This document was produced by ME&A, Inc., at the request of the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared independently by the USAID Bangladesh Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (BMEL) Activity. FINAL EVALUATION REPORT Final Performance Evaluation for USAID’s Feed the Future Bangladesh Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC) Activity February 9, 2022 FINAL EVALUATION REPORT Final Performance Evaluation for USAID’s Feed the Future Bangladesh Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC) Activity February 9, 2022 Contract/Order Number: GS-10F-154BA/72038819M00001 USAID Bangladesh Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Activity (BMEL) Activity Prepared by ME&A, Inc. 4350 East-West Highway, Suite 210 Bethesda, MD 20814 USA DISCLAIMER This report is made possible by the support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents are the sole responsibility of ME&A, Inc. and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government. TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ii 1. INTRODUCTION-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 1.1 Background ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 1.2 RDC Objectives and Theory of Change (TOC)---------------------------------------------------------1 1.3 Adaptive Implementation Approach-----------------------------------------------------------------------2 1.4 Evaluation Purpose, Audience and Scope----------------------------------------------------------------- 2 1.5 Evaluation Questions (EQs)---------------------------------------------------------------------------------2 2. METHODOLOGY -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3 2.1 Approach and Methods--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3 2.2 Data Analysis --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5 2.3 Methodological Limitations----------------------------------------------------------------------------------5 3. FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------6 3.1 Productivity ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------6 3.1.1 Progress Against Selected Indicators------------------------------------------------------------7 3.1.2 Crop Diversification--------------------------------------------------------------------------------8 3.1.3 Drivers of Productivity-----------------------------------------------------------------------------8 3.1.4 Conclusions ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------9 3.2 Mechanization and Cooperation with CSISA Activity (EQ 2)-----------------------------------------9 3.2.1 Awareness of USAID CSISA Mechanization Activities in the FTF ZOI--------------------9 3.2.2 CSISA Services and the Key Beneficiaries ---------------------------------------------------- 10 3.2.3 Coordination Between CSISA-MEA and RDC Activities ---------------------------------- 10 3.2.4 Beneficiaries of RDC and CSISA-MEA Activities-------------------------------------------- 10 3.2.5 Performance of RDC-Facilitated Franchisee Scheme--------------------------------------- 11 3.2.6 Increase in Mechanized Farming---------------------------------------------------------------- 12 3.2.7 Change in Farmers’ Status in Relation to Mechanization----------------------------------- 12 3.2.8 Conclusions ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12 3.3 Incentives, Market System Cooperation, and Investment (EQ 3) ---------------------------------- 12 3.3.1 Alignment of Incentives for Each Market System Actor with the Desired Intervention and Expected Market System Change--------------------------------------------------------- 12 3.3.2 Market System Cooperation-------------------------------------------------------------------- 14 3.3.3 Investment from Market System Actors to Adapt and Scale Up Investments in Commercializing New Technologies, Inclusive Business Models, or Value Chain Upgrading Strategies------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 15 3.3.4 Conclusions ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17 3.4 Market Accelerator Fund (FAS) (EQ 4)----------------------------------------------------------------- 18 3.4.1 Market Accelerator Fund/Fixed-Amount Subaward Dynamics and Reporting --------- 18 3.4.2 MAF/FAS Grant Reporting ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 19 3.4.3 MAF/FAS Thematic Areas----------------------------------------------------------------------- 19 3.4.4 MAF/FAS Partners’ Perceptions---------------------------------------------------------------- 20 3.4.5 MAF/FAS and Systemic Change ---------------------------------------------------------------- 21 3.4.6 Conclusions ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22 3.5 Nutrition (EQ 5) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22 3.5.1 Mixed Message on Commitment to Nutrition----------------------------------------------- 22 3.5.2 RDC Activities Related to Nutrition ---------------------------------------------------------- 22 3.5.3 Stakeholders’ Views on Nutrition-------------------------------------------------------------- 23 3.5.4 Conclusions ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23 3.6 Gender (EQ 6) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24 3.6.1 RDC Commitment to Gender ----------------------------------------------------------------- 24 3.6.2 Conclusions ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 26 3.7 Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (EQ 7) ----------------------------------------------------------- 26 3.7.1 RDC MEL and FTF Guidance Overview ------------------------------------------------------ 26 3.7.2 New FTF Indicator Handbook 2018 and Impact on RDC MEL--------------------------- 26 3.7.3 RDC Monitoring Direct Participant Results and Attribution (EQ 7.1) ------------------ 27 3.7.4 The COVID-19 Pandemic Impact on RDC’s Performance -------------------------------- 28 3.7.5 Conclusions ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 28 4. LESSONS LEARNED ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 28 5. RECOMMENDATIONS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 30 ANNEXES ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 33 Annex 1: Scope of Work -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 34 Annex 2: Stakeholder Analysis-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 38 Annex 3: Key Informant Interviews-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 45 Annex 4: Data Collection Instruments---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 49 Annex 5-A: Bibliography--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------130 Annex 5-B: List of National and Regional Firms (MAF/FAS Grantees) to Provide Access to New Technologies and Improved Management Practices for Smallholder Producers----------------139 Annex 6: Producer Survey and Interview Data Analysis Highlights-----------------------------------------148 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Evaluation Questions by Thematic Area...................................................................................................... 2 Table 2: Geographical Distribution of KIIs, FGDs, and Surveys............................................................................. 4 Table 3: Data Collection by Instrument and Stakeholder Type............................................................................. 5 Table 4: Farmers’ Gross Margin per Hectare, $/ha................................................................................................... 7 Table 5: Farmers’ Yield of Targeted Agricultural Commodities, MT/ha.............................................................. 7 Table 6: Yields of Key Crops in the RDC Project Area – Current vs. Five Years Ago, MT/Ha....................8 Table 7: Changes in the Adoption of Crop Species During the Last Five Years in the RDC Project Area 8 Table 8: Changes in the Utilization of the Five Drivers Toward Improvement in Crop Productivity, Sales, and Gross Margin During the Last Five Years in the RDC Project Area .............................................9 Table 9: What Are the Best Incentives to Inspire Producers to Test New Crops and Products? .............13 Table 10: FAS Grants Under IR 1 – Increased Farm Productivity in Rice-Based Cropping Systems..........18 Table 11: FAS Grants Under IR 2: Increased Participation of Farmers and Other Actors in Profitable Market Systems with 28 Private-Partner FASs..........................................................................................19 Table 12: FAS Core Business Areas and Cooperation Objectives......................................................................20 Table 13: Women in the Eyes of VCAs in the RDC Project Area......................................................................25 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Types of Market Constraints Addressed by RDC – Local Value Chain Actor Perceptions, Percentage of Responses, N=100.................................................................................................................14 Figure 2: RDC Private and USG Investment, 2018–2020 ......................................................................................15 ACRONYMS Acronym Description AAER Adopt-Adapt-Expand-Respond ABF Asset-Based Financing ACDI-VOCA Agricultural Cooperative Development International/Volunteers in Overseas Cooperative Assistance ACIAR Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research ADF Agricultural Development Fund AESA (USAID) Agricultural Extension Support Activity AESC Agricultural Extension Service Center AIRN Agricultural Input Retailers’ Network APS Annual Performance Survey AVC (USAID) Agricultural Value Chain (Activity) BANA (USAID) Bangladesh Aquaculture and Nutrition Activity BARI Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute BINA Bangladesh Institute of Nuclear Agriculture BMEL Bangladesh Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Activity BNA (USAID) Bangladesh Nutrition Activity BUP Bangladesh University of Professionals CLA Collaborating, Learning, and Adapting COP Chief of Party COVID-19 Coronavirus Disease 2019 CPP Crop Protection Product CSIS Center for Strategic and International Studies CSISA-MEA (USAID) Cereal Systems Initiative for South Asia – Mechanization Enhancement (Activity) CSISA-MI (USAID) Cereal Systems Initiative for South Asia Mechanization and Irrigation (Activity) DAE Department of Agricultural Extension DHIS District Health Information System DO Development Objective EG Economic Growth EQ Evaluation Question ET Evaluation Team FAO (United Nations) Food and Agriculture Organization FAS Fixed-Amount Subaward FGD Focus Group Discussion FPE Final Performance Evaluation FTF Feed the Future Program FY Fiscal Year GAP Gender Accelerator Program GOB Government of Bangladesh Acronym Description HYV High-Yielding Variety IADNI Integrated Agricultural Development for Nutrition Improvement ICT Information and Communications Technology iDE International Development Enterprises IP Implementing Partner IR Intermediate Result IRRI International Rice Research Institute KI Key Informant KII Key Informant Interview LEAP Learning Evaluation and Analysis Platform LSP Local Service Provider M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MAA Market Actor Agreements MAF Market Accelerator Fund MAIL Ministry of Agricultural, Irrigation, and Land MAP (RDC) Market Acceleration Program MEL Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning MSD Market System Development NDA Non-Disclosure Agreement NGO Non-Governmental Organizations POS Point of Sale PPP Public-Private Partnership PRSSP Policy Research and Strategy Support Program Q Quarter R&D Research and Development RDC Rice and Diversified Crops (Activity) RRF Rural Reconstruction Foundation SAFETI Safe Aqua Farming for Economic and Trade Improvement SCO Systemic Change Objective SME Subject Matter Expert SNA Social Network Analysis SOW Scope of Work TL Team Leader TMSS Thengamara Mohila Sabuj Sangha TOC Theory of Change UOMCSL Uzirpur Organic Multipurpose Cooperative Society Ltd. U.S. United States USAID United States Agency for International Development USDA United States Department of Agriculture USG United States Government Acronym Description VCA Value Chain Actor WEAI Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index WEE Women’s Economic Empowerment ZOI Zone of Influence i ABSTRACT This final performance