we conducted a non-experimental performance evaluation using document reviews, 
key informant interviews (KIIs) and focus-group discussions (FGDs). The goal of the performance 
evaluation was to broadly answer the research questions, listed in Table 1, related to the relevance, 
impact, effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability of the project as a whole. Below we describe the 
data sources used in the performance evaluation and the data collection and analysis process.
3.1.1 Data Sources for the Performance Evaluation 
Table 3 summarizes qualitative data collection activities and includes information on the number of 
interviews conducted for each data collection activity and respondent type. At midline, we conducted 16 
interviews total, including 2 focus groups with NFSA inspectors. 
Table 3: Summary of Qualitative Data Collection Activities
Data Collection 
Activity Respondent Type Number of Interviews
KIIs
NFSA Staff 3
TAIB staff 5
USDA 1
Business Chambers 1
Food Businesses 2
3rd Party Certification Companies 2
FGDs NFSA Inspectors 2 groups of 8-10 inspectors
This performance evaluation also used TAIB program documents to assess the progress of the project:
• TAIB Semi-Annual Reports covering the periods: April 1-September 30, 2019; October 1, 2019 to 
March 30, 2020; April 1-September 30, 2020; and October 1, 2020-March 31, 2021. 
• The NFSA Organizational Capacity Scorecards (Organizational Assessment Tool) for Years 1, 2
and 3.
• NFSA regulatory documents, including the published regulations of Decision No. 3 of 2020, 
Decision No. 6 of 2020, Decision No. 7 of 2020, and Decision No. 13 of 2020 as well as other 
23
draft regulations such as the Hotel Licensing Technical Regulation and the Free Zones Technical 
Regulation.
• Brochures, industry guides, and other public facing documents such as: “FAQ for Food Import 
Licensing”; “NFSA Manual for Industry on COVID-19”; “Consumer Food Safety Brochure for 
Web”; and “Food Handler’s Guide in Packhouse”.
• Articles about TAIB activities, including “Supporting Science, Increasing Trade: Science-based 
Approaches Remove Trade Barriers for Beef Liver Exports to Egypt”.
• NFSA administrative and internal policy documents such as their Code of Conduct, Food 
Complaints Handling Procedure, Technical Competencies Manual, and Food Risk List.
• The report, “NFSA’s Modernization of Egypt’s Food Import Control System”.
• Monitoring data on administrative policies and procedures, trainings, and policy, law and 
regulation progress.
• TAIB Evaluation Plan.
• TAIB 5-year Work Plan.
• NFSA Needs Assessment and Narrative.
• TAIB Plan of Operation and Activities.
3.1.2 Data Collection and Analysis 
NORC collected primary qualitative data to supplement the documents provided by TAIB. The primary 
data consisted of 14 key informant interviews with TAIB staff, NFSA staff, a representative from the 
Chamber of Food Industries, staff from food businesses and 3rd party certification companies, and a 
representative from USDA. Additionally, two focus group discussions were conducted with NFSA 
inspectors to gather their perspectives. These midline KIIs and FGDs provide information on the progress 
of implementation, challenges and successes since baseline, and recommendations for the project 
moving forward.
The NORC evaluation team contracted Dr. Zeinab Khadr and Mr. Mohamed Hassan Hosni, experienced 
social scientists from American University in Cairo, to coordinate and conduct the KIIs and FGDs. 
Interviews were conducted between August 16th and September 20th, 2021 and were conducted 
remotely given continued concerns around COVID-19; in addition, respondents across categories were 
acclimated to working remotely, including inspectors who had previously participated in virtual 
trainings. Interviews with TAIB staff averaged about one hour, ranging from 40 minutes to 85 minutes. 
All other interviews took between 30 and 60 minutes, with the exception of one KII with NFSA staff that 
went for one and half hours, and the focus groups with inspectors which also took approximately one 
and half hours. Interview protocols can be found in Annex IV and our COVID-19 Safety Protocol for the 
data collection field work can be found in Annex V.
All interviews were recorded. Interviews were conducted in Arabic or English, depending on the 
preference of the respondent, and the team at American University in Cairo transcribed and translated 
them. NORC’s qualitative specialist then coded all transcripts using a deductive coding scheme in 
Dedoose qualitative analysis software to produce relevant excerpts by theme and evaluation question. 
These excerpts were analyzed to find congruencies and divergences among respondents and to provide 
information to answer the evaluation questions. 
24
The categories of respondents were expanded from baseline to include NFSA inspectors, NFSA staff, 
food businesses, 3rd party certification companies, and USDA in addition to the previous categories of 
TAIB staff and Chamber of Food Industries representatives. It was not possible to interview 
representatives of other Ministries that work on food safety in Egypt.
This qualitative data was collected for the primary purpose of validating and contextualizing the 
information on TAIB’s progress from the program documentation listed above. As such, the interview 
questions and sampling design were developed in order to maximally complement the analysis of progress
especially from the Organizational Capacity Scorecards, monitoring data, and Semi-Annual reports.
3.2. Performance Evaluation Findings 
3.2.1 Alignment with Key Stakeholders 
We begin our presentation with a detailed look on the alignment of the TAIB activities with key 
stakeholders of the project—the US Government (USG) and the USDA, the Egyptian Government and 
NFSA, and the broader Egyptian community. 
Alignment with USDA and USG
As a food for progress program from the USDA, TAIB 
supports USDA’s overarching objective of increasing 
trade both for the target countries generally and 
between the US and those countries. Through building 
the capacity of NFSA to ensure safer imports and 
exports and harmonizing food safety policies and 
regulations with international standards, TAIB is 
designed to facilitate trade and also promote policies 
that are in line with USG regulatory frameworks.
A key example of aligned priorities between USDA/USG 
and TAIB is the reform of Egypt’s policy on Ractopamine. 
Before the establishment of NFSA and the 
implementation of TAIB, Egypt had aligned its regulatory 
framework more closely with the European Union and
adopted their policy of zero-tolerance for Ractopamine 
(a veterinary drug used for beef). This zero-tolerance policy was not in line with the approved CODEX 
standard, or the WTO’s guidance that requires a deviation from an approved CODEX standard to be set 
based on consumption risk assessments. The zero-tolerance policy towards Ractopamine had 
significantly impacted US exports, reducing US meat exports to Egypt from peak to trough by almost $90 
million since Egypt began enforcing the policy in 2018.
44 With TAIB’s support, NFSA conducted a 
consumption study to establish minimum acceptable levels of Ractopamine for consumption and 
implement it as a technical regulation. Since Egypt is the world’s largest importer of beef liver, it 
represents a highly important market for US producers, and this change was beneficial to US producers.
USDA reports that rejections of consignments containing imported beef liver is down 90% since the 
44 Source: USDA/Venture37: Supporting Science, Increasing Trade: Science-based Approaches Remove Trade 
Barriers for Beef Liver Exports to Egypt
“TAIB was able to work directly with 
NFSA to help establish standards and 
regulations that are consistent with 
those that are based on science, 
number one. And they are consistent 
with international norms. In this case, 
the Codex Alimentarius, which is really 
the standard for food safety under the 
World Trade Organization, one of the 
pillars, if you will, […] that was really 
the direct match to what we are trying 
to do, as USDA to facilitate trade.” 
(USDA, KII) 
25
adoption of Egypt’s new veterinary drug residue technical regulation.45 In that regard, TAIB’s activities 
are well aligned with the trade objectives of USDA and the USG, which was also echoed by the 
representative from USDA. 
Alignment with NFSA and the Egyptian Government
The Egyptian Government and NFSA share the goals of streamlining food safety oversight processes to 
be more efficient as well as aligning regulations with international standards to increase trade, both 
domestically and with other countries. Respondents from TAIB highlighted that increased trade in food 
products is a priority for the President, Prime Minister, and Ministry of Trade in Egypt: specifically, 
reducing the cost of trade, encouraging food exports, generating foreign currencies, and increasing 
incomes for Egyptian farmers, pack houses, and processing firms. In addition, these stakeholders share 
the objective of ensuring food safety and nutrition security for Egyptian citizens. 
Making food safety oversight processes more streamlined and efficient necessitates reducing overlap 
between the duties of NFSA and other ministries. The TAIB project supports reducing this overlap in two 
ways: 1) by building the capacity of NFSA so that it can take on more oversight until it eventually fulfills 
its mandate of being the sole entity responsible for food safety in Egypt, and 2) supporting NFSA as it 
navigates relationships with ministries, particularly through the drafting of Memorandums of 
Understanding. TAIB has supported the drafting of Memorandum of Understandings between NFSA and 
the Customs Authority under the Ministry of Finance, the Cairo Chamber of Commerce, Egyptian Drug 
Authority, General Organization for Veterinary Services, Central Administration for Plant Quarantine and 
the Free Zones Authority. Additionally, TAIB has supported NFSA to develop the food import control 
strategy. This strategy moves away from 100% sampling, instead sets sampling rates based on 
assessments of risk, and is designed to reduce the time and cost of trade.
Alignment with the Broader Egyptian Community
TAIB’s activities are also well aligned with the needs of the broader Egyptian community. There are high 
prevalence rates of different enteric virus infections among the Egyptian population that are linked to 
food safety such as Hepatitis A and E viruses, human rotaviruses, human noroviruses, human 
astroviruses, and human adenovirus.46 The activities of the TAIB project will improve the enforcement of 
food safety regulations and increase consumer and industry awareness, which will in turn lead to less 
foodborne illnesses and better public health outcomes. During one KII, NFSA staff also mentioned that 
there is a “new national direction towards good nutrition for adolescents and young people”. 
TAIB project activities have included communications with the Egyptian public, such as preparing a 
newsletter on consumer protection and building NFSA’s website. TAIB also worked with NFSA to develop 
a brochure for consumers educating them on safe practices for purchasing and storing food. This 
brochure was disseminated electronically and TAIB provided 9,000 printed copies to NFSA for further 
dissemination. Several respondents mentioned that Egyptian consumers are becoming increasingly 
aware of the importance of food safety; one respondent from a 3rd party certification company stated, 
“The Egyptian market is currently experiencing major concern with this subject. It is not price only, no 
45 USDA GAIN Report: Adopting A Risk Based Tolerance for Ractopamine in Beef Reduces Rejections by 90 Percent, 
July 28, 2021 (link). 46 Aboubakr H, Goyal S. Involvement of Egyptian Foods in Foodborne Viral Illnesses: The Burden on Public Health 
and Related Environmental Risk Factors: An Overview. Food Environ Virol. 2019 Dec;11(4):315-339. doi: 
10.1007/s12560-019-09406-z. Epub 2019 Sep 27. PMID: 31560123.
26
there are some groups of the population who seek food safety.” In addition, several respondents 
brought up the issue of tourism and how food safety issues can prevent tourists from coming to Egypt, 
thus making food safety an important topic in sectors outside of the food system.
3.2.2 Progress and Impacts of TAIB activities and Effectiveness in Reaching Targets 
In this section, we discuss progress of TAIB activities for each of the three activities: Activity 1: Capacity 
Building: Government Institutions; Activity 2: Training: Food Safety and Management; and Activity 3: 
Capacity Building: Promote Improved Policy and Regulatory Frameworks. We examine the project’s 
effectiveness in reaching targets by reviewing TAIB project documents, including progress on various 
indicator measures set by the project, validating them based on the information from the KIIs and the FGDs. 
Activity 1: Capacity Building: Government Institutions
At the onset of the project, IFPTI conducted a Needs Assessment of NFSA through a series of in-person 
interviews with key NFSA stakeholders to identify organizational capacity needs. The IFPTI needs 
assessment team divided these organizational needs into five dimensions: 1) Policies, Procedures, and 
Programs; 2) Training; 3) Outreach; 4) Integration (Change Management); and 5) Capacity and Systems. 
In total, the team identified 260 needs distributed among the five capacity-building dimensions. NFSA 
and the TAIB team planned to regularly revisit this NFSA organizational capacity assessment, using it as a 
roadmap to track NFSA activities and progress.
As part of the midline evaluation, NORC reviewed TAIB program documents to assess the progress of TAIB 
on building the capacity of NFSA. During the initial needs assessment of NFSA, IFPTI developed a scorecard 
system to measure progress in the five dimensions – Policies, Procedures, Programs, Training, Outreach, 
Integration and Capacity and Systems, which NORC found to be an effective way to track progress on 
increasing NFSA institutional capacity to regulate food safety—an indicator of progress of TAIB under 
Activity 1. The scorecard uses a point system, 1 for each of the 260 measures, identified as needs in the 
IFPTI Needs Assessment document. TAIB tracks progress by first assigning a range of scores for each 
measure based on levels of completion; for example, those that were started are assigned a score of 0.2 
and those that are almost complete are assigned 0.8, with completed activities assigned a 1.0 score. They 
then calculate the progress for each dimension as the percentage of total measures completed in that 
dimension. 
TAIB made progress in varying degrees on all dimensions identified in the needs assessment. Below is a 
description of progress against indicators to date. By the end of project year 3 this score exceeded 
TAIB’s Project Year 3 target and represents 85.7% of the target for the life of the project.
TAIB has also made great progress as measured by 2 other indicators under Activity 1, as described below.
• For the indicator, Number of administrative policies and procedures issued or adopted by NFSA, 
TAIB has supported the issuance or adoption of 20 policies and procedures at the end of year 3, 
or 83% of the target (24) for the life of the project. 
• Finally, the indicator, Value of new USG commitments and new public and private sector 
investment leveraged by USDA to support food security and nutrition, measures investment 
expenditures (including cost-shares with partners and joint procurements with NFSA) for public 
and private stakeholders. At the end of year 3, TAIB has leveraged $394,946 total in 
investments, or 70% of the target for the life of the project ($567,059). 
27
The NORC Evaluation Team asked the KII respondents 
about the NFSA capacity building activities. According 
to respondents from TAIB, one of the primary 
successes in the domain of capacity building was the 
development of a code of ethics under the policies, 
procedures and programs sub-activity.
Another key achievement of the project is the 
preparation of more than 50 job descriptions for administrative jobs in NFSA under the capacity and 
systems sub-activity. In addition, TAIB has designed and delivered a suite of training programs that focus 
on building the soft skills of NFSA’s existing staff for better management under the training sub-activity. 
Some of the contents of these trainings include leadership and management skills; effective 
communication skills; and a three-day stress management skills training. The content of these trainings 
is designed to help NFSA staff, especially middle management, implement daily tasks more effectively 
while building a productive working culture amongst colleagues and private sector stakeholders. These 
trainings were given to 12 staff members and at the request of NFSA leadership will be repeated as part 
of upcoming project activities, to be targeted at administrative staff, inspectors, and managers.
In addition, there were numerous procedures developed by TAIB to facilitate NFSA processes such as 
procedures to receive applications for licenses, procedures to register certification companies, and the 
development and establishment of procedures for complaint committees to handle food safety 
complaints from citizens under the policies, procedures and programs and the capacity and systems sub￾activity. In addition, TAIB also prepared a list of frequently asked questions for the private sector to 
facilitate the food importer licensing process, that details the required application steps. This was one of 
a several publications that TAIB prepared to help private sector businesses navigate new processes and 
understand NFSA regulations, including a manual for industry on COVID-19 and infographic videos on 
NFSA’s website.