evaluation assesses the extent to which the Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC) Activity (the Activity), implemented by ACDI-VOCA, achieved its objectives to inform future programming in agricultural market system facilitation. It answers seven Evaluation Questions (EQs) exploring the extent to which RDC: achieved increased Farm Productivity; collaborated with the Cereal Systems Initiative for South Asia – Mechanization Enhancement Activity (CSISA-MEA) to strengthen access to machinery and tools; increased participation in profitable market systems; used the Market Accelerator Fund (MAF) to support RDC’s objectives and address market system constraints; identified the determinants of positive or negative nutritional behaviors; determined the best entry points for integrating nutrition-sensitive activities; and, integrated gender considerations and ensured equitable access for women. It also assesses RDC’s Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) approach for measuring market system change and explores the extent to which RDC achieved its three life-of-activity targets. The evaluation combined qualitative and quantitative data collection methods—including a desk review, Key Informant Interviews (KIIs), Focus Group Discussions (FGDs), and a producer survey. Due to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) concerns, the evaluation team (ET) conducted all KIIs, FGDs, and surveys using remote interviewing technologies. The ET relied on findings from primary stakeholders (e.g., Lead Private Partners) in attributing RDC’s impacts. The evaluation concludes that the Activity was well-designed by USAID following a Market Systems Development approach and FTF Guidelines. The Activity achieved all planned results as per its agreement with USAID, despite the COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns and restrictions in 2020–2021. Both productivity (yield ha-1) and profitability (gross margin ha-1) of rice (across the variety types: local, High-Yielding Variety [HYV], fine quality, and hybrid) and three of the five non-rice crops (mung bean, sesame, and sunflower) increased in the catchment areas during the Activity. The adoption of groundnut and maize did not increase. The Activity also successfully addressed the key productivity drivers: quality seed, crop protection, marketing, mechanization, and processing. The extensive partnership of CSISA-MI and, in turn, CSISA-MEA with RDC, involved a significant sharing of activities with machinery manufacturers, dealer partners, and commercial lenders. As a result, the mechanized service provider business sector grew and proved profitable. That said, it is necessary to make the use of machinery (especially rice machinery) more cost effective by taking into consideration the cropping pattern, efficient management of the three paddy transplanting seasons, ways to increase machinery utilization time, increasing area coverage, and networking user farmers with proper vertical and horizontal integrations within the diverse rice varieties. RDC-introduced market incentives were well aligned with the private-partner interventions and the overall market access for farmers increased during the life of the Activity. RDC successfully strengthened vertical cooperation among private-sector partners, and the horizontal links between research institutions and Government of Bangladesh/Department of Agricultural Extension (GOB/DAE) partners. RDC was also successful in catalyzing investment from market system actors, both public and private, to adapt and scale up investments in commercializing new technologies, adopting inclusive business models, and upgrading value chain strategies. The MAF gained momentum by 2020–2021. RDC made some efforts to determine the best entry points for integrating nutrition-sensitive activities; however, the Activity did not identify the determinants of nutritional behaviors. Despite proactive efforts to empower women within the ZOI, little changed to improve women’s equitable access to the agricultural market system. Social norms (cultural/traditional) as well as family obligations continue to restrict women’s equitable access. The Activity had a very robust MEL system to measure both the standard and custom market system FTF indicators, and it can be reasonably concluded that the Activity achieved its targets. ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION This Executive Summary summarizes the findings, conclusions, and recommendations from the final performance evaluation of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC) Activity implemented in the Feed the Future (FTF) Zone of Influence (ZOI) by Agricultural Cooperative Development International/Volunteers in Overseas Cooperative Assistance (ACDI/VOCA) over a five-year period from July 13, 2016, to December 12, 2021. The evaluation’s purpose was to assess the extent to which RDC achieved its objectives to inform future programming in agricultural market system facilitation. The Evaluation Team (ET) answered the following seven Evaluation Questions (EQs): 1. To what extent has the RDC Activity been successful in achieving its Intermediate Result 1 (IR 1): “Increased Farm Productivity”? 2. How successful has the RDC Activity been in collaborating with the Cereal Systems Initiative for South Asia – Mechanization Enhancement Activity (CSISA-MEA) to strengthen access to machinery and tools through expanded commercial outreach of machinery manufacturers, dealers, and local service providers? 3. To what extent has the RDC Activity been successful in achieving its IR 2: “Increased Participation in Profitable Market Systems”? 4. How successful has the RDC Activity been in using the Market Accelerator Fund to support the activity’s objectives and address targeted market system constraints? 5. How successful has the RDC Activity been in identifying the determinants of positive or negative nutritional behaviors and determining the best entry points for integrating nutrition-sensitive activities? 6. How successful has the RDC Activity been in effectively integrating gender considerations and ensuring equitable access for women, increasing female engagement and empowerment, and promoting women entrepreneurs? 7. How effective has the RDC Activity’s Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) approach and tools been in measuring market system change? The RDC Activity has focused on the FTF objective “Improve Food Security through Systemic Changes that Increase Rural Incomes,” and two IRs: “Increased Farm Productivity” and “Increased Participation in Profitable Market Systems.” The RDC Activity focused on three life-of-activity targets:1 1. Five hundred thousand (500,000) people with access to new and improved products, services, and/or market channels. 2. A 50 percent expansion of commercial outreach in the FTF ZOI of production- and post￾harvest-related inputs and services. 3. A 50 percent expansion of commercial procurement by collaborating companies. METHODOLOGY The evaluation combined qualitative and quantitative data collection methods—including a desk review, Key Informant Interviews (KIIs), Focus Group Discussions (FGDs), and a producer survey. Due to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) concerns, the ET (one team member based in the United States 1 RDC Project Document, July 2016. iii and two based in Dhaka and Gazipur) conducted all KIIs, FGDs, and surveys using remote interviewing technologies. Given that the secondary (e.g., Value Chain Actors [VCAs]) and tertiary (e.g., producers) stakeholders refused to associate their business and production activities with RDC, the ET fully relied on the findings from primary stakeholders (e.g., Lead Private Partners) in attributing the impacts of the RDC Activity. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The ET clustered the EQs into four thematic areas for presentation of the findings. Findings: Increased Agricultural Productivity (EQ 1 and EQ 2) EQ 1: The RDC has supported 43 national and regional firms to provide access to new technologies and improved management practices for smallholder producers in improved rice, maize, pulses (mung bean) and oilseeds (sunflower, groundnuts, and sesame) through improved availability of seeds (and seed treatments), seedlings, fertilizer (including inoculants), Crop Protection Products (CPPs), crop procurement, mechanization, Information and Communications Technology (ICT), and access to finance. The RDC has reported an increase across the crop yields and margins against the baselines and a good rate of crop diversification that is supported by producer survey and KIIs. EQ 2: In the FTF ZOI, CSISA-MEA focused on the training and capacity development of Local Service Providers (LSPs), mechanics, operators, and drivers; whereas RDC focused on awareness and market development for machinery. The RDC coordinated with the various financial institutions linking to CSISA￾MEA to explore opportunities for providing financing to the light engineering sector dealing with farm machinery. Local actors reported increased use of mechanization and mechanization having a good impact on their household incomes. Conclusions: Productivity The RDC contributed to the increased productivity and diversification of the targeted crops in the FTF zone. The key drivers were improved seed, crop protection, processing, marketing, and mechanization. The attribution is discussed in EQ 7. The RDC and CSISA-MEA Activities have demonstrated a good level of cooperation and complementarity. Findings: Increased Participant Involvement in Profitable Markets (EQ 3 and EQ 4) EQ 3: The RDC Market Accelerator Fund (MAF)/Fixed-Amount Subaward (FAS) Fund with private partners provided training, marketing, and promotional incentives to the local VCAs and addressed the key market constraints—including better access to information, integrated services, better quality inputs, finance and, to some extent, procurement. Sixty-nine (69) percent of partners reported that the incentives were well aligned with the objectives of the partner activities. EQ 4: The MAF model supported 80 interventions, 12 with high potential to scale up. The public and private investment demonstrated an impressive 3.7-to-1 United States Government (USG) dollar contribution. Market Accelerator Fund partners reported that the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) with RDC achieved nearly 100 percent of their initial objectives. Conclusions: Market Participation The match funding model of partnership with the private sector demonstrated a good potential to provide innovative incentives up and down the value chains and to address specific market constraints for big and small market players. It required innovative project management, mutual learning, capacity building, and a new Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) approach of measuring scale and systemic results. Findings: Nutrition (EQ 5) To support improved nutrition, RDC pursued activities that impacted the three primary FTF nutrition￾sensitive agriculture pathways: income, production, and women’s empowerment. Along the production- iv for-consumption pathway, RDC has increased availability of rice and diversified crops through improved farm management practices and inputs. To increase incomes, RDC diversified crop options by promoting profitable rotational cropping patterns and greater market access. The RDC also implemented several standalone nutrition-related activities—some of which (e.g., NutriChamps) had wide publicity in Bangladesh and are a good example of donor cooperation. Conclusions: Nutrition The RDC has fulfilled its agreement for nutrition and demonstrated improvements in nutrition and dietary patterns among its stakeholders. Findings: Gender and Youth (EQ 6) The RDC operated under the concepts of Women’s Economic Empowerment (WEE) Systemic Change Objective 2 (SCO 2): “Increased adoption of gender- and nutrition-sensitive business models.” Every FAS private-partner activity proposal was reviewed with a gender lens. Value Chain Actors and LSPs report having 70 percent of women and youth as clients and higher numbers of women and youth clients as compared to five years ago. The RDC implemented several specific gender-related activities in cooperation with the private partners. However, the women and youth involvement in all RDC-supported sectors remains low (4 percent and 7 percent, respectively). Conclusions: Gender and Youth The stakeholder reporting on women and youth involvement in the sector indicates a general positive trend. Despite the proactive efforts to empower women within the ZOI, the change has been slow over the past five years. The majority of VCA interviews conclude that social, cultural, traditional, and family obligations still prevent women from fully entering employment. Findings: Monitoring, Evaluation, Learning and Measuring Systemic Change (EQ 7) Over the course of its implementation, RDC swiftly transitioned from direct to computed participant results monitoring using the “catchment area” approach, suggested as one of the options of measuring results in the 2018 FTF Indicator Handbook and the “Participant-Based Survey Sampling Guide for Feed the Future Annual Monitoring Indicators.”2 Upon implementing the “catchment area” approach, the RDC Activity measured a five-fold increase in outreach between October 2020 and June 2021, and the ET noted that at least 80 percent of this attribution has been supported through the reported results of the FASs. While RDC has developed nine Systemic Change Objectives (SCOs), the Activity had not fully developed the methodology nor measured the market systemic change during the FPE. The RDC subcontracted Outcome Harvesting as an initial attempt to describe the scalable models achieved during the life of the Activity and to measure systemic change in the market systems. The report was published in January 2022. The scalable models tested by RDC include developing an agent banking model; improved access to finance; innovative marketing tools; inclusive distribution channels; better access to affordable new agricultural products, tools, machinery, and improved crops; women entrepreneurship; and better￾nutrition promotion events. 