Table 5 lists the administrative policies and procedures completed under activity 1 as of the end of 
year three.
Table 5: Completed Administrative Policies and Procedures under Activity 1 as of the end of Year 3
No. Title of Administrative Policy or 
Procedure
Purpose
1 Evaluation Forms The Inspectorate evaluation forms are used to evaluate NFSA 
inspectors in both senior and moderate roles.
2 Continuous Improvement Team 
Procedure
The Continuous Improvement Team Procedure outlines the rules 
and responsibilities of the team that is responsible for using quality 
techniques to analyze and provide suggestions to top management.
3 Induction Procedure The Induction Procedure details the awareness and orientation 
program for new employees.
4 Document Control Procedure The Document Control procedure details how NFSA retains 
documents and standard forms.
5 Internal Audit Procedure The Internal Audit procedure details roles and responsibilities of the 
internal audit department.
“NFSA is considered the first authority in 
Egypt to adopt its ethical code. This ethical 
code contains the ethics that every 
employee, whether among inspectors or 
other specialists or jobs, have to commit 
to.” (TAIB staff, KII)
28
No. Title of Administrative Policy or 
Procedure
Purpose
6 Management Review Procedure The Management Review Procedure establishes systems, roles and 
responsibilities of planning, implementation, recording 
management and reviews of the quality management system at 
NFSA to insure sustainability and effectiveness in accordance with 
the quality policy and objectives.
7 Nonconformity Procedure The Nonconformity Procedure describes the standard of which 
NFSA can handle nonconformity related to the quality management 
system and other systems applied.
8 NFSA Corrective Actions 
Procedure
The NFSA Corrective Actions Procedure explains how to investigate 
the root cause of non-conformity cases and to take the appropriate 
actions to erase these cases and ensure it doesn't occur again.
9 NFSA Organizational Context 
Procedure
The NFSA Organizational Context Procedure explains the context of 
NFSA and outline the internal and external factors related to its 
purposes and directions.
10 Risk and Opportunities Procedure The Risk and Opportunities Procedure identifies, evaluates, and 
mitigates risks and identifies and enhances opportunities within 
NFSA activities and departments.
11 NFSA Training and Development 
Policy
The NFSA Training and Development Policy outlines the detailed 
procedures of training needs analyses, training planning and 
training evaluation processes for NFSA in compliance with local law 
and CAOA decrees.
12 NFSA Performance Management 
Procedure
The NFSA Performance Management Procedure outlines the 
procedure for planning, evaluating and managing staff performance 
at NFSA.
13 Technical Competencies Manual The Technical Competencies Manual serves as a guideline for 
determining the knowledge, skills, and / or abilities for NFSA 
employees. By using the technical competencies, NFSA 
management will support the efforts in the several human capital 
aspects such as learning and development, recruitment and 
selection, succession planning, and performance management.
14 NFSA Job Families NFSA Job Families classify NFSA jobs that are similar in the 
field/profession of the work and core accountabilities that based on 
function.
15 Food Complaints Handling 
Committee Procedure
The Food Complaints Handling Committee Procedure explains 
processes from receiving to closing food complaints from different 
entities.
16 NFSA Publication and Style Guide The NFSA Publication and Style Guide illustrates NFSA official 
publication requirements including the use of official logos, e-mail 
signatures, internal communication templates and others.
17 NFSA Consumer Guidelines for 
Food Complaints
The NFSA Consumer Guidelines for Food Complaints guide 
consumers on how to identify and report food complaints.
18 NFSA Food Handling License 
Standard Operating Procedure
The NFSA Food Handling License Standard Operating Procedure 
explains NFSA processes to issue food handling licenses for 
restaurants.
19 NFSA Food Disposal Procedure The NFSA Food Disposal Procedure describes steps and procedures 
of food disposal at NFSA.
20 NFSA Health Certificate Standard 
Operating Procedure
The NFSA Health Certificate Standard Operating Procedure 
describes NFSA steps to issue health certificates for exported foods.
Source: Monitoring Data: Admin Policies and Procedures Registration Data as of 11/11/2021
29
In project year 2, TAIB and NFSA began the process of re-designing and updating NFSA’s existing website 
to facilitate some of these processes under the needs assessment’s capacity and systems dimension. 
This new website provides a multitude of services: disseminating information to the public and trading 
partners (under the outreach sub-activity); enabling businesses to register and access regulatory 
information, allowing consumers to file complaints, and publishing communications with the public 
during times of foodborne illness outbreaks. The registration process for businesses will allow them to 
be publicly listed on the website, creating a whitelist to facilitate partnerships with exporters. 
Respondents from NFSA staff highlighted this whitelist as a good strategy to encourage businesses to 
interact with NFSA and comply with food safety regulations. They noted that reduced fees and 
procedures on imports for whitelist establishments could serve as an extra incentive.
However, when asked about the registration process with NFSA, a respondent from a 3rd party 
certification company complained of problems with communication. They asked for more avenues of 
communication, such as phone numbers or WhatsApp numbers. For the 3rd party certification 
companies, TAIB is planning to draft standard operating procedures to guide the inspection process. 
These are planned for the near future and should address some of these respondent concerns.
Apart from the above, one of the most important areas of capacity building from TAIB was the 
development of inspection protocols to guide inspectors in the field under the policies, procedures and 
programs sub-activity. In project year 2, TAIB leveraged inspection protocols from the FDA and different 
US states’ Departments of Agriculture to launch the development of a comprehensive inspection 
manual. This manual intends to include step-by-step instructions, protocols and procedures for 
conducting inspections, report writing, sample taking, auditing inspectors, training inspectors, incident 
and crisis management, enforcement, and inspection record retention. Under this inspection manual 
framework, TAIB supported NFSA in developing standard operating procedures for inspection and 
inspection checklists for packhouses, retail establishments, manufactured food and mobile food carts. 
Activity 2: Training: Food Safety and Management
The TAIB project has made great progress in 
training inspectors and NFSA staff. TAIB, NFSA, 
and IFPTI successfully adapted the FD-170 FDA 
training curricula to the Egyptian context and 
translated it to Arabic. The adapted Arabic 
language FD-170 program is now a mandatory 
training for all NFSA food safety inspectors. To 
facilitate the capacity building of trainers within 
NFSA TAIB and IFPTI adopted a training-of-trainer 
approach and led trainings on instructor skills 
including the FD-170 CSIT, which is a course 
designed to practice delivering the FD-170 as an 
instructor and not as a student. A total of 42 people have been trained in a training of trainers program 
by the end of year 3, which includes a skills development course. TAIB has also trained 1,021 people in 
government (e.g.: NFSA inspectors and staff) by the end of project year 3, or 90% of the target for the 
life of the project (1,133) in this category. The total number of people trained in different categories at 
the end of year 3 is 1,495, or 53% of the target for the life of the project (2,821)—this includes trainees 
from firms, producers, and civil society.
“They applied a good strategy in training. At 
the beginning they train people on the basics 
of food safety which is FD170. They applied the 
training of trainers in which they trained 13 
trainers who received highly efficient training 
with the aim for this group to train their 
colleagues. This was done in reality. They 
tested those trainers and selected the first 
group who participated in training the other 
NFSA employees with TAIB team.” (NFSA Staff, 
KII)
30
The NORC evaluation team explored how NFSA staff 
viewed the trainings and to what extent they 
benefitted from the trainings. A respondent from 
NFSA staff commended the success of the training 
of trainers approach, which helps ensure 
sustainability beyond the life of the project and 
called it “highly efficient”. In addition, they noted 
how the iterative nature of the trainings has 
allowed for continual improvement with their 
delivery. The inspectors who received the training 
of trainers expressed their appreciation for the 
training of trainers approach during the FGD discussions, noting how it provided them the confidence 
to train others. 
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the overall numbers of inspectors trained had to be reduced due to 
restrictions on the numbers of participants per training session (down from 30 to 12). However, TAIB 
staff were able to continue implementing this activity and hit their target numbers, using online learning 
tools. TAIB worked with IFPTI to modify FDA’s Good Manufacturing Practices training program (FD-190) 
for remote learning and successfully delivered the training course over eight days to a cadre of NFSA’s 
inspectors. This training was designed to be as interactive as possible.
TAIB is also supporting the incorporation of an adapted FD-207 training (FDA’s Plan Review training 
course) into NFSA’s process for the inspection and approval of catering establishments. A Plan Review 
is a tool to ensure that food establishment layouts are designed to meet the requirements of safe 
food production.
Importantly, TAIB has also facilitated the launch of an online learning management system with eight
courses translated into Arabic, with 7 courses adapted from the FDA. These courses include: NFSA 190: 
Food GMPS, Application and Evidence Development (adapted from FDA); Sanitation Practices (FDA); 
Preventative Controls (FDA); Sampling (FDA); Food Allergens (FDA); FD-170 (FDA); Plumbing (FDA); and 
Advanced HACCP (CODEX). Table 6 lists the numbers of trainees per course in the online learning 
management system.
Table 6: Numbers of Trainees per Course in the Online Learning Management System
Course Description Number of 
Trainees
Online: NFSA 190: Food GMPS, Application and Evidence Development 6
Online: NFSA Basic Food Safety (Packhouse) Training - V2_2020 106
Online-Advanced HACCP- NFSA-Q1-2021 44
Online-Food Allergens- NFSA-Q1-2021 131
Online-Plumbing in food establishments- NFSA-Q1-2021 54
Online-Preventive Controls- NFSA-Q1-2021 121
Online-Sampling- NFSA-Q1-2021 119
Online-Sanitation Practices - NFSA-Q1-2021 129
Source: TAIB Indicator Tables.
“Before the training, I used to be very stressed 
and it is my nature not to talk too much and 
had an introvert personality. But after the 
training, I became more daring and applied my 
training on the 500 Pharmacists who are to be 
appointed by NFSA and they had to receive a 
month of training […] without the training of 
trainers it would have been hard for me to do 
it.” (Inspector, FGD)
31
The trainings that TAIB has provided have led to a shift in the culture of food inspections in Egypt. In the 
focus groups with inspectors, they described how there is now more flexibility with inspections; the 
perception of inspectors being government 
officers coming to punish businesses has been 
changing gradually and they are instead viewed 
more as partners on the same team as the 
businesses, working together to improve their 
operation. To that end, TAIB has not only greatly 
expanded NFSA’s library of technical trainings, 
but they have also rolled out a much appreciated 
‘soft skills’ training to help inspectors deal with 
the social aspects of their work more easily. 
Despite success in developing training curricula and training inspectors, there have been some 
challenges faced by TAIB in improving the knowledge and ability of the NFSA staff. Respondents from 
TAIB explained that simply getting huge numbers of trainees to travel from their respective 
governates to one place on the first day of training was tough. TAIB has also had to tailor trainings to 
inspectors with extremely variable levels of background knowledge.
TAIB has implemented two training systems that help to overcome the challenges with variability 
between inspectors. One is the inclusion of ‘soft skills’ trainings, mentioned above, to help inspectors 
manage relationships with each other, their clients, and their management. This has helped reduce 
tensions. The other system in place is the A,B,C system which ranks inspectors based on evaluations of 
their knowledge from the trainings. This seemed to be a good way to help integrate inspectors from 
other ministries into the general inspectorate work force while avoiding tensions around some having 
much more experience in food safety—in the focus group they clearly understood that their 
classification was not based on age or years of experience but on evaluations of their retention of 
training skills and knowledge.
Despite this difficult balancing of training quality with the need to train large volumes of inspectors, plus 
the COVID-19 pandemic, TAIB is currently on track to meet its targets that were set for the indicators 
under Activity 2. Descriptions of progress against these indicators to date is described below. For more 
detail, please see Annex I.
• Number of individuals who have received short-term agricultural sector productivity or food 
security training as a result of USDA assistance. The target number for this indicator for year 3 is 
770, and at the end of year 3 TAIB has trained 881 people, or 114% of the target. The target 
number of people to be trained by the end of the project is 2,821. As of the end of year 3, TAIB 
has trained 1,495 people, or 53% of the target for the life of the project; so TAIB will need to 
accelerate the rate of training to achieve the target by project’s end. 
• Number of international training programs localized and translated. TAIB has localized and 
translated 10 programs as of the end of year 3, or 63% of the target (16) for the life of the 
project. 
• Number of unique businesses that pass National Food Safety Authority (NFSA) inspection. A total 
of 2,782 businesses have been approved as of the end of year 3, or 52% of the target number 
“In your mission, you meet different factory 
directors. Some of them might not accept that 
you give them some notes and the issue 
would be how to deal with those persons. 
Others might be more likely to engage in long 
argument so our training in communication 
skills gave us the needed skills to deal with 
different personalities.” (Inspector, FGD)
32
for the life of the project of 5,352; 2,492 of these businesses were approved during year 3, 
showing an accelerating pace of approvals as TAIB continues its efforts.
Activity 3: Capacity Building: Promote Improved Policy and Regulatory Frameworks
TAIB support has been enormously impactful in the realm of policies and regulations. Since the 
inception of the project, TAIB prepared policy frameworks and conducted international regulatory 
review for foundational areas of regulatory control including food exports and labelling. The most 
significant pivot in strategy that the project has made is in terms of its priorities among the three 
categories of activities (organizational capacity building, inspector trainings, and regulations). A TAIB 
respondent described this shift in strategy, which now prioritizes regulations first, then inspector 
trainings, then organizational capacity building, “as almost the reverse [of the original prioritization of 
activities].” (TAIB Staff, KII)
NFSA staff also clearly stated in their interviews that 
regulations are their first priority, as evidenced in the 
quote below from an NFSA staff emphasizing the 
importance of developing bylaws. TAIB’s shift in 
strategy reflects not only the priorities of NFSA staff but 
also the priorities of USDA in facilitating trade flows. In 
addition, focusing on regulations is an efficient use of 
TAIB’s technical expertise, and will contribute to the 
sustainability of the project.
Originally, TAIB set a target of 10 policies, regulations, 
and/or administrative procedures passed or adopted as 
a result of USDA assistance over the life of the project. 
In light of the pivot towards prioritizing policies and regulations, they set new targets that increase the 
number of passed or adopted policies to 20 (stage 5), and also sets targets for policies and regulations in 
other stages of development. Table 7 shows all the policies, laws, and regulations TAIB is supporting 
NFSA to pass and the stages of their development. 
Table 7: Policies and Regulations by Stage of Development
Policy, Law, and Regulation Stages
1 2 3 4 5
Chairman's Decree: Reduction in Sampling Rates for Imported Consignments in 
Response to COVID-19 - Policy
Health Certificate - Regulation
Amendment of Decision No. 2 / 2020 – Regulation
Hotel Establishment Licensing - Regulation
Import Chapeau - Regulation
Organic Agriculture Executive regulation - Regulation
Preborder Notification Requirements - Regulation
Pre-Requisite Program for Food Establishments - Regulation
Registration of Third Parties for Issuing Conformity Certificates for Exported 
Consignments and for Imported Consignments- Regulation
“Any good audit system has to rely on 
good bylaws that act as ruler against 
which you measure the right and 
wrong. So the first priority is to finish 
our bylaws […] this is one of the most 
important things TAIB did with NFSA. 