2 Agrilinks. v Conclusion (Overall and EQ 7) The Activity was perfectly designed by USAID following a Market Systems Development approach and FTF Guidelines. The RDC has achieved all the planned results as per its agreement with USAID, despite COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns and restrictions in 2020–2021. LESSONS LEARNED Some of the lessons learned from RDC implementation and this evaluation include the following: • Market System Development (MSD). The MSD approach has demonstrated the benefits of working with national, regional, and local market players, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, when RDC partners demonstrated a high level of resilience and resourcefulness, which allowed RDC to continue operations and even overachieve some of its targets in the final two years of operations. Also, RDC was instrumental in ensuring private partner competitiveness through co-creation, facilitation, and buying down risks of innovation. Future MSD projects in the agribusiness sector in Bangladesh will be able to build on RDC’s successes and the trust built with market actors, without having to start from scratch. • Collaborating, Learning, and Adapting. The Activity has gone through a valuable learning curve of engaging private partners and shifting the private sector’s mindset toward a facilitative approach. RDC also proved that there is an appetite for market actors working in the agricultural sector to co￾invest and try new models, which is encouraging for future MSD Activities in Bangladesh. The USAID Mission’s involvement, experimentation, flexibility, and co-creation with the implementing partner is also a new and valuable Collaborating, Learning, and Adapting (CLA) experience in this Activity. • MSD Cooperation Modalities. RDC had a mixed experience with the FAS modality and FAS reporting. What was a useful experience, as reported by some smaller partners, proved to be less meaningful and/or an extra bureaucratic burden for other larger partners. • Gender and Youth. With low levels of women’s participation in agricultural employment and business, the Activity developed positive lessons in women-to-women entrepreneurship, female bank agent/micro-merchants, marketing, and processing models that are definitely worth further development (see Recommendations). The Activity could have benefited from having a greater focus on youth—who also have a much higher adoption rate of new technology/ICT innovation compared to older stakeholders. • FTF Zone of Influence Promotion. One of the advantages of the MSD facilitation approach was the partnership with national versus local businesses. This allowed larger players with existing services and products to expand their operations within the FTF ZOI and become more inclusive in their approaches, to the benefit of local producers and VCAs. • Mechanization. The Activity has demonstrated the benefits of mechanization in rice and other crop sectors. The support of mechanization service centers, training local service providers, introduction of asset-based financing, and franchise schemes have demonstrated promising results. If properly packaged for further use, these models have a good potential for scaling up. Utilization of rice transplanters, however, has been challenging from the cost/benefit perspective. • Crop Diversification. Successful diversification was somewhat limited by market price fluctuations and adverse weather conditions. What proved to be good for food and income resilience has not proven to be as good for longer-term business practices. Crops prone to suffer from adverse weather conditions are particularly challenging to advance and promote via donor development projects with only a five-year project life. However, the RDC’s promotion of climate-resilient crops—e.g., short￾stem maize, and better practices in crop protection, mechanization, and procurement—provided valuable lessons on how to partially mitigate the challenges of diversification. vi • Nutrition-intensive Crops. Despite the known health benefits of zinc rice, available varieties must produce acceptable yields and profit for producers as well as meet consumer preferences and viable retail price points. • Bio-solutions. Environment-friendly and production-efficient models in agricultural bio-solutions, e.g., Trichoderma seed inoculants, bio-pesticides, etc., developed by the RDC, faced limitations related to supply, regulatory restrictions, and an immature demand side. However, lessons learned from successful partnerships suggests that there is good potential for the increasing adoption of bio￾solutions and the bio-solutions market. • Access to Finance/Banking. The success of the integration, reorientation, and expansion to formal banking of the existing micro-merchant networks in (remote) rural areas has proven to be one of the most valuable lessons learned. In addition, RDC found that there is potential for a high level of women engagement. RDC’s learning with respect to reducing partner banks’ risk in expanding in rural areas is another success story worth replicating alongside the modern digital banking solutions (mobile banking, Point of Sale [POS], and input credit) (see Recommendations). • Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). The COVID-19 pandemic pushed this Activity and its private partners to scale up and adapt various ICT solutions for remote work. • Integrated Services. RDC guided private partners to learn the benefits of integrated delivery advisory, seed improvement, crop protection, farm management, financial, marketing, and procurement services—improving partners’ outreach in the FTF zone and bottom line. • Scalable Models. Strictly speaking, most of the innovations promoted by the RDC have been tested for years, even decades, by other USAID and non-USAID players in Bangladesh. However, the ”facilitation” for the private partners approach was innovative. Unfortunately, due to apparent time constraints, the RDC was unable to “package” successful models to assist in future replication. The RDC’s “Outcome Harvesting Report” issued after the Activity ended was the first attempt to inventory, summarize, and describe the “scalable models.” However, a better packaging of the know￾how could be achieved to assist future projects. • Systemic Change. There are numerous MEL guidelines and reports intending to structure the SCOs. However, a lack of clear definitions of the expected systemic change, SCOs, and how to measure the SCOs from the start was a challenge to the Activity. This led to some confusion with operational and FTF indicators which, finally, were not fully defined or measured until the end of the Activity. As with the scalable results, the lesson learned is that activities should have sufficient time and adequate methodology to analyze and measure the systemic change that could also realistically result from more than one USAID Activity. RECOMMENDATIONS Drawing on the findings and conclusions presented above, the following are recommendations to inform future USAID programming in the areas of agricultural policy, research, and planning: • MSD Activities Implementation Phases. Based on the ET’s experience with MSD, it takes an average of 18 months for an Activity to develop an initial portfolio of partnerships with the private sector. The ET recommends an 18-month market research and partnership building period for future MSD activities, with at least 36 months of implementation and a 12-month scalable model analysis/packaging, replication, and dissemination phase. • Scalable Models. The MSD activities are recommended to develop “know-how” packages (e.g., manuals, guides, sample investment plans, etc.) for the successful scalable models and lessons learned cases for models that did not work. vii • Monitoring, Learning, and Evaluation (MEL). Activities’ MEL systems should be available for analysis for external monitors, and evaluators authorized by USAID. If USAID contractors use proprietary data management systems, evaluators should still be able to examine what and how the relevant data is fed into the system, how and by whom it is processed, and receive real-time MEL reports by indicator, outputs, and outcomes. • MSD Cooperation Modalities. It is worth considering customized cooperation agreements to fit different types of private partners’ needs. There may be a potential for large international/national partners to fully fund the USAID-provided technical assistance/expertise, while some of the smaller partners with promising models could be initially fully financed by USAID with a funding phase-out provision. • Policy Advocacy. Due to regulatory bottlenecks affecting seed and commodity trading in Bangladesh, it is recommended that policy advocacy be incorporated in future MSD activities. A collective strategy and plan with private partners and agribusiness associations, as well as direct work with the GOB agencies, should be considered. Scaling of new technologies at the local level and their sustainability largely depends on the endorsement of public agencies—especially the Department of Agricultural Extension (DAE) in the crop sector. • Bio-solutions. Further support to promoting bio-solutions in agriculture is recommended as part of environmental protection, promotion of “green” consumer preferences, enhanced productivity, and producer incomes. Collaboration with national and international research institutions and laboratories with best practices in bio-solutions development, testing, regulations, and promotion is highly recommended. • Zinc Rice. Increased consumption of zinc biofortified rice has been an important USAID goal. The realistic challenge has been the development of varieties that result in high yields for farmers as well as meeting consumer preferences for attributes and price. The new Bangladesh Rice Research Institute (BRRI) dhan 100 apparently meets all these requirements. As availability of this new variety becomes more plentiful, future USAID-funded projects involving rice should focus on this new variety or similar ones. • Banking and Access to Finance. The Bank Asia, BRAC, and City Bank agent models supported by the Activity are recommended for further assessment and dissemination. Further support for developing asset-based financing products, particularly for agri machinery acquisition, will be needed in FTF. • Gender and Youth. The culturally and socioeconomically adapted women engagement models developed by the Activity should be widely replicated in FTF and nationwide. Further gender-role promotion is necessary with private and government partners. Digital/ICT literacy programs for women and youth should be incorporated into any Activity to reduce the digital divide, along