We establish committees and if we 
need some experience that is not 
available, we request TAIB help in this 
regard.” (NFSA Staff, KII)
33
Policy, Law, and Regulation Stages
1 2 3 4 5
Registration of Importers - Regulation
Risk Categorization and Sampling for Imports - Regulation
Veterinary Drug Residues - Regulation
Micro, Small and Medium - Sizes Enterprises executive regulation - Regulation
Customs Law Executive Regulation
Code of Conduct Technical Draft - Regulation
Registration of Food Safety Management Systems Certification Bodies - Regulation
Mobile Food Carts Technical Requirements – Regulation
Food Export Control - Policy
Food Additives - Regulation
Technical Requirements for Food Storage Establishments – Regulation
Temporary Release Requirements for Imported Food Consignments – Regulation
Food Sanction Law (Amending Law No. 1/2017 of the National Food Safety 
Authority – Law
Traceability - Regulation
Sanctions Law – Law
Pesticides – Regulation
Judicial Officers - Regulation
Exporting Country Recognition Agreements - Regulation
Administration of Imports and Exports - Regulation
Food Central Laboratories - Regulation
Amending decision 1/2019 for the Salt - Regulation
Chemical Contaminants
Food Transportation - Regulation
Harmonized Food Law Guideline for CCAfrica Region - Policy
Domestic Risk Categorization - Policy
Agriculture Quarantine - Law
Slaughterhouses - Regulation
Packhouse Technical Regulation - Regulation
Microbiological Contaminants - Regulation
Licensing of Establishments in Free Zones – Regulation
Food Expiration Dates - Regulation
Food contact material - Regulation
Fish and Fish Products - Regulation
Bakeries establishments - Regulation
Source: Monitoring Data: All Policy Law Regulation Progress as of 11/11/2021
34
Below is a description of TAIB’s progress against indicators for activity 3 to date. For more detail, please 
see Annex I.
• As of the end of Year 3, TAIB has achieved the passage of 14 policies, regulations, and 
administrative procedures, or 140% of the original target and 70% of the new target. 
• Under activity 3, TAIB also measured progress with the indicator, Number of individuals 
benefiting indirectly from USDA-funded interventions, which covers awareness raising activities 
such as publishing guides, manuals, and frequently asked question documents for industry to 
improve the implementation environment for policies and regulations. The target for the life of 
the project is 55,500, and 44,252 individuals have indirectly benefited as of the end of year 3, or 
80% progress against the target.
The most significant regulation supported by TAIB 
was Decision No. 7 of 2020, which was the 
technical regulation for the risk-based design of
food import control. This regulation removed 
NFSA’s 100% systematic inspection approach and 
transitioned Egypt to a risk-based approach. Then, 
in January 2021, Decision No. 6 of 2020: Importer 
Licensing Requirements entered into force, 
launching the first stage of NFSA’s new food 
import control system. In February 2021, the 
Ministry of Finance issued Decree No. 38/2021,
establishing a pre-shipment registration system under a new single window. This single window system 
is slated to roll out in October of 2021. TAIB is supporting this rollout to ensure that the requirements 
under NFSA’s food import control system regulation and strategy are incorporated into the system. In 
addition, TAIB supported NFSA with the implementation of the new risk-based food import control 
system through developing the process for food import licensing and drafting NFSA’s food commodity 
risk list that categorizes foods based on their potential to harbor harmful pathogens and hazards. 
Aligning regulations with international standards is key for TAIB’s impacts on public health and nutrition 
security in Egypt. Egypt is an import-dependent country, so regulations that make imports more efficient 
and cheaper have significant implications for food 
security. The new import control strategy will be 
extremely important moving forward in facilitating 
trade and ultimately reducing prices of quality food 
items for Egyptian consumers. In addition, 
improved inspection processes will ensure that 
both imported food and domestically produced 
food is safer to eat. NFSA staff, in their KIIs, outlined 
ambitions to focus on the food safety for the 
domestic sector in the coming years.
There are more technical regulations, executive regulations, a sanction law, and policies in the pipeline. 
Some of these that have been drafted but not yet issued include: a Prime Ministerial Decree that would 
organize the central food laboratories operating at Egyptian ports to be under the administration of 
“The most important [support from TAIB] is 
issuing the legislations and bylaws and these 
are the most important success stories 
between NFSA and TAIB. In particular, 
decree #7 for year 2020 which focuses on 
risk-based auditing. I consider it one of the 
most important and successful decrees for 
NFSA […] on the legislative side, TAIB was 
very successful.” (NFSA Staff, KII)
“We enter a new activity every day, we 
started with exports and now we are 
entering supermarkets, restaurants and 
touristic sector and this would require an 
ongoing support from TAIB. […] Long term, 
I would say that the last thing we have are 
street vendors and the uncontrolled 
sector.” (NFSA Staff, KII)
35
NFSA; technical regulations for food storage; temporary release requirements for imported food 
consignments; a chemical contaminants technical regulation that would transition Egypt away from 
relying on European Union protocols and towards adopting CODEX guidance on risk based management; 
recognition agreements with foreign competent authorities; and guidance for food expiration dates.
However, there remains some room to support NFSA’s communications with private businesses. During 
KII, private sector respondents complained that NFSA did not communicate with them transparently 
around the regulatory process. TAIB has been active in supporting the private sector businesses; it held 
workshops with industry representatives to help them understand the new regulatory requirements. In 
2021, TAIB organized one workshop for 41 representatives from food industries to discuss the 
differences between the old and new food import control systems, explain the benefits of the risk-based 
approach, and outline the requirements for applying for food import licenses. Another workshop was 
attended by 26 participants from private sector associations, international development projects, and 
large-scale trade businesses to review the TAIB-supported Supplier Zero Traceability Manual and discuss 
approaches to train industry on new traceability requirements.
TAIB has also directed efforts to fostering good relationships 
between NFSA and the Chamber of Food Industries, which 
will allow for the private sector to take on a more involved 
role in the development of regulations, policies, and 
strategies, as well as creating a good enabling environment 
for their implementation. The respondent from CFI 
highlighted the importance of a common understanding of 
the visions and priorities of NSFA. CFI members consider the 
Chamber as a formal representative of the whole sector. 
When some businesses are stuck in corrective procedures 
which might require some understanding and discussion 
between the companies and NFSA, the Chamber works as a 
moderator, and when NFSA wants to disseminate messages 
across the industry, the Chamber is an excellent platform for 
these messages.
3.2.3 Evaluation of TAIB efficiency 
A major feature of the TAIB project is its flexibility in the 
face of changing priorities from NFSA. Respondents from 
TAIB explained that NFSA is navigating a difficult political 
environment that can influence its priorities rapidly. 
However, while NFSA staff may sense the changes in policy 
direction or priorities from the Government, TAIB staff are 
not always privy to such information. The management of 
TAIB has been challenged with changing priorities outside of 
the control of the project that dictates its activities and 
timeline. However, TAIB staff have shown high levels of resourcefulness in figuring out ways of side￾stepping obstacles, overcoming challenges, and continuing to make progress against their mandates 
even if this progress does not come out of the activities originally envisioned.
“We are perfectly aligned. […] TAIB, 
as part of its mission and 
responsibilities, is responsible for 
cooperating with NFSA and CFI at the 
same time to facilitate 
communicating any NFSA output to 
the food sector in Egypt in a clear 
way so a common understanding at 
the level of visions and priorities can 
be achieved.” (Chamber of Food 
Industries, KII)
“I think the project adjusted very 
well, to the needs of NFSA […] I'm 
really very proud of my time with 
working with NFSA and TAIB project 
very, very helpful and very good and 
excellent staff, leadership.” (USDA, 
KII)
36
TAIB has also been making good use of MEL data in adjusting their approach in some areas. One way in 
which the TAIB project improved on its approach in response to MEL data was to expand their activities 
to work with other stakeholders in the food safety sector instead of focusing solely on NFSA. By working 
with stakeholders like the Chamber of Food Industries, TAIB can improve the regulatory environment 
and make new processes and technical regulations easier to implement.
Finally, in response to NFSA indicating that its priority was to pass policies and regulations leveraging TAIB’s 
technical expertise, TAIB changed its original prioritization of the three activities to draft and pass more 
regulations, updating their target numbers and even re-allocating their budget. The original and the amended 
budget, as of September of 2021, allocated across the three activity areas are presented in Figure 11.
Figure 11: Original and Amended Budget Allocation across the Three TAIB Activity Areas
3.2.4 Key Success Factors and Challenges for the TAIB project 
Key Success Factors
One of the major successes of TAIB thus far has been the trust and partnership that they have fostered 
with NFSA. In particular, TAIB’s willingness to be responsive to NFSA’s priorities and objectives instead of 
rigidly keeping to their own agenda has been crucially important. A TAIB respondent explained that at 
first, they planned out the next six months or a year into the future, but soon realized that this was not 
agile enough to respond to NFSA’s changing priorities. So, they shortened the duration of their plans to 
3 months or even one month. TAIB’s agility was recognized by the NFSA Staff who stated, “With every 
stage NFSA goes through, TAIB provides support which in most cases is different from its original plan.” 
(NFSA Staff, KII)
37
The flexibility of the TAIB project has been a key 
factor in the success of the project despite the 
challenge of frequently pivoting strategies and 
priorities and has earned them a role as a 
trusted partner of NFSA. This overarching 
strategy of being flexible and responsive to the 
needs of NFSA was also recognized by the 
respondent from USDA who commended the 
management of the project.
Another aspect that was clear from the KIIs is 
that one of the most important value-adds 
that TAIB brings to the table is technical expertise. NFSA staff greatly appreciated being able to 
access experts through TAIB’s networks, especially for international experience in specific areas of 
food safety science.
In terms of successes to be replicated, a prime example is TAIB’s efforts to develop alternative processes 
to work with middle management. A respondent from TAIB recommended that “TAIB needs to continue 
to work with the middle management in NFSA, this is a very important point.” (TAIB Staff, KII) In 
addition, continuing the collaboration with stakeholders in the private sector; TAIB activities with the 
Chamber of Food Industries will continue to be important for their efficacy. 
Challenges 
There were several internal and external factors that influenced TAIB’s ability to implement project 
activities as planned. Most of these factors will also continue to be challenges for TAIB as they progress 
towards the end of the project, which may require TAIB to work around them to maintain their pace and 
reach the targets by the end of the project. 
Overlapping Food Safety Activities between NFSA and Ministries. Among the external factors, there 
are continual conflicts between NFSA and other ministries that have historically been tasked with food 
safety oversight. While overlap with ministries is starting to decrease, this is a slow process as NFSA 
builds its capacity and takes on more and more oversight over different sectors. The work that TAIB is 
doing to train inspectors and build NFSA’s capacity is key to reducing overlap between them and other 
ministries. 
Broader Cultural Awareness around Food Safety.
Yet another external factor that is important for 
the long-term success of the project is broader 
cultural awareness around food safety. Improving 
this awareness would not only help the Egyptian 
public but would also make inspections easier. 
NFSA staff in their KIIs expressed the need for more 
public campaigns around food safety.
TAIB has already done some work on this front, but 
NFSA staff has more ideas about how public 
awareness materials can be updated and expanded moving forward. They called for an updated short 
“You know, we have been responsive to so 
many needs of [NFSA], it was just natural 
when they had another need […] they came 
to us. […] I think it's really important for 
future projects, to recognize that and to go 
into every conversation with your 
counterpart […] and be open to 
understanding their point of view and what 
their priorities are.” (TAIB Staff, KII)
“We also have a challenge of changing the 
society and culture with regard to food safety. 
People are used to specific practices. To 
change these practices will take a long time 
[…] This is one of the issues that we need to 
work on with TAIB. TAIB can support activities 
to deliver media messages to the public about 
food safety.” (NFSA Staff, KII)
38
movie on the NFSA as well as branching out into radio and television in coming phases of the project. 
This was echoed in the focus groups with inspectors, who complained that consumer culture around 
food safety is a barrier to their work as well since the people they interact with for inspections do not 
take their mission seriously. 
The COVID-19 pandemic. Finally, as in everywhere else in the world, the COVID-19 pandemic impacted 
implementation of some of the TAIB activities, especially those related to capacity building and training. 
At the same time, it also catalyzed processes that will enhance the sustainability of the project: namely, 
investments in digitization and acclimation to reduced sampling rates. 
In the beginning of the pandemic, TAIB implementation activities were slowed and for a brief period, 
halted before technologies to facilitate communication were established. A respondent from TAIB 
described this abrupt change in working environment: “Before COVID we used to exist inside NFSA all 
the time and on a continuous contact and discussion with NFSA policy makers whether on current issues 
or future ones, receive their support and notes all the time. But with COVID, NFSA was shut down for a 
while and started to change place and have more than one place. In addition, we had to work in turns 
and cycles and we worked from home.” (TAIB Staff, KII)
The pandemic also diverted attention away from some of the planned organizational capacity building 
sub-activities under Activity 1, as TAIB staff were focused on passing the temporary measure to reduce 
sampling rates to 25% to protect the health of the inspectors and facilitate trade during the pandemic 
(Decision No. 3 of 2020 Reduced Sampling Due to COVID-19), converting trainings to digital formats, and 
ensuring that all NFSA staff had the necessary materials to protect themselves and stay safe. However, 
the temporary measure to reduce sampling to 25% aligned nicely with the switch to risk-based sampling; 
since NFSA is moving away from 100% inspection and sampling anyway, a TAIB respondent explained, 
this helped sensitize people to reduced inspection rates—dropping down to 25% allowed stakeholders 
to get used to a different system than 100% consignment.
The COVID-19 pandemic posed an enormous challenge for TAIB’s training activities under activity 2, 
especially since food safety trainings often include important demonstrations of techniques, so it was
difficult to adapt them to virtual or hybrid formats. The pandemic pushed TAIB to continue to invest in 
digital ways of conducting trainings by establishing an online learning platform with 8 internet-based 
courses, based on FDA and CODEX trainings and translated into Arabic. This was a continuation of 
investments in digitization that had begun before the pandemic, investments that greatly facilitated 
TAIB’s activities during the crisis. Before the pandemic, TAIB staff were able to host trainings in their 
offices with rooms that could hold up to 22 inspectors, but during the pandemic they had to enforce a 
maximum number of 12 people per room. However, they still hit their targets number of inspectors to 
train. 
Now that the virtual trainings are created 
and the technology is in place, these tools 
should help TAIB in its continued work in 
keeping up with demands for trained 
inspectors as NFSA expands rapidly. 