with developing accessible internet access devices and resources for women. Youth training programs for focusing on mechanization will encourage youth to remain engaged in agricultural occupations. • Mechanization. In future activities dealing with agricultural mechanization, it is recommended that manuals and business plan examples be developed for farmers, dealers, and businesses to demonstrate the benefits of mechanization for a range of crops. Step-by-step ‘’how to franchise” manuals can be developed for public use. Future USAID MSD investments should target resolving cost/benefit challenges of critical equipment such as rice transplanters. • Getting partners take new products. Further MSD activities reducing risks of brand-new innovations and phasing out of scaled support are recommended in future activities. A stronger focus on partnering with firms that have established processing facilities and market share at the consumer level could be more effective in encouraging producers to grow profitable and nutrient-rich foods viii intended for processing. The result of these relationships will ensure long-term financial benefits for producers and opportunities for processing firms to expand their market position. • Crop Diversification. Future agriculture-related activities may consider introducing greater flexibility for types of crops. For example, having one project dedicated to horticulture while another is dedicated to ground crops often results in lost opportunities and/or conflicts between implementers. Often, the private sector firms targeted as potential partners in Bangladesh have product lines that involve several sub-sectors of agricultural production. Therefore, implementers working within a “silo” miss opportunities of potential benefit to producers. With a more flexible approach, the farmer household incomes may become a more important achievement measure than aggregate yields and outputs per crop. • Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). The future competitiveness of the agricultural sector will, to a great extent, depend on ICT adoption rates and further inclusive innovations. It is recommended to support affordable hardware, software, and connectivity solutions for the rural population. However, the marginal and remote farmers, women, and youth are at risk of digital divide. Cooperation with the Government of Bangladesh (GOB) and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) is necessary to focus on digital access for vulnerable groups. • Integrated Services. It is recommended to scale up the integrated services tested by the Activity, with an increased focus on gender and youth. • Privacy Concerns. The privacy and digital security of all USAID Activities’ stakeholders should be seriously addressed and protected from each Activity’s onset. At the same time, USAID contractual mechanisms should clearly and explicitly state that USAID auditors and evaluators must have access to some of the private information of the stakeholders by default, with an option of certain exclusions. This should be extended to MSD partner agreements. • Access to Information for Evaluators/MEL accessibility. It is recommended that USAID include a requirement for all activities to maintain audit- and evaluation-accessible MEL systems—with the capacity to produce real-time MEL reports by any USAID-approved Activity/FTF indicator, gender, and other relevant data, even if the contractor partner also uses the data in their proprietary data systems. • Systemic changes. It is recommended to define the systemic changes that USAID/FTF want to achieve in Bangladesh/FTF ZOI and the indicators to measure the systemic changes—and conduct an ex-post and/or midterm Outcome Harvesting/Systemic Changes evaluation for a cluster of activities— including RDC, Livestock, Nutrition, Horticulture, and Aquaculture, without so much focus on the attribution of each Activity rather on identifying, quantifying, and packaging for replication the successful scalable models and progress on the systemic changes. 1 1. INTRODUCTION This report presents the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Final Performance Evaluation (FPE) of the Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC) Activity funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in Bangladesh and implemented by ACDI/VOCA. A three-person Evaluation Team (ET) managed by the USAID/Bangladesh Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (BMEL) Activity conducted the evaluation. 1.1 BACKGROUND The RDC Activity has been implemented by Agricultural Cooperative Development International/Volunteers in Overseas Cooperative Assistance (ACDI/VOCA) over a five-year period starting on July 13, 2016, with an initially planned termination date of July 12, 2021. On April 16, 2021, the Activity was granted a five-month, no-cost extension until December 12, 2021.3 The RDC Activity has been implemented in three Divisions, 21 Districts, and 104 Upazilas,4 located in the FTF Zone of Influence (ZOI) in the Khulna, Barisal, and Dhaka Divisions. The Activity had an allocated budget of $24.48 million, of which 41 percent is estimated to have been spent on operations, 34 percent on programmatic activities, and 25 percent on indirect costs by the Activity’s end.5 1.2 RDC OBJECTIVES AND THEORY OF CHANGE (TOC) The RDC Activity has focused on one objective: “Improve Food Security through Systemic Changes that Increase Rural Incomes,” and two Intermediate Results (IRs): “Increased Farm Productivity” and “Increased Participation in Profitable Market Systems.” RDC had three life-of-Activity targets:6 ● Five hundred thousand (500,000) people with access to new and improved products, services, and/or market channels. ● A 50 percent expansion of commercial outreach in the FTF ZOI of production- and post￾harvest-related inputs and services; and ● A 50 percent expansion of commercial procurement by collaborating companies. By design, RDC was not expected to directly support agricultural producers or local Value Chain Actors (VCAs). The Activity was expected to reach the above targets through facilitative technical assistance to selected lead private-sector partners that would create scalable market system impacts and, ultimately, benefit rural households with the added value of expanding opportunities for women and youth (see Annex 6 for the TOC schematic). To this effect, a $1.5 million Market Accelerator Fund (MAF) was established to support strategic Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) with national and regional agribusinesses and business development service and facilitation providers. The MAF had a minimum leverage requirement of 1:1.7 3 Award AID-388-A-16-00002, Modification of Assistance Number 9, April 16, 2021. 4 Annual Report Fiscal Year [FY] 2020. 5 Ibid. 6 RDC Project Document, July 2016. 7 The ET refers to the fund partners as “FAS Partners.” In the project documents, the fund activities have been intermittently referred to as the MAF, Market Accelerator Program (MAP), and Fixed-Amount Subawards (FAS). The USAID financial contributions to the PPPs were implemented in the form of FAS. Hence, from the USAID procurement perspective, the PPP partners were referred to as FAS. From the PPP implementation perspective, the private partners were referred to as “Lead Partners” or MAF or MAP partners. 2 1.3 ADAPTIVE IMPLEMENTATION APPROACH The RDC has been implemented in a unique way, allowing the interventions to be adaptive. As stated in the RDC Activity document: “…[T]his is a departure from more traditional activity management, in which interventions are managed flexibly in response to changing conditions. Adaptive management anticipates programmatic changes, collecting necessary data to determine when those changes have taken place so one of several predetermined alternatives can be adopted. To this end, the program description will provide the overall approach to implementation and the framework for how it will be managed, whereas the work plan will serve as the primary tool for operationalizing an adaptive management approach. To this end, ACDI/VOCA and USAID/Bangladesh will develop the work plan on a rolling basis. This will not be a traditional annual work plan; rather each work plan will be jointly developed and evaluated on an ongoing and predetermined basis.” The adaptive management approach involved a high degree of communication and coordination between ACDI/VOCA and the USAID/Bangladesh Activity management staff on a frequent and ongoing basis. 1.4 EVALUATION PURPOSE, AUDIENCE AND SCOPE The RDC’s evaluation purpose is to assess the extent to which RDC achieved its objectives. The primary audience is the Economic Growth (EG) Office of USAID/Bangladesh. USAID may distribute the report to other relevant stakeholders, such as implementing partners under the Feed the Future (FTF) Program, relevant departments of the Government of Bangladesh (GOB)—specifically, the Department of Agricultural Extension (DAE), research institutes, and private sector and other donors. 1.5 EVALUATION QUESTIONS (EQS) This evaluation’s Scope of Work (Annex 1) requested the ET to provide answers to seven Evaluation Questions (EQs) grouped into four thematic areas (see Table 1). Table 1: Evaluation Questions by Thematic Area 1. IR 1: Increased Farm Productivity EQ 1: To what extent has RDC been successful in achieving its IR 1: “Increased Farm Productivity”? EQ 2: How successful has RDC been in collaborating with the Cereal Systems Initiative for South Asia – Mechanization Activity (CSISA-MEA) to strengthen access to machinery and tools through expanded commercial outreach of machinery manufacturers, dealers, and local service providers (LSPs)? 2. IR 2: Profitable Market Systems EQ 3: To what extent has RDC been successful in achieving its IR 2: “Increased Participation in Profitable Market Systems” and strengthening of the relevant market systems, namely: 3a. Ensuring that the incentives for each market system actor are aligned with the desired intervention and expected market system change. 3b. Facilitating increased levels of cooperation (both horizontal and vertical). 3c. Catalyzing investment from market system actors, both public and private, to adapt and scale up investments in commercializing new technologies, inclusive business models, or value chain upgrading strategies. EQ 4: Market Accelerator Fund. How successful has RDC been in using the MAF to support the Activity’s objectives and address targeted market system constraints? 3 3. Cross-Cutting Issues EQ 5: Nutrition. How successful has RDC been in identifying the determinants of positive or negative nutritional behaviors and determining the best entry points for integrating nutrition-sensitive activities? EQ 6: Gender. How successful has RDC been in effectively integrating gender considerations and ensuring equitable access for women, increased female engagement, women’s empowerment, and promotion of women entrepreneurs? 4. Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) EQ 7: MEL/Collaborating, Learning, and Adapting (CLA). How effective have RDC’s MEL approach and tools been in measuring market system change? EQ 7.1: MEL and Attribution. In Fiscal Year (FY) 2020 reporting, RDC reported 248,913 farmers applying improved technologies and management practices. To what extent can these data be reasonably attributed to RDC interventions? What are the tradeoffs between using survey data through a “market shed” or “catchment area” approach compared to assisting private sector firms to maintain comprehensive customer or supplier lists? If the private sector firms do not or cannot produce comprehensive customer or supplier lists, what impact would this have on USAID’s ability to assess the number of beneficiaries attributed to the Activity? EQ 7.2: Lessons Learned/Scalable Models. What are some of the lessons learned and, based on lessons learned, what are some scalable interventions/technologies? 2. METHODOLOGY 2.1 APPROACH AND METHODS The evaluation combined qualitative and quantitative data collection methods, including desk review, Key Informant Interviews (KIIs), Focus Group Discussions (FGDs), and a producer survey. Due to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) concerns, the ET (team leader based in the United States and two national consultants based in Dhaka and Gazipur) conducted all KIIs and administered the survey questionnaire using remote interviewing technologies (i.e., telephone, Skype, Zoom, Google Meet, and Microsoft Teams). Document Review: The ET reviewed documents pertaining to the RDC, FTF activities, GOB reports, policy briefs, technical reports, and GOB policy frameworks. (See bibliography in Annex 5.) KIIs: Key informant interviews were semi-structured interviews utilizing a discussion guide while also following an open-ended format to allow exploration of topics as they emerged. (See Annex 3 for the KII guide.) FGDs: Initially planned as in-person group discussions with VCAs, the FGDs had to be conducted individually by phone due to the COVID-19 lockdown and limited internet in rural areas. Producer Survey: The ET administered the survey questionnaire by telephone to assess stakeholders’ perceptions of the program, including its implementation and results. (See Annex 4 for the survey questionnaire and Annex 6 for a breakdown of survey respondents by stakeholder group.) Sampling KIIs: As per the initial plan, the ET interviewed all 39 active RDC primary stakeholders (Lead Private Partners/Fixed-Amount Subaward [FAS]). In addition, the ET also interviewed 11 RDC staff and 27 USAID, GOB, and Research and Development (R&D) partners. (See Annex 3 for a list of KII participants.) The KII Guide and Summary of the responses are presented in Annex 4. FGDs: Due to the remote nature of this evaluation, the ET decided to randomly select FGD participants and conduct KIIs with them instead. As a result, the ET conducted telephone interviews with 100 VCAs. 4 They drew KII samples from 10 districts (Barguna, Barisal, Faridpur, Gopalganj, Jashore, Khulna, Magura, Meherpur, Rajbari and Satkhira8). The ET conducted KIIs with a range of stakeholders including private partners, aggregators, input dealers, trades, retailers, producers, buyers, extension agents, financial service providers, ICT providers, and local service providers (mechanization). The team selected a sample of the districts (Table 2) based on the numbers and stakeholder types available in the spreadsheet that USAID shared with the ET.9 Producer Survey: The survey included 125 producers. The geographical distribution of the sample was identical to the sample discussed above under FGDs (Table 2). While the ET tried to include samples that covered all six RDC-focused crops (rice, sesame, maize, mung bean, sunflower, and groundnut), the ET found that not all six crops were cultivated in all districts (Table 3). Further, there was a discrepancy between the numbers of male and female respondents, given that the spreadsheet only included a limited number of female producers. Therefore, the ET included all female producers that were included in the spreadsheet. Once sampled, the questionnaire was telephonically administered with all producers. Table 2: Geographical Distribution of KIIs, FGDs, and Surveys Division District KIIs KIIs/FGDs Survey Dhaka Dhaka City 50 0 0 Faridpur 1 23 10 Gazipur 1 0 0 Rajbari 0 3 12 Gopalganj 0 10 11 Barishal Barisal 6 5 12 Pirojpur 0 0 13 Barguna 1 19 11 Chuadanga 2 0 0 Khulna Khulna 5 4 11 Magura 1 4 12 Jashore 3 25 9 Satkhira 0 4 12 Narail 2 0 0 Meherpur 1 3 12 Rajshahi Bogura 1 0 0 Sylhet Sylhet 1 0 0 Mymensingh Mymensingh 2 0 0 6 Divisions 17 districts + Dhaka City 77 100 125 8 Dhaka district was excluded since the RDC did not implement VCA-related activities in that district. 9 There were 8,111 entries included in the spreadsheet, but when names and contacts were later disclosed, it became clear that there were duplications, e.g., the same producer growing two or more crops. 5 Table 3: Data Collection by Instrument and Stakeholder Type Crop Survey Partner KIIs VCA Type KII-FGD Rice 39 FAS/MAP 39 Input Dealer 42 Sesame 28 R&D 12 Retailer 30 Maize 20 USAID 6 Aggregator 16 Mung bean 17 RDC 11 Trader 12 Sunflower 14 GOB 9 Total 100 Groundnut 7 Total 77 Total 125 2.2 DATA ANALYSIS Qualitative data analysis involved coding the data using Microsoft Excel software to identify themes in the interview notes and program documents and assess their relative importance in answering the EQs. Quantitative data analysis consisted of calculating basic descriptive statistics and frequencies of the survey results. Attribution Analysis Using the Market Systems Development approach, RDC only worked directly with lead firms. Lower tier businesses did not directly associate with RDC. However, having a direct association with RDC was not the only way ET assessed attribution. The ET also used available reports and interviews to analyze the flow of product from lead firms to secondary and tertiary firms and how their work with lead firms influenced their business models. Assessing attribution did not simply involve asking an interviewee if they are associated with the Activity. The ET developed comprehensive evaluation tools that addressed attribution in multiple direct and indirect ways, including questions related to other donor and government support (Annexes 3-6). The ET also conducted a thorough review of the FTF Handbook and looked at its methodological evolution during the life of the Activity to assess RDC attribution to reported Activity results. 2.3 METHODOLOGICAL LIMITATIONS Challenges in data collection: Due unavoidable circumstances, the beneficiary list and beneficiary contact clearance procedure took longer than planned; consequently, the ET experienced delays and methodological challenges to conduct the surveys and assess the results of the project. Challenges assessing attribution and contribution: Market system change is a non-linear process with multiple contributors. The incremental contribution of any factor to market change outcomes is typically unknown and can only be estimated based on available evidence. The ET used attribution analysis where the RDC directly intervened (mainly FAS partners), conducted contribution analysis (Section 2.3) to assess RDC’s indirect impacts using the available evidence, and reached informed conclusions about the program’s likely contribution to observed market change outcomes. COVID-19: The COVID-19 pandemic created travel and mobility restrictions. After several delays, the team Leader (TL) travelled to Bangladesh. However, a few days into his quarantine, the GOB announced a new national lockdown on May 28, 2021. Hence, the ET conducted all KIIs remotely using Zoom, Skype, and phone. The ET administered the VCA and producer questionnaires telephonically. Remote interviews limited the personal interaction with the participants, however, making it difficult to observe non-verbal cues or body language. Also, limited internet bandwidth made communication more difficult at times. As a result, the TL was unable to participate in the desired number of interviews. Notwithstanding, remote interviews had the advantage of being more cost efficient than in-person interviews and, in the case of KIIs, generally made it easier to find mutually convenient interview times. However, the ET faced significant difficulties reaching out to the secondary (VCA) and tertiary (producer) 6 stakeholders with little or no knowledge of the program. Non-Random Responses to the Producer Survey and FGDs: The Producer Survey respondents and FGD interviewees were not randomly drawn from a full dataset of the target population and, thus, were not necessarily representative of this population. The ET sought to mitigate this sampling bias by triangulating the responses from different stakeholder groups such as aggregators, input dealers, traders, and retailers (within KIIs and FGDs) with the documentation and reporting available. Length of interview: The KIIs and the administration of the survey both lasted for about 90 minutes. It was extremely difficult to convince the KIs to spend time to provide responses to the ET’s questions. Towards the end of the interview, a few Key Informants (KIs) lost interest and asked the ET to end the interview process. 3. FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS The Findings and Conclusions of this evaluation incorporate the results of the desk review in April–May 2021; data collection phase in June–August 2021; the RDC performance reported in FY 2016–FY 2020, the Annual Performance Surveys 2018–2020,10 and the most recently estimated results reported by RDC in FY 2021. 3.1 PRODUCTIVITY The RDC has continued the USAID FTF tradition of supporting the important rice sector in Bangladesh. Since 2010, USAID has funded several interventions that have directly supported millions of smallholder farmers with the purpose of improving access to quality seed, fertilizer, machinery, and other inputs to increase yields and margins. Some of the previous FTF activities have tested market systems and scaling￾up models in partnership with private market players—notably, the recent Agricultural Value Chain (AVC) Activity. The collective impact of the FTF activities resulted in an estimated reduction of hunger (68 percent) and poverty (36 percent) in the areas where FTF has worked from 2011–2018.11 The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) found that, “In 2014 alone, nearly two million producers used new technologies or management practices and $9.4 million in new private sector investments were leveraged thanks to Feed the Future’s support.”12 Implementing Partners (IPs) have reported an increase in rice and cash crop yields, margins, and improved farming and management practices. Despite the success in the ZOI, USAID introduced emerging and strategic business models to the RDC Activity at the small farmers and VCA levels to accelerate the ongoing development. The big difference between the RDC and most of the previous activities is that RDC has directed its support through the bigger market actors alongside the small, regional firms. The RDC Activity has supported 42 national and regional firms (listed in Annex 5-B) to provide access to new technologies and improved management practices for smallholder producers in improved rice, maize, pulses (mung bean) and oilseeds (sunflower, groundnuts, and sesame) through improved availability of seeds (and seed treatments), seedlings, fertilizer (including inoculants), Crop Protection Products (CPPs), crop procurement, mechanization, ICT, and access to finance. (The findings of the RDC partner operations are discussed in the EQ 3 and EQ 4 sections.) 10 At the time of this draft evaluation report, RDC is conducting an Annual Performance Survey (APS 2021) to verify the estimated outcomes for FY 2021, preparing a FY 2021 Annual Report, and commissioning a study on the Systemic Change, all of which may have had an impact on the final findings and conclusions of the RDC evaluation if those documents could have been made available to the ET. 11 www.feedthefuture.gov/country/Bangladesh, based on Bangladesh Integrated Household Survey 2018–2019. 12 Tracking Promises, Reid Hamel, CSIS Global Food Security Project, September 2016. 7 The RDC conducted a reasonable quality research before selecting the crops and types of support in 2017–2021. (The list of RDC technical reports and feasibility studies is presented in Annex 5.) The market systems approach implemented by RDC changes the traditional concept of smallholder “support” to providing “access” or “outreach” to “participants”—to the extent that the end beneficiaries (farmers) are not aware of the Activity, and the Activity “does not know the end beneficiaries.”13 The “outreach” is measured annually through the Annual Performance Survey (APS). The APS covers all categories of RDC interventions and assess performance at both the producer and VCA (trader, distributions, retailers, service providers, processor/millers, etc.) levels as per the attribution guideline. The APS generates data from a sample survey, which is used to extrapolate with a calculated access outreach number. (See details in Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning [MEL] plan V4, April 10, 2019.) According to APS 2020, 73 percent of producers were reached through input services,14 6 percent from output markets,15 and 12 percent of producers received RDC-facilitated support services such as mechanization, finance, advisory services, and ICT (RDC Annual Report 2020). 