However, there could be hybrid solutions 
that would allow for more individual 
“The interaction is not as good as the face to face, in 
some cases, when I do not understand a specific 
thing, I can talk to the trainer during the break. On 
Zoom, a break means that the trainer is off and you 
cannot communicate with him.” (Inspector, FGD)
39
attention for trainees as well as practical, hands-on demonstration of techniques, because the 
inspectors in the focus group identified problems with virtual training that would create trade-offs in 
continuing to conduct them virtually. 
3.2.5 Sustainability of TAIB Project Activities 
Project Benefits Likely to be Sustained Past the Project Lifespan
Most of the activities of the TAIB project are specifically designed to outlive the project, such as 
developing training curricula, operating procedures and job descriptions, or regulations. One of the key 
elements of the TAIB training agenda has been to bring international experts to implement a train-the￾trainer approach and to mentor these NFSA trainers as they conduct the training themselves for other 
NFSA staff. The training curricula are being institutionalized by NFSA and they are now conducting some 
training by themselves. 
NFSA staff was particularly cognizant during the KII 
of the lasting impact of the regulations that TAIB 
supported, and greatly appreciate their role in 
bringing in experts and helping to align regulations 
with international standards. However, it is also 
the organizational capacity building products such 
as job descriptions and standard operating 
procedures that will continue to provide benefits 
for NFSA long into the future. Multiple 
respondents from TAIB pointed to these capacity 
building deliverables as central to the 
sustainability of the project. 
Finally, TAIB’s collaboration with the CFI is likely to have a longer-term effect on Egypt’s food sector. 
Over the course of the TAIB project, project leadership has increasingly recognized the importance of 
working with CFI and has begun implementing activities to foster their collaboration and assistance. 
Specifically, in the last year TAIB has worked on reviewing the Chamber’s organizational structure and 
job descriptions for their departments, and also provided trainings for 6 staff members of the Chamber 
of Food Industries that were designated to serve as future trainers. The training programs focused on 
NFSA’s Law, regulations, and other food related legislation that impacts food businesses in the private 
sector. Through these activities, TAIB has had a positive and sustainable impact on the implementation 
environment for new NFSA regulations and processes.
Elements Unlikely to be Sustained Past the Project Lifespan
Despite the focus of TAIB on sustainability, there are a few activities that seem unlikely to be sustained 
past the end of the project. The activities that are least sustainable are the provisions of equipment or 
funding. 
“There's a direct impact, because the 
standards that are in place affect trade 
facilitation in both ways. […] Through this 
project, for example, Egypt was able to study 
the risk assessment methodology standards, 
and […] establish limits or maximum residue 
limits that are based on Codex […] that's 
probably the most important I would say, 
takeaway from this project, is to allow that 
process to take place in Egypt. So that the 
standards are science based and consistent 
with international norms.” (USDA, KII))
40
4.Conclusions and Recommendations At midline, we conducted a mixed-method evaluation of the TAIB project to examine its impact. We 
employed two different approaches, one involving a macro-level trade analysis to examine the impacts 
of TAIB on Egyptian exports and imports and the other a performance evaluation based on document 
reviews, key informant interviews, and focus-group discussions to examine the progress and impacts of 
TAIB activities, their effectiveness in reaching targets, and sustainability. The summary of the findings is 
presented below. 
4.1 Trade Analysis Findings 
We conduct a quasi-experimental impact evaluation to determine whether we can detect changes in the 
values of exports and imports that can be attributed to the TAIB project. The evaluation design requires
comparing actual trade to its counterfactual, that is, what trade would have been without the TAIB
intervention. The approach involves comparing trade values of specific product categories subject to 
NFSA inspection – the intervention group – to counterfactual values synthesized from trade categories 
not regulated by NFSA but containing products with characteristics of differing degrees of similarity to 
those in the intervention group – the comparison group. The latter synthesis is carried out using a 
statistical matching technique. The findings from the trade analysis are:
• TAIB has had an impact on exports in 2019 that were almost 12-percent higher than what they 
would have been had TAIB not been implemented. This effect translates into a US$ increase in 
exports of almost 293 million (constant 2010).
• TAIB’s has had an impact on exports in 2020 that were almost 8-percent higher than what 
they would have been had TAIB not been implemented and the COVID-19 pandemic not 
occurred. This effect translates into a US$ increase in exports of almost 185 million (constant 
2010).
• TAIB has had an impact on imports in 2019 that were ten-percent higher than what they 
would have been had TAIB not been implemented. This effect translates into a US$ increase in 
imports of almost one billion (constant 2010).
• TAIB’s impact on imports in 2020 is uncertain. Despite the evaluation team’s best effort, we 
could not calculate a credible estimate for TAIB’s impact on imports in 2020. The issue may be 
that some of the comparison imports experienced infrequent trade flows over the analysis 
period, resulting in significant volatility. 
One of the biggest challenges facing the present impact evaluation is that the onset of the pandemic 
took place between the start-up of TAIB and (for now) the midline. This requires that we statistically dis￾entangle the COVID-19 effects on Egypt’s trade flows from those of TAIB for detecting actual impacts on 
trade. While we developed analytic tests to disentangle the TAIB effects from the COVID effects, key 
data elements from 2020 and 2021 required to carry out the tests were not publicly available at this 
time. While we have more confidence in the impact estimates for 2019, we recommend caution in using 
and interpreting the impacts estimates for 2020.
41
4.2 Performance Evaluation Findings 
We conducted a non-experimental performance evaluation using document reviews, key informant 
interviews (KIIs) and focus-group discussions (FGDs). The goal of the performance evaluation was to 
provide a wholistic account of TAIB project’s progress on its activities to date, assesses its impacts, and 
how it has performed against its targets. We also examine the success factors to TAIB’s performance, 
key challenges that it faced, and the extent to which the TAIB activities are sustainable. This evaluation 
found that:
TAIB has made significant progress in almost all activity areas against its targets for Activity 1, 
institutional capacity building. TAIB developed an assessment tool to track the progress in increasing 
NFSA institutional capacity that the evaluation team found very useful. By the end of project year 3, the
score exceeded the Project Year 3 target and represents 85.7% of the target for the life of the project. One 
of the significant achievements in this activity was the development of inspection protocols.
TAIB successfully developed trainings and adopted a train-the-trainer approach that was lauded by 
NFSA staff, inspectors, and other trainees. TAIB brought, for the first time, a suite of food safety 
training programs approved by the FDA to a foreign food competent authority leveraging the expertise 
of American food safety professionals to strengthen Egypt’s food inspectorate workforce. Although the 
COVID-19 pandemic was disruptive, TAIB was able to continue work on activities thanks to pre￾pandemic investments in digitization and further measures such as setting up institutional zoom 
accounts for NFSA staff and creating an online Learning Management Platform (LMS) to continue 
trainings digitally. TAIB has been able to train close to 1,500 people in many different areas over the life 
of the project. Although the project is on track to meet its year 3 target, it must accelerate the rate of 
training to meet the target of training 2,821 people by project’s end. 
TAIB’s support has been enormously impactful in the realm of policies and regulations. As of the first 
half of year 3, TAIB has achieved the passage of 12 policies, regulations, and administrative procedures, 
that surpassed the original target. The most significant regulations supported by TAIB was Decision No. 7 
of 2020, which was the technical regulation for the risk-based design of food import control, and 
Decision No. 13 of the Year 2020, which removed Egypt’s zero tolerance on Ractopamine. But there are 
also tensions between NFSA and the private sector around lack of communications that may weaken the 
long-term transparency in development of Egypt’s regulatory framework. 
The flexibility of the TAIB project has been a key factor in the success of the project despite the 
challenge of frequently pivoting strategies and priorities. Expanding the reach of the project to the 
Chamber of Food Industries (CFI), shortening the duration of plans submitted to NFSA, and forging 
strong working relationships with mid-level NFSA staff have been effective strategies to ensure progress. 
There are substantial internal and external challenges that may impede the progress of the project 
and/or impact its sustainability. There remains a lack of cultural awareness around food safety in the 
broader Egyptian community that hampers both the inspection process and the general demand for safe 
products.
42
4.3 Recommendations 
Based on the findings of the performance evaluation, NORC proposes that the TAIB project consider 
implementing the recommendations below. Many of these recommendations call for continuing 
strategies that TAIB has already developed to circumnavigate obstacles to implementation. In these 
cases, NORC found that TAIB’s strategies have been effective in moving project activities forward
despite persistent challenges. Other recommendations propose new activities that could enhance 
project sustainability and efficacy moving forward.
Continue to work with the entire system of stakeholders such as the CFI to lay the groundwork for 
implementation of new regulations and policies. This was an effective strategy for TAIB to continue 
improving food safety in Egypt despite external challenges outside of their control. Not only did 
awareness raising and capacity building activities for other stakeholders allow TAIB to continue 
activities when facing delays, these activities are also crucially important to create a conducive 
environment for new regulations to be implemented. The Chamber of Food Industries is a key 
stakeholder that can facilitate communication between NFSA and the food industry and can help 
guide businesses through new processes being implemented.
Increase the engagement of private sector stakeholders in the regulation development process 
with a system that allows them to comment on drafts. This was a recommendation that came up in 
interviews with both private sector respondents and TAIB staff. Improving feedback processes 
between NFSA and the food industry would help align regulations and policies with the needs and 
incentives of private businesses, which in turn will make their implementation smoother and more 
effective.
Focus on improving avenues of communication between private sector companies and NFSA, in 
particular, with point people that can be contacted or phone services so that everything is not 
over email. Respondents from the private sector described challenges with communication, 
particularly during NFSA licensing processes. TAIB is already planning to develop standard operating 
procedures for new channels of communication, and this will be very helpful in facilitating 
businesses to register with NFSA. Specifically, respondents called for a point person who could 
manage communications so that responses to corrections and questions are faster and clearer.
Make small improvements to the trainings such as including more demonstrations of application 
of theory and videotaping them. The switch to virtual trainings, while necessary for the pandemic 
and useful to maximize numbers of inspectors trained, entailed some tradeoffs. Inspectors in the 
focus group discussions explained that it was difficult to bridge theory and practice, and that the 
virtual format of training took away opportunities for individual guidance. Thus, they called for more 
demonstrations of applying theory, as well as more opportunities to ask questions in person. 
Additionally, NFSA staff requested more videotaped trainings so their trainers can continue using 
them as resources past the end of the project.
Scale up consumer awareness activities around the importance of food safety, especially in 
agricultural regions where inspectors frequently work. Improving consumer awareness of food 
safety was a clear priority from the Government of Egypt and NFSA, not only for better public health 
outcomes, but also to facilitate smoother and easier inspections. Inspectors in focus group 
43
discussions described confusion from business owners that did not understand why they were being 
asked to make improvements. This was especially an issue in more rural areas.
Continue to seek out and build relationships with middle management at NFSA. TAIB has 
implemented a strategy of building relationships and establishing technical working groups with 
middle management to spread out these responsibilities. This has been a successful approach and 
should be continued to avoid delays and to keep work flowing as much as possible.
44
Annex I. TAIB Performance Indicators and Targets for FY2021 and 
Life of the Project 
Activity Performance Indicator Disaggregation Baseline Targets Y3 Achieved 
Y3
Targets 
LOP
Achieved 
LOP
% of LOP 
Achievement
Activity 1 Number of organizations with 
increased performance improvement 
with USDA assistance
Total 0 1 1 2 1 50%
Government Agencies 0 1 1 1 1 100%
Activity 3 Number of public-private partnerships 
formed as a result of USDA assistance
Total 0 0 0 0 1 100%
Other (Chamber of Food 
Industries) 0 0 0 1 1 100%
Activity 1 Value of new USG commitments and 
new public and private sector 
investment leveraged by USDA to 
support food security and nutrition
Total
0 $151,200 $46,865 $567,059 $394,946 70%
Activity 3 Number of policies, regulations and/or 
administrative procedures in each of 
the following stages of development 
as a result of USDA assistance
Total 0 12 23 24 46 192%
Stage 1 0 0 4 3 16 533%
Stage 2 0 3 3 7 3 43%
Stage3 0 0 8 5 11 220%
Stage 4 0 2 2 9 6 67%
Stage 5 0 7 6 20 10 50%
Activity 2 Value of change in trade as a result of 
NFSA oversight
Processed/Value added 
Products TOTAL TBD 1.0% 10.4% 3.0% 10.4% 347%
Activity 2 Number of individuals who have 
received short-term agricultural sector 
productivity or food security training 
as a result of USDA assistance
Total 0 770 881 2,821 1,495 53%
Male 0 539 405 2,281 878 38%
Female 0 231 476 990 617 62%
New 0 700 804 2,821 1,495 53%
45
Activity Performance Indicator Disaggregation Baseline Targets Y3 Achieved 
Y3
Targets 
LOP
Achieved 
LOP
% of LOP 
Achievement
Continuing 0 70 110 450 301 67%
People in firms 0 520 31 2,122 410 19%
People in Government 0 250 846 1,133 1,021 90%
People in Civil Society 0 0 4 16 41 256%
Activity 2 Number of individuals participating in 
USDA food security programs
Total 0 770 881 2,821 1,495 53%
Male 0 539 405 2,281 878 38%
Female 0 231 476 990 617 62%
15-29 years old 0 308 570 1,290 687 53%
30+ years old 0 462 302 1,981 730 37%
People in government 0 250 846 1,133 1,021 90%
Proprietors of USDA￾assisted private sector 
firms
0 0 0 0 0 -
People in Civil Society 0 0 4 16 41 256%
Laborers 0 520 27 2,122 410 19%
Activity 3 Number of individuals benefiting 
indirectly from USDA-funded 
interventions
Total
0 16,000 33,502 55,500 44,252 80%
Activity 2 Number of unique businesses that 
pass National Food Safety Authority 
(NFSA) inspection
Total
180 700 2,492 5,352 2,782 52%
Activity 2 Number of administrative policies and 
procedures issued or adopted by NFSA
Total
0 5 7 24 20 83%
Activity 2 Number of international training 
programs localized and translated
Total
0 4 5 16 10 63%
46
Annex II. List of Treated and Untreated Categories HS￾Category Description
Treated Categories
02 Meat and edible meat offal
03 Fish and crustaceans, mollusks and other aquatic invertebrates
04 Dairy produce; birds eggs; natural honey; edible products of animal origin, not elsewhere 
specified or included
05 Products of animal origin, not elsewhere specified
07 Edible vegetables and certain roots and tubers
08 Edible fruit and nuts; peel of citrus fruit or melons
09 Coffee, tea, mate and spices
10 Cereals
11 Products of the milling industry; malt; starches; inulin; wheat gluten
12 Oil seeds and oleaginous fruits; miscellaneous grains, seeds and fruit; industrial or medicinal 
plants; straw and fodder
15 Animal or vegetable fats and oils and their cleavage products; prepared edible fats; animal or 
vegetable waxes
16 Preparations of meat, of fish or of crustaceans, mollusks or other aquatic invertebrates
17 Sugars and sugar confectionery
18 Cocoa and cocoa preparations
19 Preparations of cereals, flour, starch or milk; pastrycooks' products
20 Preparations of vegetables, fruit or nuts or other parts of plants
21 Miscellaneous edible preparations
22 Beverages, spirits and vinegar
Untreated Categories
1 Live animals
6 Live trees and other plants; bulbs, roots and the like; cut flowers and ornamental foliage
13 Lac; gums, resins and other vegetable saps and extracts
14 Vegetable plaiting materials; vegetable products not elsewhere specified or included
23 Residues and waste from the food industries; prepared animal fodder
24 Tobacco and manufactured tobacco substitutes
25 Salt; sulfur; earths and stone; plastering materials, lime and cement
26 Ores, slag and ash
47
HS￾Category Description
27 Mineral fuels, mineral oils and products of their distillation; bituminous substances; mineral 
waxes
28 Inorganic chemicals; organic or inorganic compounds of precious metals, of rare-earth metals, of 
radioactive elements or of isotopes
29 Organic chemicals
30 Pharmaceutical products
31 Fertilizers
32 Tanning or dyeing extracts; tannins and their derivatives; dyes, pigments and other colouring 
matter; paints and varnishes; putty and other mastics; inks
33 Essential oils and resinoids; perfumery, cosmetic or toilet preparations
34 Soap, organic surface-active agents , washing preparations, lubricating preparations, artificial 
waxes, prepared waxes, polishing or scouring preparations, candles and similar articles, modelling 
pastes, "dental waxes" and dental preparations with a basis of plaster
35 Albuminoidal substances; modified starches; glues; enzymes
36 Explosives; pyrotechnic products; matches; pyrophoric alloys; certain combustible preparations
37 Photographic or cinematographic goods
38 Miscellaneous chemical products
39 Plastics and articles thereof
40 Rubber and articles thereof
41 Raw hides and skins (other than fur skins) and leather
42 Articles of leather; saddlery and harness; travel goods, handbags and similar containers; articles 
of animal gut (other than silk-worm gut)
43 Fur skins and artificial fur; manufactures thereof
44 Wood and articles of wood; wood charcoal
45 Cork and articles of cork
46 Manufactures of straw, of esparto or of other plaiting materials; basketware and wickerwork
47 Pulp of wood or of other fibrous cellulose material; recovered (waste and scrap) paper or 
paperboard
48 Paper and paperboard; articles of paper pulp, of paper or of paperboard
49 Printed books, newspapers, pictures and other products of the printing industry; manuscripts, 
typescripts and plans.