3.1.1 Progress Against Selected Indicators The RDC measured the productivity Intermediate Result (IR) using standard FTF indicators, including crop yields and gross margins.16 The RDC has reported increases across the crop yields and margins against the baselines (where available), except for drops due to cyclones and draughts (e.g., sesame 2020) as shown in Tables 4 and 5. Table 4: Farmers’ Gross Margin per Hectare, $/ha Crop Baseline 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020 Change (%) between baseline and FY 2020 Rice 624 699 499 790 27 Groundnut – – – 1,201 – Maize 647 782 909 1,268 96 Mung bean 475 419 236 391 -18 Sesame 218 172 693 62 -72 Sunflower 333 332 253 700 110 Source: RDC FY 2021 Q3 Progress Report. Table 5: Farmers’ Yield of Targeted Agricultural Commodities, MT/ha Crop Baseline 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020 Change (%) between baseline and FY 2020 Rice 5.57 5.84 6.83 5.95 7 Groundnut – – – 2.23 – Maize 6.78 7.8 11.45 11.46 69 Mung bean 0.85 0.94 0.64 0.83 -2 Sesame 0.81 0.58 0.89 0.40 -51 Sunflower 1.34 1.33 1.17 2.09 56 Source: RDC FY 2021 Q3 Progress Report. 13 Based on interviews with the RDC management in April–September 2021. 14 Input services ensure the availability of seeds (and seed treatments), seedlings, and fertilizer (including inoculants). 15 Output markets included collection, procurement, and processing of crop produces. 16 The gross margin is the difference between the total value of production of the agricultural commodity (crop) and the cost of producing that commodity, divided by the total number of units in production (hectares of crops). Gross margin per hectare is a measure of net income from that farm (Ref: RDC Activity – Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) plan V4, April 10, 2019). 8 The FPE reported an almost consistent increase in yields for all the RDC crops and rice varieties as shown in Table 6. There was some inconsistency between FPE and RDC figures on magnitude and change in yields of reported crops. In general, lower yields were estimated in FPE findings (Table 6) compared to RDC (Table 5), whereas the relative temporal change in yield for rice, sesame, and mung bean was lower in the RDC report. The discrepancies might have occurred due to differences in sampling locations in addition to the size of the samples. Nevertheless, FPE estimates progress in productivity across all six RDC crops in the range of 14 percent (sesame) to 38 percent (groundnut). Table 6: Yields of Key Crops in the RDC Project Area – Current vs. Five Years Ago, MT/Ha Crop (Species / Variety) Yield – Five years ago Yield – Current Change (%) Rice-Local 2.96 3.83 29 Rice-HYV (Bold) 4.14 5.18 25 Rice-Fine quality 2.65 3.15 19 Rice-Hybrid 4.95 5.45 10 Groundnut 1.69 2.33 38 Maize 4.88 6.19 27 Mung bean 0.57 0.67 17 Sesame 1.11 1.27 14 Sunflower 0.50 0.62 25 Source: FPE Producer Survey 2021, N=125. 3.1.2 Crop Diversification Bangladesh’s agriculture is overwhelmingly rice-dominated. While the country is maintaining self￾sufficiency in rice, the demand for other crops, such as pulses and oilseeds, continues to exceed supply. The non-rice crops are not only a dietary issue, but also an environmental risk aversion issue for maintaining and enhancing soil fertility and groundwater availability as well as profitability (e.g., the high price of maize as increased demand for poultry feed, and of mung beans for a new export market) in the cropping and/or farming systems. Hence, crop diversification has been an important aspect of RDC. The FPE demonstrated that VCAs attracted new clients by approximately 18 percent—especially for maize, mung bean, sesame, and sunflower crops during the last five years (Table 7). The producer survey also showed increased adoption of mung bean, sesame, and sunflower crops (Table 7). Table 7: Changes in the Adoption of Crop Species During the Last Five Years in the RDC Project Area Crop (Species/Variety) Response of Interviewees (%) Client of VCAs Producers Five Years Ago Current Five Years Ago Five Years Ago Rice-Hybrid 1 81 22 35 Rice-Inbred 31 72 83 72 Groundnut 0 1 6 6 Maize 0 18 16 16 Mung bean 0 17 7 14 Sesame 1 18 9 12 Sunflower 0 18 6 11 Source: RDC FPE Producer Survey and VCA FGDs 2021. 3.1.3 Drivers of Productivity The RDC made a business case for integrated services that contributed to enhanced sales and 9 productivity—such as improved quality seeds, biofertilizer and micronutrients, mechanization, and financial inclusion and digitization. The producer survey reported five drivers that contributed to improvement in crop productivity, sales, and gross margin. They are improved seeds, improved marketing, better crop protection, better processing, and increasing adoption of farm mechanization. Utilization of those drivers has increased by 29 percent compared to five years ago. Notably, only 5 percent of surveyed producers used mechanization five years ago, which jumped to 30 percent. A strong collaboration between RDC and CSISA-MI has probably contributed to this attribution. Table 8: Changes in the Utilization of the Five Drivers Toward Improvement in Crop Productivity, Sales, and Gross Margin During the Last Five Years in the RDC Project Area Driver Utilization by the Producers (% respondents) Change Between Periods (%) Five years ago Current Seed 21 50 29 Marketing 25 49 24 Crop protection 18 38 20 Processing 15 35 20 Mechanization 5 30 25 3.1.4 Conclusions Increased Productivity in Rice-based Cropping Systems Final Performance Evaluation data revealed both productivity (yield ha-1) and profitability (gross margin ha￾1) of rice (across the variety types: local, High-Yielding Variety [HYV], fine quality, and hybrid) and five non-rice crops (groundnut, maize, mung bean, sesame, and sunflower) increased in the catchment areas during the RDC Activity. Crop Diversification Adoption (as percent of producers) of the non-rice crops mung bean, sunflower, and sesame, increased by 86, 75, and 36 percent, respectively, according to an FPE ET estimation. However, the adoption of groundnut and maize did not increase. Productivity Drivers The RDC has successfully addressed the key productivity drivers reported by the farmers’ survey: quality seed, crop protection, marketing, mechanization, and processing. 3.2 MECHANIZATION AND COOPERATION WITH CSISA ACTIVITY (EQ 2) The Cereal Systems Initiative for South Asia Mechanization and Irrigation Activity (CSISA-MI) Phase I launched in 2013 aimed to transform agriculture in southwest Bangladesh by unlocking potential productivity through irrigation, small-scale agricultural machinery, and the provision of agricultural services.17 Intending to build on the successes of the CSISA-MI, the FTF Bangladesh Cereal Systems Initiative in South Asia Mechanization Extension Activity (CSISA-MEA) began on October 1, 2019, with the aim of designing and implementing market-driven interventions in partnership with private sector firms. International Development Enterprises (iDE) was a partner in the implementation of CSISA-MI and a key partner of CSISA-MEA—conducting demonstrations and training for machinery service providers. 3.2.1 Awareness of USAID CSISA Mechanization Activities in the FTF ZOI The premise of the CSISA-MI Activity was grounded in the theory that the introduction of modernized equipment would result in an increase in smallholders’ productivity, diversification of crops, and growth in revenue over time. The final CSISA-MI report noted that ongoing activities were to focus on 17 USAID 2020. Final Report, USAID/Bangladesh CSISA-MI Phase 1 Activity Final Evaluation, December 21, 2020. 10 dissemination and enhancement of mechanization in the FTF ZOI; however, the ET found that KIs had limited awareness of the CSISA mechanization activities.18 3.2.2 CSISA Services and the Key Beneficiaries In addition to the objectives noted above, CSISA-MI focused on responding to escalating rural labor costs and scarcity.19 To address this objective, CSISA-MI provided services for distribution, machinery/mechanization support, smallholder technical support, and crop intensification. It also established linkages between machinery service providers and farmers. Workshops on repair and maintenance provided technical information for farmers. The CSISA-MI also provided spare parts guidance, coordination with local seed companies to ensure availability, and direct machinery supplier linkage. Beneficiaries of CSISA-MI and CSISA-MEA included farm machinery operators,20 mechanics, LSPs, drivers,21 and farmers. 3.2.3 Coordination Between CSISA-MEA and RDC Activities Interviews with the Chief of Party (COP) of the RDC as well as the previous RDC COP (who also served as COP of CSISA-MEA) confirmed good coordination between the two projects about expanding mechanized farming. According to the progress reports for the two CSISA activities, while coordination between CSISA-MI with RDC was good, the synergy with CSISA-MEA was exceptional. Key Informant Interviews with 40 respondents revealed that collaboration between RDC and the CSISA￾MEA Activity strengthened access to machinery and tools for farmers. The extensive partnership between CSISA-MEA and RDC stimulated interventions with RDC’s partners, including ACI Motors Ltd., The Metal Private Ltd., Robi Phone, and BRAC Bank. The former COP of RDC and CSISA-MEA reported that CSISA-MEA focused on training and capacity development of LSPs, mechanics, operators, and drivers, whereas RDC focused on awareness and market development and sales of mechanized equipment. The RDC coordinated with financial institutions providing opportunities for financing to the light engineering firms producing farm machinery. During a KII with the CSISA-MEA COP, who led both MI and MEA, he reported that CSISA-MEA promoted combine harvesters and rice transplanters within the FTF ZOI. ACI Motors Limited machinery and Metal Agro sold combine harvesters and rice transplanters and provided after-sale support to the farmers. The COP added that RDC provided market promotion support to ACI and Metal Agro, and CSISA-MEA provided after-sale support. Unlike RDC, CSISA-MEA provided access to finance support and after-sales service support with the help of the LSPs. The COP reported that CSISA-MEA uses a joint￾venture approach with business entities, whereas RDC provided grants to them. 3.2.4 Beneficiaries of RDC and CSISA-MEA Activities Metal Agro, a RDC and CSISA-MEA partner since November 2018, is working in collaboration with a local organization, Uzirpur Organic Multipurpose Cooperative Society Ltd. (UOMCSL) in the Narail district. Uzirpur Organic Multipurpose Cooperative Society Ltd., in turn, is transferring mechanization techniques and approaches to farmers. The RDC worked with three additional mechanization partners: Krishibid Farm Machinery and Automobiles Ltd. (October 2017), Abedin Equipment Ltd. (December 2020), and Alim Industries Ltd. (December 2020). The purpose of these partnerships was to develop the market and, also, increase awareness of farm machinery. According to a member of the RDC 18 Ibid. 19 Ibid. 20 Driver: A person who compels anything else to move onward is the driver. In the field of farm mechanization, generally or conventionally, the driver is the person who drives the farm machinery (e.g., tractor, power tiller, combined harvesters, reapers, etc.). 21 Machinery Operator: One who performs some act by using their hand(s), or instruments, is an operator. In the field of farm mechanization, the operator is the person who operates farm machinery like a low-lift pump or a deep tube-well (for irrigation), spray machine, thresher, winnower, etc. 11 staff, these four firms collectively sold approximately 300 combine harvesters to farmers during their partnerships with RDC. The International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (known by its Spanish acronym, ) Hub Manager formerly involved in the CSISA mechanization activities reported that the farmers are saving 50 percent of their cost using modern machinery and young people are becoming operators—thereby contributing to youth employment. During a KII with a representative of UOMCSL, the key informant stated that CSISA-MEA had helped generate interest from banks and other financial institutions in agricultural mechanization. The former RDC COP reported that, at the start of RDC, there were only two manufacturers of mechanized agricultural equipment in Bangladesh. The RDC worked toward increasing the number of manufacturers, leading to innovation and price competition. He also noted there was no mechanized harvesting in 2018. Combine harvesters, with a cost of around $30,000 per harvester, have the potential to be adoptable machinery for harvesting—expanding the area to be harvested in a crop year. Rice transplanters, which were promoted by RDC with a cost of around $4,000 per transplanter, have the potential of being significant cost-saving tools for smallholders. However, one of the KIs reported that although rice transplanters are critical to the success of transplanting crops, the 15- to 18-day transplanting window may be insufficient to achieve the break-even point within the prevailing cropping pattern. Therefore, the opportunity for traveling custom service providers is questionable for the financial feasibility of this equipment. However, a KI also noted that mechanical land preparation in the ZOI is now the norm. The CSISA-MEA COP reported that in the ZOI, CSISA worked with over 3,000 machinery service providers, i.e., LSPs who provide support to more than 300,000 farmers. According to him, CSISA-MEA activities have impacted the income of both the farmers and LSPs. He noted that maize is the most profitable crop in the ZOI when harvested with combines—and world-class yields can be achieved. Conversely, yields without combines are very poor. 3.2.5 Performance of RDC-Facilitated Franchisee Scheme The RDC facilitated a machinery and equipment sales and a service franchisee scheme during 2017–2018 (Krishibid Farm Machinery and Automobiles Ltd.), 2018–2020 (Metal Agro), and 2020–2021 (Abedin Equipment Ltd. and Alim Industries Ltd.). By associating themselves with Metal as their Franchisee, the companies managed to leverage their combined strengths to market Metal equipment to the local LSPs and/or lead farmers. The franchise provided support for spare parts and maintenance. In the opinion of RDC partners Metal Agro and Konika, this Activity mitigated operational challenges and reduced the operational cost of the machinery in rural areas. The RDC, along with Metal, also facilitated bank collaboration meetings to encourage banks to provide Asset-Based Financing (ABF), which could be utilized by purchasers to finance the equipment. Through this intervention, Metal was able to establish two franchisee dealerships; and as a result, they sold 21 combine harvesters and three rice transplanters in the FTF ZOI. The mechanization intervention primarily focused on rice and wheat. Farmers also received support with harvesting services from the Konika mechanization unit. It helped them to harvest rice without having to face labor shortages—a major problem that companies face during the rice harvesting season. Further, the regular cost of combined harvester service was BDT 6,000 per 100 decimals of land. Those farmers supported by Konika increased their incomes by 30 percent when compared with other farmers without such support.22 22 RDC FY 2020 Annual Report: October 1, 2019–September 30, 2020. 12 3.2.6 Increase in Mechanized Farming The survey with farmers found that mechanized farming has expanded considerably since the beginningof the project. The respondents support RDC’s progress reports about the changes within the ZOI about mechanization over the past five years. Out of 125 respondents, 79 percent reported that they have partly increased their mechanization. Only 8 percent reported that they are now fully mechanized, and 6 percent stated that they are using their own machines. Further, 50 percent of the respondents reported that they are increasing their mechanized operations using LSP services. 3.2.7 Change in Farmers’ Status in Relation to Mechanization Of the 125 respondents that participated in the RDC FPE producer survey, 36 percent reported that their household income has been enhanced due to increased mechanized operations. Extensive use of LSP services resulted in household income increases for 35.5 percent of respondents. For 18.8 percent of respondents, increased household income resulted from use of their own machinery. Yet several challenges need to be addressed—such as the economic capacity of the franchise owners, the reluctance of banks to provide loans to those interested in purchasing machines, and the higher-level cost of the machinery in comparison to the purchasing power of farmers.23 3.2.8 Conclusions The extensive partnership of CSISA-MI and, in turn, CSISA-MEA with RDC, involved a significant sharing of activities with machinery manufacturers, dealer partners, and commercial lenders. These partnerships resulted in a scalable concept of economic benefit to smallholder farmers. The activity of franchise development by the machinery manufacturers has been proven to be highly successful for repair, maintenance, and hands-on training for machinery owners. However, the financial success of franchise owners remains a challenge as banks are still reluctant to approve loans to them. Yet, the mechanized service provider business sector has proved to be profitable and will likely be a growing job creator, especially for young people. Although mechanized rice transplanting significantly reduces the production cost for producers, it is necessary to make the use of this machinery cost effective by taking into consideration the cropping pattern, efficient management throughout the three paddy transplanting seasons, finding out ways to increase the machinery utilization time, exploring more area coverage, and networking user farmers with proper vertical and horizontal integrations within the diverse rice varieties. 3.3 INCENTIVES, MARKET SYSTEM COOPERATION, AND INVESTMENT (EQ 3) 3.3.1 Alignment of Incentives for Each Market System Actor with the Desired Intervention and Expected Market System Change The RDC has worked to create incentives and mitigate constraints up and down the selected value chains. The incentives included matching grants, capacity building, business/operation expansion, and new markets for private partners; access to integrated services; improved inputs; agricultural and financial risk mitigation; and new markets and increased sales for the local VCAs and producers. The survey with 39 RDC partners found that 69 percent of respondents believed that the incentives provided to the market actors through projects with RDC were well aligned with the projected positive change. Further, 55 percent of the local VCAs opined that the sales and/or procurement incentives helped to reach smallholder farmers (less than 5 ha) during the last five years. On the contrary, 63 percent of GOB officials, researchers, and RDC Project staff were unaware of whether those incentives were aligned. 23 The GOB is now providing subsidies to farmer to support the purchase of the machinery. 13 Local VCAs had their own incentives to attract producers to test new crops and products, including the provision of advisory services, organizing field demonstrations, volume discounts, etc. (Table 9). Table 9: What Are the Best Incentives to Inspire Producers to Test New Crops and Products? Incentive Number of VCA Respondents Who Identified the Incentive as Most Effective Percentage of VCA Respondents Who Identified the Incentive as Most Effective Advisory services 42 20 Field trials 42 20 Product promotion prices 39 18 Field Days 38 18 Volume discounts 29 14 Incentives for input suppliers 24 11 Total 214 100 The RDC reports a learning curve in adjusting incentives for the private partners, depending on their interests and markets. In addition to promoting the value of including smaller VCAs and producers in their operations, RDC helped the partners address some of the supplier and buyer market constraints. For example, partnerships with ACI, Ispahani, Bayer, Dynamic, PCL, NAAFCO, and Metal Agro worked to improve access to information, as well as improving inputs. Other partnerships focused on improving access to knowledge and training.24 Constraints, as perceived by producers’ versus buyers’ experiences, were evident from the responses to the Producer Survey and market actor KIIs conducted by the ET. Producers identified monopoly positions and lack of pricing transparency as major constraints. Buyers reported quality and dependable raw product supply as major constraints. The RDC partnered with Lal Teer Seed, Bombay Sweets, and Pran Group to improve procurement centers to benefit both sellers and buyers. Further efforts such as partnering with seed companies such as Ali Seed Farm in starting their zinc rice buy-back model and establishing Konika Seed Company’s integrated model are leading producers to more profitable crops aimed at resolving the input-related constraints. One hundred (100) local VCAs interviewed by the ET reported that RDC helped them address at least 14 market constraints—including lack of technical knowledge (15 percent), access to market information (12 percent), and improving farming methods (11 percent), as shown in Figure 1. 24 RDC Subaward Database 2021. 14 Figure 1: Types of Market Constraints Addressed by RDC – Local Value Chain Actor Perceptions, Percentage of Responses, N=100 Source: RDC FPE FGDs, Local VCAs, 2021. 3.3.2 Market System Cooperation Horizontal Cooperation: As part of the ET data collection, 55 percent of VCAs reported that horizontal links/peer cooperation have been improved in their value chains over the past five years, while 64 percent of the RDC private partner firms reported that the Activity did not facilitate horizontal cooperation. The RDC reported hosting numerous and regular workshops and roundtables to bring together peers and competitors to discuss a multitude of market system issues25—suggesting significant effort toward horizontal cooperation. Key informants from the GOB and research institutions, on the other hand, reported significant RDC contribution to the development of horizontal links, particularly in R&D. In relation to horizontal cooperation, RDC contributed toward extending the agent banking system. For example, Bank Asia established “safe” retail banking distribution outlets to expand the impact and reduce risks. During a KII with the partner firms, the KI reported that through their agent banking channel, they opened 44,316 accounts (savings accounts, remittance accounts). BRAC Bank used their established retail networks to provide credit facilities to Subject Matter Expert (SME) borrowers and relied on an MFI partner, Rural Reconstruction Foundation (RRF), utilizing the Bangladesh Bank stimulus package. Through the partnership with the MFI, they also provided non-stimulus loans to 500 farmers ($123,000); 95 percent of whom were female). Finally, the BRAC Bank completed loan disbursement to 110 SMEs through their agent points and SME unit offices in the FTF zone.26 Based on the USAID meetings with the RFC team and Bank Asia, RDC played an instrumental role in helping Bank Asia to roll out the agent banking model. Bank of Asia used the micro-merchant networks developed by the Activity to replicate and expand their existing bank agent model to FTF ZOI. Vertical Cooperation: The market system approach of private sector stakeholders becoming the face of activities inspired by what the donor project—in this case RDC—lends to vertical cooperation. When producers and market actors in value chains directly interact with input and service providers or buyers 25 Feed the Future Bangladesh Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC) Activity Annual Report October 1, 2017–September 30, 2018. 26 USAID 2020. Activity Report, USAID/Bangladesh CSISA-MEA April 2020. 15% 12% 11% 9% 9% 9% 8% 8% 2% 5% 3% 4% 3% 1% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% Technical knowledge Market information Improving farming methods Access to inputs Access to improved seed Expanding new distribution channels Introducing new varieties Management skills Rice intensification Mechanization Access to export Access to finance Access to innovation Access to ICT 15 of farm production via workshops or training sessions, relationships are formed, and comprehension of mutual objectives is acquired.27 Ninety (90) percent of the private-sector RDC partners (grantees) reported that their project with RDC facilitated increased levels of vertical cooperation in their area of business. Fifty-six (56) percent of the local market actors interviewed reported that vertical links have been improved in the last five years. The RDC MEL reports support the increased number of dealers, distributers, retailers, and seed and other input suppliers.28 3.3.3 Investment from Market System Actors to Adapt and Scale Up Investments in Commercializing New Technologies, Inclusive Business Models, or Value Chain Upgrading Strategies Investment in Commercializing New Technologies The RDC has been improving the investment ratio with grantees over each of the past three years. In 2018, RDC’s share of activities with private-sector partners was 56.2 percent. By 2020, the RDC share had dropped to 21.4 percent.29 (See Figure 2.) Figure 2: RDC Private and USG Investment, 2018–2020 Source: RDC Activity Presentation, April 22, 2021. RDC interventions have also catalyzed opportunities for partners, market actors, and producers via two FAS interventions with Bank Asia, BRAC Bank, and one new FAS in development—which is focused on supporting machinery companies to establish credit lines for machinery service providers.30 The RDC’s engagement with financial institutions to benefit producers was particularly important during the COVID￾19 pandemic; because during this period, micro-merchants and agent banking outlets suffered—which, in turn, impacted smallholders.31 27 Feed the Future Bangladesh Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC) Activity Annual Report October 1, 2017– September 30, 2018. 