50 Silk
51 Wool, fine or coarse animal hair; horsehair yarn and woven fabric
52 Cotton
53 Other vegetable textile fibers; paper yarn and woven fabric of paper yarn
48
HS￾Category Description
54 Man-made filaments
55 Man-made staple fibers
56 Wadding, felt and non-wovens; special yarns, twine, cordage, ropes and cables and articles 
thereof
57 Carpets and other textile floor coverings
58 Special woven fabrics; tufted textile fabrics; lace, tapestries; trimmings; embroidery
59 Impregnated, coated, covered or laminated textile fabrics; textile articles of a kind suitable for 
industrial use
60 Knitted or crocheted fabrics
61 Articles of apparel and clothing accessories, knitted or crocheted
62 Articles of apparel and clothing accessories, not knitted or crocheted
63 Other made up textile articles; sets; worn clothing and worn textile articl ...
64 Footwear, gaiters and the like; parts of such articles
65 Headgear and parts thereof
66 Umbrellas, sun umbrellas, walking sticks, seat sticks, whips, riding-crops
67 Prepared feathers and down and articles made of feathers or of down; artificial flowers; articles 
of human hair
68 Articles of stone, plaster, cement, asbestos, mica or similar materials
69 Ceramic products
70 Glass and glassware
71 Natural or cultured pearls, precious or semi-precious stones, precious metals, metals clad with 
precious metal and articles thereof; imitation, jewelry; coin
72 Iron and steel
73 Articles of iron or steel
74 Copper and articles thereof
75 Nickel and articles thereof
76 Aluminum and articles thereof
78 Lead and articles thereof
79 Zinc and articles thereof
80 Tin and articles thereof
81 Other base metals; cermets; articles thereof
82 Tools, implements, cutlery, spoons and forks, of base metal; parts thereof of base metal
83 Miscellaneous articles of base metal
84 Nuclear reactors, boilers, machinery and mechanical appliances; parts thereof
49
HS￾Category Description
85 Electrical machinery and equipment and parts thereof; sound recorders and reproducers, 
television image and sound recorders and reproducers, and parts and accessories of such articles
86 Railway or tramway locomotives, rolling-stock and parts thereat railway or tramway track fixtures
87 Vehicles other than railway or tramway rolling stock, and parts and accessories thereof
88 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof
89 Ships, boats and floating structures
90 Optical, photographic, cinematographic, measuring, checking, precision, medical or surgical 
instruments and apparatus; parts and accessories thereof
91 Clocks and watches and parts thereof
92 Musical instruments; parts and accessories of such articles
93 Arms and ammunition; parts and accessories thereof
94 Furniture; bedding, mattresses, mattress supports, cushions and similar stuffed furnishings; 
lamps and lighting fittings, not elsewhere specified or included; illuminated signs, illuminated 
name¬plates and the like; prefabricated buildings
95 Toys, games and sports requisites; parts and accessories thereof
96 Miscellaneous manufactured articles
97 Works of art, collectors' pieces and antiques
99 Commodities not specified according to kind
50
Annex III. Supplement to Midline Trade Analysis 
In order to keep the body of the text as easy to read as possible, the statistical descriptions of the 
methodologies used in Chapter 2 are presented in this annex. There are four sections in this annex: the 
first section (Annex to 2.1.2) provides technical details for the econometric estimation of the interrupted 
time series with potential outcomes (ITSPO) framework impact estimates; the second section (Annex to 
2.1.3) presents findings on the prediction accuracy of the counterfactual when the unit of analysis is the 
country trading partner as opposed to HS trade categories; the third section provides (Annex to 2.2) 
technical details for the analysis of movement toward increasing trade; and the final section (Annex to 
2.3) discusses technical details for the analysis of mitigation of COVID-19 bias from the trade impact 
estimates. 
Annex to 2.1.2: Econometric estimation of ITSPO framework impact 
estimates 
In Section 2.1.2, we presented the results of what we called the unconditional impact estimates. These 
were derived from a simple difference of the actual observed values of treatment and the 
corresponding values of the counterfactual as estimated from entropy matching. This is what is called a 
design-based quasi-experimental estimate since the matching is assumed to create two groups 
mimicking random assignment. There is no additional conditioning of these differences using covariates 
in an attribution model to account for sources of asymmetric influences on the treatment and 
comparison groups. This reduces the precision of the impact estimate and could even lead to omitted￾variable bias. 
As mentioned in 2.1.2, a more sophisticated approach would have been to utilize a model specification 
and conditioning covariates and would be estimated over the combined pre-intervention and 
intervention period, 2014-2020:
47 However, we were not able to perform this conditional approach due 
to dearth of data for 2020 and 2021. The equation for this model is: 
Here, the 𝛼𝛼𝑛𝑛 are coefficients to be estimated, when i equals 1 then 𝑋𝑋𝑡𝑡,𝑠𝑠,𝑖𝑖 denotes its actual outcome 
data and when i equals 0 then 𝑋𝑋𝑡𝑡,𝑠𝑠,𝑖𝑖 denotes the counterfactual outcome data (the synthetic 
comparison values derived from the matching) for the period 𝑡𝑡 = [2014,2015, … 2020], 𝑇𝑇𝑡𝑡 = 0 prior to 
TAIB (≤2018) and 1 once NFSA is running (≥2018), 𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠,𝑖𝑖 is the experimental group (treatment or 
comparison) and equal to 1 if i is a treated observation and 0 otherwise, is a HS category fixed 
effect.
48 Last, the vector, captures various sources influencing intertemporal variation in the out￾47 Of course the down-side of the added sophistication is the introduction of additional assumptions in the form of 
the model specification.
48Note that there is no𝐺𝐺𝑡𝑡,𝑠𝑠𝑇𝑇𝑡𝑡
. 
{𝜉𝜉𝑠𝑠}
𝒁𝒁𝑡𝑡,𝑠𝑠
(s)
51
come indicators specific to a sector.49 At the macro level, there will be exchange-rate, and interest-rate 
fluctuations, and political and policy shocks (e.g., strikes, changes in government). The maintained 
assumption is that these would affect all sectors – and, therefore, treatment and comparison groups –
roughly equally. Next there may be within-food-sector sources of variation, such as weather, exogenous 
wage and price shocks to food-sector inputs (domestic or imported), and, of course, regulatory (NFSA) 
influences. Finally, there will be firm-level factors, but, in the present case, these are limited to the 
number of firms and employment in each subsector since NORC currently does not have access to firms’ 
or NFSA’s data. Taking derivatives with respect to 𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠,𝑖𝑖 and 𝑇𝑇𝑡𝑡, the gap between the treatment and 
comparison groups over the intervention period would be calculated as .
50 For the midline 
application of Equation (2-1), we have excluded , but retained the time trend and HS-code fixed 
effects. 
To convert the results of the above calculation of the US$ value of the trade impacts is based on the 
following methodology. Let be the US$ value of the TAIB impact for trade-flow F (F=exports or 
imports) in period t = 2019 (or 2020):
Where is the forecast error for each treatment HS code, h from the statistical 
matching analysis and consists of the de-meaned trade flows, and its associated 
counterfactual (synthetic comparison), 51 and 𝐶𝐶ℎ,𝑡𝑡
𝐹𝐹 is the counterfactual (comparison) value of HS￾code h’s exports. 𝐶𝐶ℎ,𝑡𝑡
𝐹𝐹 is computed as
where the sum is taken over all 76 non-treated HS-code categories and 𝑤𝑤ℎ,𝑘𝑘
𝐹𝐹 is the entropy-matching 
weight for the kth untreated HS component used to construct the synthetic comparison value of HS 
code h and 𝑉𝑉ℎ,𝑘𝑘,𝑡𝑡
𝐹𝐹 is the matching trade-flow-value covariate.
Finally, to calculate the total impact – exports and imports combined – from TAIB. This is simply ℐ𝑡𝑡 ≡
ℐ𝑡𝑡
X + ℐ𝑡𝑡
M, where t would either be 19 (for 2019) or 20 (for 2020) and, as above, ℐ𝑡𝑡
𝐹𝐹 is the US$ value of 
the TAIB impact for trade-flow F (F=exports or imports). The total impact, 𝜄𝜄𝑡𝑡, in percentage terms is 
49Note that this paragraph is not meant to list every possible potential covariate, but just to provide examples. 
Moreover, the ultimate choice of covariates will depend on experimentation during model estimation, in part 
based on what we are able to additionally collect in the Egyptian context for the MTE. 50At endline, when we have more years of data, if we add the term𝛼𝛼7𝑡𝑡𝑇𝑇𝑡𝑡𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠,𝑖𝑖 to Equation (2-1) then the gap would 
be calculated as and would represent the estimated impact for the respective time period. This is a 
simple linear trend and is independent of the HS category. Alternatively one could instead add the expression
𝛼𝛼7𝑡𝑡1𝑇𝑇𝑡𝑡𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠,𝑖𝑖 + 𝛼𝛼8𝑡𝑡2𝑇𝑇𝑡𝑡𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠,𝑖𝑖 + 𝛼𝛼9𝑡𝑡3𝑇𝑇𝑡𝑡𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠,𝑖𝑖 to Equation (3), where 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 = 1 if Period t and 0 otherwise, and test the 
hypotheses forj,k ∈{1,2,3}, j≠k.
51 The mean used for de-meaning was computed from the associated in-sample (2014-2018) trade-flow values.
𝒁𝒁𝑡𝑡,𝑠𝑠
(s)
ℐ𝑡𝑡
𝐹𝐹
52
, and as defined above.
Finally, while synthetic matching as described, above, guarantees perfect balance between treatment 
and comparison groups, at endline we plan to follow Abadie and Gardeazabal (2003) and carry out 
“placebo testing” to determine whether the gaps (impacts) could have been the result of chance.52 At 
endline we will have 2 additional years of data that could be enough to perform the placebo testing.
Annex to 2.1.3: Prediction accuracy of counterfactual for country-level 
matching 
In Section 2.1.3, we presented findings on the prediction accuracy of the counterfactual in terms of 
forecasting error with the unit being two-digit HS trade categories. In addition, we also examined for 
robustness the degree of forecast error there would be if the unit of analysis were the country trading 
partner, of which there were 76. The forecast errors from the application of the same matching used for 
the HS-code analysis are shown in Figure II.1 and Figure II.2.
52Abadie, A., and Gardeazabal, J. (2003), “The Economic Costs of Conflict: A Case Study of the Basque Country,” 
American Economic Review, 93 (1), 112–132. In essence, this test reruns the analysis for all the different HS codes 
in the sample and then calculates whether the change detected in the HS codes of interest could have simply been 
the result of chance.
𝜄𝜄𝑡𝑡 = 𝑉𝑉𝑡𝑡
X
𝑉𝑉𝑡𝑡
𝜄𝜄𝑡𝑡
X +
𝑉𝑉𝑡𝑡
M
𝑉𝑉𝑡𝑡
𝜄𝜄𝑡𝑡
M , (2-C)
𝑉𝑉𝑡𝑡 ≡ 𝑉𝑉𝑡𝑡
X + 𝑉𝑉𝑡𝑡
M
53
Figure II.1: Within-sample (2014-2018) forecast error for exports, by country code
Figure II.2: Within-sample (2014-2018) forecast error for imports, by country code
54
Annex to 2.2: Movement toward increasing trade
Though data are not yet available in time for the current midline, NORC proposes to conduct the 
following analyses at endline since it would still serve to provide a way to document movement toward 
trade in those sectors which at endline have not had sufficient time for a detectible trade impact to 
materialize.
Movement in employment. Perhaps the most obvious indicator of movement toward trade is an increase 
in employment in the sectors that should benefit from the food safety reforms supported by TAIB, at 
least if such movement is the result of an increase in agricultural production relative to employment 
levels in other sectors competing for the same labor. The approach, below, can be applied separately to 
exports, imports, and the sum of the two. Consider the case of TAIB-sectors that export. We implement 
this maintained hypothesis using two alternative types of analysis.
First, letting 𝐿𝐿𝑠𝑠 be the size of employment in sector s, we will compare the percentage change in
employment, between the twelve months of 2019 and those of July 2020 through June 2021 (aka
2021*) in TAIB-targeted sectors to those of non-TAIB-targeted sectors. At a minimum, this comparison
would control for the extent of the fall in employment due to COVID-19, from 2019 to 2020 and
changes in an international price index for each traded sector from 2019 to 2021* (July 2020 through
June 2021). For example, consider estimating the following model specification:
where subscripts, 𝑡𝑡 and s stand for time period (first COVID-19 year = 0, midline = 1) and sector (product
category); the 𝛼𝛼𝑘𝑘, 𝑘𝑘 = {0,1,2,3} are coefficients to be estimated; 𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠 is the experimental group (TAIB￾targeted = 1 or comparison = 0); the vector, 𝒁𝒁𝑡𝑡,𝑠𝑠 captures other sources (e.g., the change in an interna￾tional price index for a sector, pre-COVID-19 average labor productivity, pre-COVID-19 export share of
production, change in the real exchange rate) influencing intertemporal variation in the outcome
indicators;53 and 𝜀𝜀𝑠𝑠 denotes independent and identically distributed standard errors. The hypothesis to
test is whether the estimate of 𝛼𝛼2 is positive can be rejected at, say, a one-sided p-level of 0.05.
As a second analytic approach we will use matching (as done in the trade-flows analysis) to examine the
extent to which employment in agricultural subsectors exhibits a greater increase (or smaller decrease)
than in other sectors. This entails using non-agricultural sectors as the source of comparison sectors for the
synthetic matching. The matching should draw on several years of data, e.g., 2015 to 2019, and then gen￾erate forecasts for 2020 and 2021*. These forecasts for each sector predict the expected level of employ￾ment had there not been a pandemic. These forecasts are useful in two ways. First, the difference
between the 2020 forecast and actual employment in 2020 provides an estimate of the extent to which
employment fell due to COVID-19 in 2020. Second, the respective 2021* forecasts provide estimates of the
53 Pre-COVID-19 average labor productivity would be calculated as 𝐿𝐿𝑠𝑠/𝑌𝑌𝑠𝑠, where 𝑌𝑌𝑠𝑠 is the value of production of 
sector s, and pre-COVID-19 export share of production would be calculated as 𝑋𝑋𝑠𝑠/𝑌𝑌𝑠𝑠, where 𝑋𝑋𝑠𝑠 is the value of 
exports of sector s.
55
extent to which sector employment in 2021* recovered from COVID-19, so the differences between them
and actual employment in 2021* provides an estimate of the increase in employment due to TAIB.54
Data on sector-level domestic labor employment and value of production would come from the Central
Bank of Egypt’s (CBE) Monthly Bulletin and the CAPMAS Report of Internal Trade, respectively. However,
we were not able to find it during our exhaustive search of publicly available sources.55 The value of
exports would come from the UN Comtrade database. International price indicators could come from
U.S. and E.U. statistical agencies and from the U.N. FAO.
Movement in number of firms exporting. We would also expect sectors that benefit from the SPS reforms
supported by TAIB to manifest movement toward trade by experiencing an increase in the number of
firms involved in importing and exporting relative to what other sectors experience.56 The approach,
below, can be applied separately to sector that export, import, or do both. Consider the case of TAIB￾sectors that export. We can use the same two analytic approaches that we propose for the case of
employment as an early indicator of movement toward trade.
First, letting 𝑁𝑁𝑠𝑠 be the number of establishments (firms) in sector s, we will compare the percentage
change in the number of firms, between the twelve months of 2019 and those of July 2020 through
June 2021 in TAIB-targeted sectors to those of non-TAIB-targeted sectors. At a minimum, this
comparison would control for the extent of the fall in the number of firms due to COVID-19, from
2019 to 2020 and changes in an international price index for each traded sector between 2019 and
2020/1 (July 2020 through June 2021). For example, consider estimating the following model
specification:
where subscripts, 𝑡𝑡 and s stand for time period (first COVID-19 year = 0, midline = 1) and sector (product
category); the 𝛽𝛽𝑘𝑘, 𝑘𝑘 = {0,1,2,3} are coefficients to be estimated; Gs is the experimental group (TAIB￾targeted = 1 or comparison = 0); the vector, 𝒁𝒁𝑡𝑡,𝑠𝑠 captures other sources (e.g., the change in an interna￾tional price index for a sector, the sector’s pre-COVID-19 share of establishments exporting, pre-COVID￾19 average labor productivity, pre-COVID-19 export share of production, change in the real exchange
rate) influencing intertemporal variation in the outcome indicators; and 𝜈𝜈𝑠𝑠 denotes independent and
identically distributed standard errors. The hypothesis to test is whether the estimate of 𝛽𝛽2 is positive
can be rejected at, say, a one-sided p-level of 0.05.
Likewise, we will also use matching (as done in the trade-flows analysis) to examine the extent to which
the number of firms in agricultural subsectors exhibits a greater increase (or smaller decrease) than in
other sectors. This entails using non-agricultural sectors as the source of comparison sectors for the syn￾54 In fact, the 2021* forecast would actually either (a) be annualized using recent historical data on the usual rela￾tionship between a year’s average employment and that reported for the first two quarters of a year or (b) running 
the synthetic matching on just the first six months of each year over the historical period. 55 Likely the pandemic slowed down its collection and or reporting. Perhaps, TAIB staff can ask these agencies 
whether the information was reported, but not yet released to the public. (Note, these data are sector totals, not 
firm specific.)
56 One could also use the approach laid out here and in the subsection on employment effects to look at the 
growth in lower-value products relative to higher-value products as well as the change in the share of lower-value 
exports.
56
thetic matching. The matching should draw on several years of data, e.g., 2015 to 2019, and then gener￾ate forecasts for 2020 and 2021*. These forecasts for each sector predict the expected number of firms
had there not been a pandemic. These forecasts are useful in two ways. First, the difference between
the 2020 forecast and the actual number of firms in 2020 provides an estimate of the extent to which
the number of firms fell due to COVID-19 in 2020. Second, the respective 2021* forecasts provide
estimates of the extent to which a sector’s number of firms in 2021* recovered from COVID-19, so the
differences between them and the actual number of firms in 2021* provides an estimate of the increase
in the number of firms due to TAIB.
In addition to the sources listed at the end of this chapter, the number of firms by sector could be ascer￾tained from the Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics’ (CAPMAS) Count of
Establishments. These data are currently not available (please see the table at end of this Annex on data
availability).
Annex to 2.3: Mitigating COVID-19 bias from trade-impact estimates
As mentioned in the main body of this report, to estimate the project’s 2020 impacts NORC endeavored to 
disentangle the effect of Covid-19 from that of TAIB. Lack of trade data for more than one year of Covid-19 
and lack of success in acquiring sectoral data on Egypt’s industrial output and employment due to sporadic 
reporting in 2020 prevented NORC from statistically identifying the project and pandemic effects at a level 
of precision worthwhile reporting. A description of the models developed follows, below. 
Under the assumption that any systematic fall in exports and imports over the period 2019-2020, 
an , respectively, was due to COVID-19, then we may consider using a sector’s percentage change in 
a given direction of trade as a proxy indicator of COVID-19’s effect. This indicator can then be included 
as a control variable in an attribution equation. To test TAIB’s effect on the percentage change in 
exports over the period 2020-2021, the specification would be:57
where the first dual subscript is for time period (first-COVID-19 year = 0, midline = 1) and the subscript 𝑠𝑠
is for sector (product category);58 the 𝛾𝛾𝑘𝑘, 𝑘𝑘 = {0,1,2} are coefficients to be estimated; 𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠 is the experi￾mental group (TAIB-targeted = 1 or synthetic comparison = 0); and 𝜁𝜁𝑠𝑠 denotes independent and 
identically distributed standard errors. We infer that TAIB has had an effect on trade if we can reject the 
hypothesis that the estimate of 𝛾𝛾1 is less than or equal to zero at, say, a one-sided p-level of 0.05. The 
test in Equation 2-4) uses the same export/import data we are using for the trade analysis.
It is probable, however, that Covid-19 did not have a equivalent effect on the treatment and (synthetic) 
comparison groups. Therefore, once data become available, NORC proposes to expand the approach 
leading to Equation 2-4 by drawing on additional assumptions. For example, it is reasonable to posit 
that, at the highest level, COVID-19 affects trade via supply and demand effects. 
57 See Footnote 54 on how we would deal with having on trade data for the first half of 2021. 58 Note that this is an ANCOVA-type regression so there is really only one time period. Hence, 𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠 and 𝜁𝜁𝑠𝑠 have no 
time subscript.
57
The supply effect relates to the loss of production due to lower employment and reduced work-hours 
(e.g., due to lock-downs and illness). One would expect to observe a greater supply effect on those of 
Egypt’s exports and imports (i.e., trading-partner exports) whose production is more intensive in their 
use of indoor labor. In support of this conjecture, consider the following analysis of Covid-19 on the 
Egyptian economy from IFPRI (2020):59
Figure II.3: COVID-19 final estimated impacts n sub-sector production in Egypt, 4th quarter, FY 2019-20
Source: COVID-19 Egypt multiplier model
Note: Fourth quarter (April to June) of 2019/20 fiscal year; ICT=Information and Communication Technologies
As implied, IPFRI found the services sector being hit hardest, falling by 10.9 percent, followed by 
industry at -8.3 percent; agriculture is the most resilient sector.
The demand effect relates to diminished demand for Egypt’s exports from international markets and for 
Egypt’s imports due to lower domestic production (for intermediate goods) and lower domestic incomes 
(for final consumption goods). One would expect to observe a greater fall in demand for those of Egypt’s 
imports with a higher share of non-luxury final goods and for those of Egypt’s exports with a heavier use 
by sectors experiencing a greater fall in output in its importing trading partners. Empirically, however, 
IFPRI op cit. found that “impacts on Egypt’s agri-food system are less severe than elsewhere in the 
economy”. They forecast that “most damage will occur in nonfarm components of the agri-food system 
due to falling consumer demand. Although higher-income households face the largest income losses, 
lower-income households also will see their incomes decline significantly.”
59 IFPRI (2020). “Impact of COVID-19 on the Egyptian economy”. Middle East and North Africa REGIONAL 
PROGRAM POLICY NOTE 06, June. [Clemens Breisinger, Mariam Raouf, Manfred Wiebelt, Ahmed Kamaly, and 
Mouchera Karara].
58
Putting these insights into practice, we can run a two-sided means-test on the null hypothesis that the 
pre-COVID-19 average labor intensity of production across the treatment sectors and synthetic compa￾rison sectors is statistically equal.60 If the null hypothesis is rejected then we may need to conclude that 
double differencing failed to remove the effect of COVID-19 from the trade data. Otherwise, we can 
choose to accept the alternative hypothesis that double differencing succeeded in removing the effect 
of COVID-19 from the trade data. 
If indeed the null hypothesis is rejected then we can endeavor to control for COVID-19 effects using this 
differential labor-intensity causal pathway of COVID-19 as well as the general COVID-19 indicators,
and introduced, above. For example, for exports, we can modify Equation (2-4) as:
where subscript s is for sector (product category); the 𝛾𝛾𝑘𝑘, 𝑘𝑘 = {0,1,2,3} are coefficients to be estimated;
𝐺𝐺𝑠𝑠 is the experimental group (TAIB-targeted = 1 or synthetic comparison = 0); 𝜆𝜆𝑠𝑠
0 is the pre-COVID-19
average labor productivity; and 𝜉𝜉𝑠𝑠 denotes independent and identically distributed standard errors. The 
hypothesis to test is whether the estimate of 𝛾𝛾1 is positive can be rejected at, say, a one-sided p-level of 
0.05.
60 Again, subject to the caveat provided in Footnote 55. If infeasible at midline, then the adjustment mentioned 
here in the text would be performed at endline.
59
Table III.1: Data availability
Variables Source(s)
Level (e.g.,
country, 
sector)
Availability Notes
Y/N Period Format 
(e.g. 
pdf)
1. Value or quantity of production 
by specific sector (not just 
food/agriculture)
Central Bank 
of Egypt 
(CBE)
Country, 
Sector
N Monthly, 
2014 to 
2020/21
PDF GDP at Factor Cost data available only for broad sec￾tors (Agriculture, forests and fishing, manufacturing 
etc.), not specific sectors as would be needed. 
While trying to access the data in Excel format through 
the CBE website it shows the error "You do not have 
permission to open this file"
2. Production of specific food or 
agricultural commodities
CBE, 
CAPMAS, 
World Bank
Country, 
Commodities
N Annual, 2014 
to 2020/21
Unknown Data disaggregated at the commodity level are unavail￾able.
3. Employment growth in agriculture 
sector and in other non￾agricultural sectors with similar 
capital and labor intensities
CBE Country, 
Sector
N Annual, 2014 
to 2020/21
PDF Only total Employment data available for broad sectors 
(Government, Public Sector, Private). We would ideally 
need data disaggregated at the agriculture vs non￾agriculture sectors level.
CAPMAS Country, 
Sector
N Annual, 2014 
to 2020/21
Unknown The CAPMAS site is not accessible.
World Bank Country N Annual, 2015 
to 2020
Excel, 
CSV
Data available only for broad sectors (Agriculture, 
Industry, Service)
Other -
STATISTA
Country, 
Sector
Y Annual Excel, 
PDF
The STATISTA site shows that some of these data are
available; however, it does not show the data source, so 
unclear if it is a reliable source (paid access required).
4. Number of firms exporting food 
products
CBE, World 
Bank (WITS)
Country, 
Commodities
N Annual Excel Data are not available 
CAPMAS Country, 
Sector
N Annual, 2014 
to 2020/21
Unknown The CAPMAS site is not accessible.
60
Annex IV. Data Collection Tools 
NFSA KII Questionnaire - Midline 
Introduction and Consent
To start the interview, please read the following script: 
Hello and thank you for agreeing to speak with us. My name is _______ (interviewer name) and this is my 
colleague________. We work with NORC at the University of Chicago, which was hired to evaluate the Egypt TAIB 
Project implemented by Venture37. Egypt TAIB aims to expand trade of agricultural products domestically, regionally 
and internationally by building the capacity and supporting the sustainable development of a functioning National Food 
Safety Authority (NFSA), improving knowledge of and training around food safety and management, and promoting an 
improved policy and regulatory framework.
In the context of this evaluation, we would like to ask you some questions about the National Food Safety Authority 
(NFSA), its mandate and purpose, and the challenges and opportunities it faces. This interview will last approximately 
an hour. Your participation is entirely voluntary, and you can choose not to answer a question or terminate the 
interview at any moment without providing a reason. Your perspective is very important to help Venture37 improve its 
programs to better support NFSA and the consumers of Egyptian products.
The information we will be collecting through this interview will be kept safe by our team. Your responses will be kept 
anonymous and your identity will be kept strictly confidential, and will not be shared outside of the evaluation team. 
Other information that could identify you (e.g., specific stories you may tell) will be excluded from reports and other 
documents produced by our team and shared with Venture37.
If you have any questions you may ask them now or later, even after the interview has started. If you wish to ask 
questions later, you may contact X, e-mail: X, phone: X.
This questionnaire has been reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of NORC which is a committee 
whose task it is to make sure that research participants are protected from harm. If you wish to find about more about 
these bodies, contact X, e-mail: X, phone: X.
Do you agree to participate in this discussion today? Yes No
Interview Datasheet
Respondent name 
______________________________
Respondent 
title/position________________________
Department ________________________
Interviewer _______________________________
Interview date _______________
Interview start time ____________
Interview end time _____________
Interview disposition codes _____________
61
NFSA’s work with the TAIB Project
I would like to first speak with you about NFSA’s work with TAIB. 
1. Which activities have been most successful in your collaboration with TAIB, and why?
• [Probe:] Which activities have been most successful in terms of passing new food safety regulations?
• [Probe:] Which activities have been most successful in your collaboration with TAIB to build NFSA’s 
internal capacity?
• [Probe:] Which activities have been most successful for training inspectors?
2. What support from TAIB has been most beneficial since the inception of the project from your point of 
view?
3. What do you think are the most useful ways that the TAIB project can continue to support NFSA?
Challenges of the TAIB Project
4. What do you think are the principal challenges with TAIB’s collaboration with NFSA? 
• How do you think these challenges could be addressed moving forward? 
5. What do you think are the principal external and contextual challenges that the TAIB project and NFSA
will need to overcome to accomplish NFSA’s mission?
6. [Interviewer: Skip this question if necessary for time:] How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected your 
work?
• How has it affected new policies and regulations that you are working on?
• How has it affected internal capacity building for the agency?
Opportunities and Sustainability
7. What is NFSA’s vision and principal priorities for the next two years?
• What opportunities would you like TAIB to capitalize and work on to help achieve these visions and 
priorities?
8. What about NFSA’s vision and principal priorities over the longer term (e.g., the next 5 years)? How 
could TAIB support these longer-term priorities?
9. If NFSA is successful in accomplishing its priorities and mandate, what do you anticipate to be the impact
or results of NFSA’s activities on knowledge and perceptions surrounding food safety, if any, with regard 
to: 
• Egyptian firms (both exporters and domestic-only actors)?
• Imports of food from abroad?
10. What do you foresee to be key factors that will ensure that TAIB’s work with NFSA is sustainable?
Closing Questions
Do you have any recommendations for how the TAIB project can be improved?
62
TAIB Staff KII Questionnaire - Midline 
Introduction and Consent
To start the interview, please read the following script: 
Hello and thank you for agreeing to speak with us. My name is _______ (interviewer name) and this is my 
colleague________. We work with NORC at the University of Chicago, which was hired to evaluate the Egypt TAIB 
Project implemented by Venture37. Egypt TAIB aims to expand trade of agricultural products domestically, regionally 
and internationally by building the capacity and supporting the sustainable development of a functioning National Food 
Safety Authority (NFSA), improving knowledge of and training around food safety and management, and promoting an 
improved policy and regulatory framework.
In the context of this evaluation, we would like to ask you about your experience implementing the TAIB project with the 
NFSA, the challenges you have faced and the factors that have helped you be successful, as well as opportunities for 
improved implementation moving forward. This interview will last approximately an hour. Your participation is entirely 
voluntary, and you can choose not to answer a question or terminate the interview at any moment without providing a 
reason. Your perspective is very important to help Venture37 improve its programs to better support NFSA and the 
consumers of Egyptian products.
The information we will be collecting through this interview will be kept safe by our team. Your responses will be kept 
anonymous and your identity will be kept strictly confidential, and will not be shared outside of the evaluation team. 
Other information that could identify you (e.g., specific stories you may tell) will be excluded from reports and other 
documents produced by our team and shared with Venture37.
If you have any questions you may ask them now or later, even after the interview has started. If you wish to ask 
questions later, you may contact X, e-mail: X, phone: X.
This questionnaire has been reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of NORC which is a committee 
whose task it is to make sure that research participants are protected from harm. If you wish to find about more about 
these bodies, contact X, e-mail: X, phone: X.
Do you agree to participate in this discussion today? Yes No
Interview Datasheet
Respondent name 
______________________________
Respondent 
title/position________________________
Department ________________________
Interviewer _______________________________
Interview date _______________
Interview start time ____________
Interview end time _____________
Interview disposition codes _____________
63
TAIB Project: Successes, Challenges, and Opportunities 
1. What do you think have been the greatest successes of the TAIB project in its implementation so far?
• Successes in relation to the passage of new laws and regulations?
• Successes with internal capacity building for NFSA?
• Successes with the training of NFSA inspectors?
2. What have been the primary challenges that you have faced in implementing TAIB?
• For new laws and regulations?
• For internal capacity building for NFSA?
• For the training of NFSA inspectors?
3. How has TAIB’s role evolved since project inception?
• What opportunities should the TAIB project capitalize on in the next two and a half years? 
• How would you recommend TAIB focus its resources moving forward to maximize its impact?
NFSA Role and Purpose
4. How do you envision NFSA’s role in Egypt’s food safety space after the end of the TAIB project?
• In the current Egyptian context, what do you think are major opportunities that NFSA can capitalize 
on to accomplish its mission?
5. In your opinion, is there any duplication between the role and activities of the NFSA and those of other 
GoE agencies and ministries?
• [F] If so, which one(s)?
5. Do you know what the principal priorities of the NFSA are for the coming year or two?
• [F] Do you think they are appropriate for NFSA to achieve its objectives? For TAIB to achieve its 
objectives?
• [F] What about those over the longer term (for example, the next 5 years)?
6. What do you think of the current approach to food safety inspections?
• Do you expect the NFSA to change how it approaches food safety inspections in the future? If so, 
how do you see this evolution?
Project Implementation to Date
7. What do you think of the passage/development process for the new policies and regulations that you are 
working on with NFSA? Can you think of any ways that it could be more efficient or effective?
8. What are typical professional backgrounds for the newly trained inspectors? (past work experience and 
education)
• How much food safety inspection knowledge did inspectors have prior to the trainings?
• Did TAIB encounter any challenges training the inspectors? If yes, what are they?
9. What do you think of the design of the TAIB project? Can you think of any ways in which the design could 
be improved?
• Do you have any lessons learned since 2018 that you could share with us that could potentially 
inform similar projects in the future?
10. How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected your work?
• How has it affected trainings with inspectors?
• How has it affected new policies and regulations that you are working on?
• How has it affected capacity building activities for NFSA?
64
Sustainability
11. What do you think are the principal challenges of NFSA that will need to be overcome to accomplish its 
mission?
• Do you think the NFSA has sufficient resources to carry out its mission? Why or why not?
• Do you think the NFSA has sufficient internal capacity to carry out its mission? Why or why not?
12. What do you foresee to be key factors that will ensure that TAIB’s work with NFSA is sustainable?
Closing Questions
Are there any additional comments you would like to make?
65
Chamber of Food Industries KII Questionnaire - Midline 
Introduction and Consent
To start the interview, please read the following script: 
Hello and thank you for agreeing to speak with us. My name is _______ (interviewer name) and this is my 
colleague________. We work with NORC at the University of Chicago, which was hired to evaluate the Egypt TAIB 
Project implemented by Venture37. Egypt TAIB aims to expand trade of agricultural products domestically, regionally 
and internationally by building the capacity and supporting the sustainable development of a functioning National Food 
Safety Authority (NFSA), improving knowledge of and training around food safety and management, and promoting an 
improved policy and regulatory framework.
In the context of this evaluation, we would like to ask you some questions about any collaboration you have had with 
the NFSA or the Egypt TAIB project, and related challenges and opportunities for the future. This interview will last 
approximately an hour. Your participation is entirely voluntary, and you can choose not to answer a question or 
terminate the interview at any moment without providing a reason. Your perspective is very important to help 
Venture37 improve its programs to better support NFSA and the consumers of Egyptian products.
The information we will be collecting through this interview will be kept safe by our team. Your responses will be kept 
anonymous and your identity will be kept strictly confidential, and will not be shared outside of the evaluation team. 
Other information that could identify you (e.g., specific stories you may tell) will be excluded from reports and other 
documents produced by our team and shared with Venture37.
If you have any questions you may ask them now or later, even after the interview has started. If you wish to ask 
questions later, you may contact X, e-mail: X, phone: X.
This questionnaire has been reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of NORC which is a committee 
whose task it is to make sure that research participants are protected from harm. If you wish to find about more about 
these bodies, contact X, e-mail: X, phone: X.
Do you agree to participate in this discussion today? Yes No
Interview Datasheet
Respondent name 
______________________________
Respondent 
title/position________________________
Department ________________________
Interviewer _______________________________
Interview date _______________
Interview start time ____________
Interview end time _____________
Interview disposition codes _____________
66
Egyptian Context
1. In your opinion, what are the principal food safety challenges facing Egypt today?
• [F – if several] Which of these do you think is most pressing?
NFSA Role and Purpose and the TAIB Project 
2. Does the Chamber of Food Industries interact with the NFSA on a regular basis?
• [F-Yes] How is the relationship between the Chamber and the NFSA?
• [F-Yes] Do you feel that the priorities of the Chamber and the NFSA are aligned? Why or why not?
• [F-No] Why not? Do you think there is something that should change?
3. In your opinion, what is the role of the NFSA in addressing food safety issues in Egypt?
4. Does the Chamber of Food Industries implement any activities with its members to help them pass NFSA’s 
inspection? Which activities? [Probes: trainings, pre-inspections, preparation/delivery of written materials]
5. In your opinion, is there any duplication between the role and activities of the NFSA and those of other 
GoE agencies and ministries?
• [F] If so, which ones?
6. Have you worked directly with the TAIB project? Could you please tell me about any collaboration or 
interaction the Chamber of Food Industries had with them?
• Do you think that the objectives of the TAIB project are aligned with the objectives and priorities of 
the Chamber of Food Industries? Why or why not?
• What have been the impacts of this direct collaboration on your work? 
• What have been the impacts of this direct collaboration on your work? 
7. Has the TAIB project resulted in any indirect impacts on your work for the food industry in Egypt? What 
are they?
• What do you think that TAIB could do moving forward to improve the work of the NFSA and your 
own work?
8. Did you notice any changes to how the TAIB project or the NFSA operates due to COVID-19 that affected 
your activities?
Challenges, Opportunities, and Sustainability
9. What do you think are the principal external and contextual challenges that NFSA will need to overcome 
to accomplish its mission?
10. In the current Egyptian context, what do you think are major opportunities that NFSA can capitalize on to 
accomplish its mission?
11. What do you foresee to be key factors that will ensure that NFSA’s work is sustainable?
12. What are some of your recommendations for the NFSA leadership to accomplish its mission?
Closing Questions
13. How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected your work related to food safety? 
• Did you notice any changes to how the NFSA operates due to COVID-19 that affected your activities?
Are there any additional comments you would like to make?
67
3rd Party Certification Companies KII Questionnaire - Midline 
Introduction and Consent
To start the interview, please read the following script: 
Hello and thank you for agreeing to speak with us. My name is _______ (interviewer name) and this is my 
colleague________. We work with NORC at the University of Chicago, which was hired to evaluate the Egypt TAIB 
Project implemented by Venture37. Egypt TAIB aims to expand trade of agricultural products domestically, regionally 
and internationally by building the capacity and supporting the sustainable development of a functioning National Food 
Safety Authority (NFSA), improving knowledge of and training around food safety and management, and promoting an 
improved policy and regulatory framework.
In the context of this evaluation, we would like to ask you some questions about how the food safety environment has 
changed under the NFSA and get your feedback on your collaboration with them. This interview will last approximately 
an hour. Your participation is entirely voluntary, and you can choose not to answer a question or terminate the 
interview at any moment without providing a reason. Your perspective is very important to help Venture37 improve its 
programs to better support NFSA and the consumers of Egyptian products.
The information we will be collecting through this interview will be kept safe by our team. Your responses will be kept 
anonymous and your identity will be kept strictly confidential, and will not be shared outside of the evaluation team. 
Other information that could identify you (e.g., specific stories you may tell) will be excluded from reports and other 
documents produced by our team and shared with Venture37.
If you have any questions you may ask them now or later, even after the interview has started. If you wish to ask 
questions later, you may contact X, e-mail: X, phone: X.
This questionnaire has been reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of NORC which is a committee 
whose task it is to make sure that research participants are protected from harm. If you wish to find about more about 
these bodies, contact X, e-mail: X, phone: X.
Do you agree to participate in this discussion today? Yes No
Interview Datasheet
Organization name 
_____________________________________________
Organization address 
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________
Respondent name 
_____________________________________________
Respondent title/position_______________________
Department __________________________________
Interviewer 
_______________________________
Interview date _______________
Interview start time ____________
Interview end time _____________
Interview disposition codes _____________
68
Introductory Questions
1. Briefly, please tell me about your company. 
• How long have you been in business?
• What are your activities and which products do you certify? 
Egyptian Context
2. Do you think food safety is a major factor in the ability of Egyptian firms to export and import? Why or 
why not?
3. Do you think food safety is a major factor in the ability of Egyptian firms to sell domestically? Why or why 
not?
4. What do you think of the current import control regulations in place? 
• What are the primary challenges that you have faced with the current import control regulations?
• Can you think of any way that they could be improved?
NFSA Role and Purpose
5. Does your company interact with the National Food Safety Authority (NFSA)?
• [F-Yes] How has your certification work changed since you started working with the NFSA?
• [F-No] Why not? Do you think that is something that should change?
6. Please tell me about the registration process with the NFSA. 
• Were there any challenges that you faced with this process?
• Can you think of any ways that this process could be improved?
7. How is your relationship with the NFSA?
• Have you faced challenges with your certification work with NFSA?
• What could improve your relationship and make your collaboration easier?
8. Do you know what the principal priorities of the NFSA are for the next year or two?
9. Have you heard about a new potential export strategy from the NFSA? 
• [If yes:] What do you think of it? How do you think it would impact your work?
• [If yes:] Do you have any feedback that you could share on how this strategy could be improved 
moving forward?
10. If NFSA is successful in accomplishing its priorities and mandate, what do you anticipate to be the impact 
or results of NFSA’s activities on knowledge and perceptions surrounding food safety, if any, with regards 
to: 
• Egyptian consumers?
• Egyptian firms (both exporters and domestic-only actors)?
• Imports of food from abroad?
Closing Questions
11. How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected your certification work?
• Did you notice any changes to how the NFSA operates due to COVID-19 that affected your business?
Are there any additional comments you would like to make?
69
Food Businesses KII Questionnaire – Midline 
Introduction and Consent
To start the interview, please read the following script: 
Hello and thank you for agreeing to speak with us. My name is _______ (interviewer name) and this is my 
colleague________. We work with NORC at the University of Chicago, which was hired to evaluate the Egypt TAIB 
Project implemented by Venture37. Egypt TAIB aims to expand trade of agricultural products domestically, regionally 
and internationally by building the capacity and supporting the sustainable development of a functioning National Food 
Safety Authority (NFSA), improving knowledge of and training around food safety and management, and promoting an 
improved policy and regulatory framework.
In the context of this evaluation we would like to ask you some questions about how the food safety industry 
environment has changed under the NFSA and get your feedback on how this has affected your business. This interview 
will last approximately an hour. Your participation is entirely voluntary, and you can choose not to answer a question or 
terminate the interview at any moment without providing a reason. Your perspective is very important to help 
Venture37 improve its programs to better support NFSA and the consumers of Egyptian products.
The information we will be collecting through this interview will be kept safe by our team. Your responses will be kept 
anonymous and your identity will be kept strictly confidential, and will not be shared outside of the evaluation team. 
Other information that could identify you (e.g., specific stories you may tell) will be excluded from reports and other 
documents produced by our team and shared with Venture37.
If you have any questions you may ask them now or later, even after the interview has started. If you wish to ask 
questions later, you may contact X, e-mail: X, phone: X.
This questionnaire has been reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of NORC which is a committee 
whose task it is to make sure that research participants are protected from harm. If you wish to find about more about 
these bodies, contact X, e-mail: X, phone: X.
Do you agree to participate in this discussion today? Yes No
Interview Datasheet
Organization name 
_____________________________________________
Organization address 
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________
Respondent name 
_____________________________________________
Respondent title/position_______________________
Department __________________________________
Interviewer 
_______________________________
Interview date _______________
Interview start time ____________
Interview end time _____________
Interview disposition codes _____________
70
Introductory Questions
1. Briefly, please tell me about your business.
• What products do you import and/or export?
• Which countries do you work with outside of Egypt?
• How long have you been in business?
Egyptian Context
2. Do you think food safety is a major factor in the ability of Egyptian firms to export and import? Why or 
why not?
• What about for your own business specifically?
3. Do you think food safety is a major factor in the ability of Egyptian firms to sell domestically? Why or 
why not?
• What about for your own business specifically?
Relationship with NFSA
4. How has the establishment of NFSA affected your business?
5. How have food safety inspections changed? How has that impacted your work?
• Have you worked directly with NFSA food inspectors?
. [If yes:] How would you characterize your relationships with them?
• Can you think of any way in which food safety inspections could be improved?
6. [If the company is an importer:] What do you think of the risk-based import control system?
• What are the primary changes under this system that have impacted your business? How have they 
impacted your business?
• Have you faced challenges with the risk-based control system? What are they?
7. What about other changes to food safety regulations since 2017? Can you think of any that have 
affected your business?
• Have you faced challenges with any of them? Which ones?
8. Do you know what the principal priorities of the NFSA are for the next year or two?
9. Have you heard about a new potential export strategy from the NFSA? 
• [If yes:] What do you think of it? How do you think it would impact your work?
10. If NFSA is successful in accomplishing its priorities and mandate, what do you anticipate to be the impact 
or results of NFSA’s activities on knowledge and perceptions surrounding food safety, if any, with 
regards to: 
• Egyptian consumers?
• Egyptian firms (both exporters and domestic-only actors)?
• Imports of food from abroad?
Closing Questions
11. How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected your business?
• Did you notice any changes to how the NFSA operates due to COVID-19 that affected your business?
Are there any additional comments you would like to make?
71
USDA: KII Questionnaire – Midline 
Introduction and Consent
To start the interview, please read the following script: 
Hello and thank you for agreeing to speak with us. My name is _______ (interviewer name) and this is my 
colleague________. We work with NORC at the University of Chicago, which was hired to evaluate the Egypt TAIB 
Project implemented by Venture37. Egypt TAIB aims to expand trade of agricultural products domestically, regionally 
and internationally by building the capacity and supporting the sustainable development of a functioning National Food 
Safety Authority (NFSA), improving knowledge of and training around food safety and management, and promoting an 
improved policy and regulatory framework.
In the context of this evaluation, we would like to ask you about the Egypt TAIB project, how well it is aligned with USDA 
objectives, and its challenges and opportunities to improve moving forward. This interview will last approximately an 
hour. Your participation is entirely voluntary, and you can choose not to answer a question or terminate the interview at 
any moment without providing a reason. Your perspective is very important to help Venture37 improve its programs to 
better support NFSA and the consumers of Egyptian products.
The information we will be collecting through this interview will be kept safe by our team. Your responses will be kept 
anonymous and your identity will be kept strictly confidential, and will not be shared outside of the evaluation team. 
Other information that could identify you (e.g., specific stories you may tell) will be excluded from reports and other 
documents produced by our team and shared with Venture37.
If you have any questions you may ask them now or later, even after the interview has started. If you wish to ask 
questions later, you may contact X, e-mail: X, phone: X.
This questionnaire has been reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of NORC which is a committee 
whose task it is to make sure that research participants are protected from harm. If you wish to find about more about 
these bodies, contact X, e-mail: X, phone: X.
Do you agree to participate in this discussion today? Yes No
Interview Datasheet
Respondent name 
______________________________
Respondent 
title/position________________________
Department ________________________
Interviewer _______________________________
Interview date _______________
Interview start time ____________
Interview end time _____________
Interview disposition codes _____________
72
Introductory Questions
1. How long have you been working with USDA Egypt?
2. In your opinion, what are the principal food safety challenges facing Egypt today?
• [F – if several] Which of these do you think are most pressing?
The TAIB Project
3. How have TAIB’s objectives and priorities evolved since the beginning of the project? 
4. What do you think have been the greatest successes of the TAIB project in its implementation so far?
• Successes in relation to the passage of new laws and regulations?
• Successes with internal capacity building for NFSA?
• Successes with the training of NFSA inspectors?
5. What have been the primary challenges that TAIB has faced?
• For new laws and regulations?
• For internal capacity building for NFSA?
• For the training of NFSA inspectors?
6. What do you think of the design of the TAIB project? Can you think of any ways in which the design 
could be improved?
• Do you have any lessons learned since 2018 that you could share with us that could potentially 
inform similar projects in the future?
NFSA’s Role, Challenges, and Opportunities
8. What do you think are the principal challenges that NFSA will need to overcome to accomplish its 
mission?
• Do you think the NFSA has sufficient resources to carry out its mission? Why or why not?
• Do you think the NFSA has sufficient internal capacity to carry out its mission? Why or why not?
9. What do you foresee to be the key factors that will ensure that NFSA’s work is sustainable?
Trade and Broader Context
10. How have the outcomes of the TAIB project affected USDA policies? 
• In Egypt?
• In the region?
• If the TAIB project is successful in the rest of its implementation, how will this affect trade in Egypt 
or the region?
11. How would a successfully operating NFSA and a unified food safety regulation in Egypt affect US trade 
with Egypt? 
12. Besides the COVID-19 pandemic, are there any political or other non-food sector related developments 
in Egypt that could impact the outcomes of the TAIB project?
Closing Questions
Are there any additional comments you would like to make?
73
FGD Guide for NFSA Inspectors - Midline 
Introduction and Consent
To start the interview, please read the following script: 
Hello and thank you for agreeing to speak with us. My name is _______ (interviewer name) and this is my 
colleague________. We work with NORC at the University of Chicago, which was hired to evaluate the Egypt 
TAIB Project implemented by Venture37. Egypt TAIB aims to expand trade of agricultural products 
domestically, regionally and internationally by building the capacity and supporting the sustainable 
development of a functioning National Food Safety Authority (NFSA), improving knowledge of and training 
around food safety and management, and promoting an improved policy and regulatory framework.
In the context of this evaluation, we would like to discuss how your work has changed under the NFSA, the 
trainings that you have received, and any opportunities to improve food safety inspections in the future. . This 
discussion will last approximately an hour. Your participation in this focus group is entirely voluntary, and you 
can choose not to answer a question or leave the focus group interview at any moment without providing a 
reason. Your perspective is very important to help Venture37 improve its programs to better support NFSA and 
the consumers of Egyptian products.
The information we will be collecting through this focus group discussion will be kept safe by our team. Your 
responses will be kept anonymous and your identity will be kept confidential, and will not be shared outside of 
the evaluation team. Other information that could identify you (e.g., your education and previous employment) 
will be excluded from reports and other documents produced by our team and shared with Venture37. We ask 
that everyone here respect each person’s privacy and confidentiality, and not repeat what is said during this 
discussion. But, please remember that other participants in the group may accidentally share what was said.
If you have any questions you may ask them now or later, even after the discussion has started. If you wish to 
ask questions later, you may contact X, e-mail: X, phone: X.
This questionnaire has been reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of NORC which is a 
committee whose task it is to make sure that research participants are protected from harm. If you wish to find 
about more about these bodies, contact X, e-mail: X, phone: X.
Do you agree to participate in this discussion today? Yes No
Interview Datasheet
Site name ______________________________
Governorate _____________________________
# of participants: Female (___); Male (____)
Facilitator _______________________________
Note taker _______________________________
FGD date ________________________________
FGD start time ____________
FGD end time _____________
Recording file name _________________________
74
Inspection Regime
We are going to discuss the risk-based food inspection approach and the impacts of the TAIB project on 
your work as inspectors. As NFSA inspectors, you are uniquely positioned to speak about this (risk 
based) approach.
1. Has the support of the TAIB project to NFSA led to changes in how you do your inspections? If so, 
in what way?
2. Have the TAIB trainings made your inspection process easier? If yes, how?
• What kinds of challenges do you face with the firms that you inspect? 
• Is there anything that could be changed to improve your interactions with the firms that you 
inspect? [Probe: changes to your scope of work? Your inspection checklists? The resources 
that you have available?]
3. Do you think that the new guidelines developed by TAIB for inspectors/ food processors are clear? 
• What do you think of the new scope of work or inspection checklists? Are they effective?
o Have you faced any challenges using them?
o Can you think of any ways in which they could be improved?
5. What additional support can TAIB provide to improve how you carry out your inspections (i.e. 
protocols, SOPs, tools, etc.)?
a. Do you feel that you have sufficient resources to do your work?
i. [Probes: Specifically regarding technical equipment? Specifically regarding 
availability of transportation for inspectors? Specifically regarding the processes 
and procedures used within the agency? Specifically regarding data analysis and 
use of data?] 
Trainings
Next we will discuss the training you have received from TAIB or a TAIB-trained trainer.
6. Looking at all the training you’ve received under the TAIB project in the past two years, have 
they been sufficient to accomplish what you are tasked to do by the NFSA? Why or why not?
• [F] What are important gaps you’d like to see addressed?
7. Now I’d like to ask you about the training on specific topics such as HACCP, Good Manufacturing 
Practices, inspection protocols, etc. you may have received.
• Which of these training topics did you find most useful?
• Which of them did you find least useful?
• Is there any information or are there any topics that you think should have been covered in 
these trainings but was not?
8. For those that participated in in-person trainings before the COVID-19 pandemic, what did you 
think about the format and length of the trainings?
• What about those that participated in remote trainings during the pandemic? What did you 
think about the format and length?
Closing Questions
Last, we would like to ask you a few general questions about food safety in Egypt.
75
9. In your experience, what are the most significant challenges to improving food safety in the 
Egyptian market? 
• [F] What about for importers and exporters specifically?
10. In your experience, what are the most significant opportunities to improving food safety in the 
Egyptian market? 
• [F] What about for importers and exporters specifically?
Are there any additional comments you would like to make?
76
Annex V. COVID-19 Safety Protocols 
The following steps will be taken to ensure the safety of NORC in-country consultants and all 
participants in qualitative data collection in light of the COVID-19 pandemic: 
Due diligence: Confirming national or local government have not put restrictions in place on movement 
or businesses during the expected data collection period. Where available, NORC will also review 
national/local government categorization of risk zones/clusters.
Limiting staff travel: Consultant should conduct interviews in one locality or as few as possible.
In the event of a positive test at any time during data collection: Individuals are required to stay home 
when sick, and should get tested for COVID-19 if they are experiencing symptoms or have been exposed 
to someone who tested positive within 14 days of the exposure. Consultants will alert NORC if they test 
positive, and they will alert any individuals that they have interacted with in person within 14 days 
before the diagnosis. If they test positive then they will quarantine:
Quarantine Protocol:
• Consultants will be quarantined for 14 days under the following circumstances:
o After reporting exposure to COVID-19. This includes confirmed or suspected exposure.
o After exhibiting any symptoms, including fever, cough, shortness of breath, loss of taste 
or smell, nausea, diarrhea, headache, fatigue, or body aches. Consultants are expected 
to monitor their own symptoms every day before leaving for the field.
o After testing positive for COVID-19.
• Consultants can resume fieldwork after 14 calendar days if (1) they are not exhibiting any 
symptoms AND (2) they have tested negative for COVID-19. The test should be done as soon as 
symptoms develop, so the individual can be treated, or 14 days after exposure if no symptoms 
develop, to confirm they are not infected.
• The consultant will report any events that lead to being quarantined to NORC.
During Interviews:
• Sanitize all data collection instruments (electronic device, pens etc.) and personal items (such as 
glasses, cell phones, and keys) before the start and after the end of each KII/FGD.
• Practice physical or social distancing according to local health and safety guidance. 
o Greet respondents in a friendly, but distant way that is culturally appropriate.
o Physical exchange of documents or devices should be avoided as much as possible.
• Wear a mask at all times (excluding meals);
o The use of face masks is mandatory, if culturally appropriate. Using the mask correctly is 
essential to avoid contagion. Likewise, consultants must be careful when removing their 
masks in order to avoid contact with contaminated areas and/or the dispersion of the 
infectious agent. Cloth masks can be used. 
• Suggest all respondents/participants to wear a mask for the duration of the KII/FGD, if possible 
and culturally appropriate. 
o Provide masks to all KII/FGD participants that do not already have one.
• Refrain from touching mouth, nose and eyes.
77
• Practice proper hand washing protocol:
o Hands should be washed between interviews, before and after using the bathroom, 
before and after eating, and after sneezing and coughing.
o Carry glycerinated alcohol (minimum 60% and maximum 95%), or antibacterial gel at all 
times.
 Hand hygiene with glycerinated alcohol or antibacterial gel should be performed 
until the hands are visibly clean. It is important to remember that glycerinated 
alcohol and antibacterial gel do not replace adequate hand washing, but it 
should be used when there is no possibility of cleaning with soap and water.
• Conduct FGD in an indoor space, large enough so that (up to) 8 participants and 1 data collector 
can sit in a horseshoe or U-shape and maintain 6 feet (2 meters) between everyone in the room. 
The data collectors will sit at the head of the group and the digital recorder will be placed in the 
center of the group to best record sounds. For KIIs, the space must accommodate 2 individuals 
with 6 feet (2 meters) between them.
• Limit provision of refreshments to study participants, to the extent possible. Where 
refreshments must be provided, consultant will consider how best to distribute refreshments in 
a way that limits people interacting physically and ask participants to wash their hands 
thoroughly both before and after eating (e.g. by setting the refreshments out on a table and 
having staff/participants come one-at-a-time).
Use private transport whenever possible: 
• For private vehicles: Surfaces which individuals come into contact with will be disinfected daily, 
such as the door handles, steering wheel, gear lever, seat belt buckles, spokes, etc.
o Consultants will wash their hands or use hand sanitizer immediately after finishing 
refueling
• For public transport:
o Consultants must wear face masks and, as far as possible, maintain a minimum distance 
of two meters from other people.
o Windows will be kept down, whenever possible
• For motorcycles and bicycles:
o Staff must wear face masks and disinfect the handlebars, helmet, gloves, glasses, and 
knee pads, among other