28 Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) Plan Version 2; January 2018. 29 RDC FY 2020 Annual Report: October 1, 2019–September 30, 2020. 30 Ibid. 31 Ibid. 16 Key informant interviews with the private-sector RDC partners found that 74 percent of them invested in commercializing new technologies due to the RDC Activity. The new technologies and approaches promote specific varieties of crops (mung bean, sesame, groundnut, saline-tolerant varieties, zinc rice, HYV, and hybrid varieties) and introduce farm machinery, e.g., combine harvesters and rice transplanters. In addition, there have been several ICT innovations adopted, e.g., POS software for the agro-input dealers. Via private sector partners, RDC has also promoted crop nutrients and protective materials as well as inoculants. The RDC COP stated that, in his opinion, the promotion of inoculants has been the most important investment leading to improved income in the ZOI. Performance in Commercializing New Technologies and Operating Business Models Key informants in research and extension services reported that the commercialization of new technologies has been successful. The following are some of the most notable examples: • Development of a business model for operating combine harvesters, along with the concerned LSPs and the machinery franchise scheme to support the business. • New technologies like HYV seed varieties of maize and sunflower, along with the improved production management. • RDC was rather successful in commercializing Trichoderma inoculants. It expanded the number of companies promoting Trichoderma from two to six. As a result, its use yielded an increase of more than 15 percent. Likewise, the use of inoculants increased farmers’ crop yields from 25 to 35 percent. • RDC, in collaboration with private firms, carried out social digital media campaigns, SMS messaging, and TVC broadcasting for effective rural marketing strategies. • RDC introduced to farmers the consumer demand-oriented hybrid rice seeds, stress-tolerant rice seeds, maize seeds, and crop protection products through Petrochem Bd. Ltd., Auto Crop Care, Supreme seed, etc. • RDC transferred improved groundnut and sesame seeds in collaboration with New Mexico State University, Lal Teer Seed, Bombay Sweets, and the Pran Group. • RDC introduced Fertera and Trichoderma promotion through Petrocehm Bd. Ltd. Xplore. • RDC digitalized staff and producer capacity building through Auto Crop Care, Bombay Sweets, Pran Group, and Lal Teer Seed. • The PRAN Group established the “Krishi hub” to provide advice and input sales to the farmers for grain procurement. • RDC introduced Fawligen, an environmentally friendly herbicide for the new premium rice varieties (e.g., OP HYVs like BRRI dhan50, BRRI dhan63), etc. • Private companies made investments to establish new production facilities and expand existing ones. As a market system activity, RDC facilitated private companies to provide saline, waterlogging-tolerant variety, short-duration variety, quality seeds, fertilizers, bio-pesticides, and post-harvest technologies. Development of New or Improved Services for the Farmers and Other VCAs Ninety-three (93) percent of respondents in the latest RDC APS (2020) reported they will continue to use adopted technologies in the upcoming seasons and years; and around 77 percent of producers 17 committed to continue post-harvest management practices—drying on a polyethene or pacca floor and improved stacking.32 Developing New Private and/or Public Partnerships The RDC has developed partnerships with 39 private-sector firms including large-scale private companies like ACI, Bayer CropScience, Robi Axiata, Chaldal.com, Metal Agri, Alim Foundation, NAAFCO, MARGIN, and M. World—as well as small-scale private companies ranging from local dealers to millers. The RDC also created partnerships with government institutions like DAE, Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI), Bangladesh Institute of Nuclear Agriculture (BINA), and non-governmental institutions like Thengamara Mohila Sabuj Sangha (TMSS), Agricultural Input Retailers’ Network (AIRN), and RRF.33 However, KIIs with DAE officials revealed that the functional relationship with RDC was not good. It was noted that scaling of new technologies and their sustainability largely depend on endorsement of public agencies like DAE. Upgrading Value Chain Strategies An impressive 74 percent of grantees reported they have upgraded their value chain strategies due to the RDC Activity—including market area expansion, increased farmer involvement, market promotion, enhanced market knowledge, software introduction, improved vertical linkages, collaboration with GOB authorities, increased supply-chain efficiency, better quality inputs/seeds, and development of linkages with farmers and input sellers. 3.3.4 Conclusions Incentives Key informant interviews with the private partner firms and local market actors revealed that the RDC￾introduced market incentives were well aligned with the private-partner interventions. The overall market access for farmers increased during the life of RDC. Horizontal and Vertical Cooperation The RDC Activity successfully strengthened the vertical cooperation among private-sector partners. The Activity also made progress in strengthening the horizontal links between research institutions and GOB/DAE partners. The Producer Survey revealed that the RDC lending partners were not proactive in reaching out to smallholders. When asked about the most successful and scalable business models developed by the RDC project, the KI stated: “BRAC Bank also expanded their Agent Bank service offering to the rural communities and increased bank account service holders to over 22,000—providing much needed remittance inflow from abroad and conducting financial literacy campaigns in [the] FTF zone. Konika Seed Company’s integrated model, where the company initially played a role in both [the] input and output market, thereby ensured fair pricing and quality. Leveraging on this success, the enterprise set up Agent Banks for their farmer cluster to make available formal financial services and working capital needs to procure better inputs of production.” Based on the USAID meetings with the RFC team and Bank Asia, RDC played an instrumental role in helping Bank Asia to roll out the agent banking model. Bank of Asia used the micro-merchant networks developed by the Activity to replicate and expand their existing bank agent model to FTF ZOI. Catalyzing Investment and Scalable Business Models The RDC demonstrated several success stories in catalyzing investment from market system actors, both 32 RDC FY 2020 Annual Report: October 1, 2019–September 30, 2020. 33 RDC Subaward Database. 18 public and private, to adapt and scale up investments in commercializing new technologies, inclusive business models, and value chain upgrading strategies. The criteria for selecting scalable business models and measuring the systemic changes remain unclear. 3.4 MARKET ACCELERATOR FUND (FAS) (EQ 4) 3.4.1 Market Accelerator Fund/Fixed-Amount Subaward Dynamics and Reporting The RDC began operations with a MAF of $1.5 million to be utilized for funding (initially) Market Actor Agreements (MAAs) and (later) FAS with the first Request for Applications announced in early 2017. According to the RDC progress reports in 2018–2020, by the end of FY 2018, RDC had signed 11 interventions. By the end of calendar year 2019, with a transition to FAS, RDC had added an additional 18 FAS and committed approximately $1.2 million. In 2020, 28 new interventions were signed. By April 2021, the FAS had achieved a total of 80 interventions that were approved, accepted, and fully implemented or currently under implementation by 42 private partners (the list of MAF/FAS awardees along with their interventions and working period is provided in Annex 5-B).34 By the end of FY 2020, FAS had utilized $845,527 of the USG contribution. The actual spending and the remaining commitment in FY 2021 will be updated in the 2021 Annual Report, expected in October 2021. The initial RDC target was for 500,000 smallholder producers to have access to RDC stimulated goods and services by the end of the project. By the end of the 2018 Activity year, RDC reported a total of 6,555 producers. However, by the end of the 2020 Activity year, RDC reported that 338,401 producers, or 68 percent of the Activity’s end goal, had access. The unverified projection35 for 2021 reported in Quarter 3 (Q3) FY 2021 is nearly 1,400,000 producers, or 280 percent. This extraordinary increase is discussed in the section on EQ 7. As previously noted (see EQ 3), RDC has continually improved the investment ratio between private￾sector investment versus United States taxpayer investment, with the most recent average private-sector investment at ratio of 3.77 to 1.36 According to the most recent RDC report,37 the Activity is supporting 26 FASs under IR 1 and 28 FASs under IR 2 in 2021 as shown in Tables 10 and 11. Table 10: FAS Grants Under IR 1 – Increased Farm Productivity in Rice-Based Cropping Systems Quality Seeds Biofertilizer and Micronutrients Mechanization Financial Inclusion and Digitization Systemic Change Objective (SCO) 1: ACI Seed (2 interventions) Ali Seed Bayer CropScience Dynamic Agro (2 interventions) Lal Teer Limited Metal Agro NAAFCO PCL-Rice PCL-Maize SCO 1: ACI-Fertilizer Bayer CropScience Haychem NAAFCO PCL-Rice Xplore SCO 7: Konika Seed Company UOMSCL Isphahani Agro Ltd. SCOs 5 and 8: Metal Pvt. Ltd. Alim Industries Ltd. Abedin Equipments ACI Motors Ltd. SCOs 4 and 8: Bank Asia BRAC Bank City Bank Robi Axiata Ltd. 34 Some partners received more than one grant. 35 Throughout the year, RDC collects data from FAS grantees—which are later verified by the APS. APS 2021 results are expected in October 2021. 36 USAID relaxed the 1:1 requirement in 2020 due to the COVID-19 difficulties. The USG/Private Sector Investment ratio in 2021 is unknown. 37 Feed the Future Bangladesh Rice and Diversified Crops Activity FY 2021 Quarterly Report: April–June 2021. 19 Quality Seeds Biofertilizer and Micronutrients Mechanization Financial Inclusion and Digitization Prantojon Xplore SCO 7: Konika Seed UOMSCL Isphahani Agro Ltd. Table 11: FAS Grants Under IR 2: Increased Participation of Farmers and Other Actors in Profitable Market Systems with 28 Private-Partner FASs Quality Seeds Biofertilizer and Micronutrients Mechanization Financial Inclusion and Digitization Grain and Seed Procurement SCO 1: ACI Seed (2 interventions) Ali Seed Bayer CropScience Dynamic Agro (2 Interventions) Lal Teer Ltd. Metal Agro NAAFCO PCL-Rice PCL-Maize Prantojon Xplore SCO 7: Konika Seed UOMSCL Isphahani Agro Ltd. SCO 1: ACI-Fertilizer Bayer CropScience Haychem Bangladesh Ltd. NAAFCO PCL-Rice Xplore SCO 7: Konika Seed UOMSCL Isphahani Agro Ltd. SCOs 5 and 8: Metal Pvt. Ltd. Alim Industries Ltd. Abedin Equipments ACI Motors Ltd. SCOs 4 and 8: Bank Asia BRAC Bank City Bank Robi Axiata Limited Mobile Network SCO 3: Sukumar Vander Natural Agro Pvt. Ltd. SCO 7: UOMSCL PRAN SCOs 3 and 6: Chaldal 3.4.2 MAF/FAS Grant Reporting As part of their grant agreements, FAS partners produced milestone reports and closing reports. Milestone reports are critical to analysis and rapid adjustment of pilot activities. Ten were provided to the ET. The ET had access to 33 closing reports. The reports are well structured and contain key project financial and technical information, performance indicators, locations operated, lessons learned, and progress or results achieved. The reports do not contain client VCA or producer lists. 3.4.3 MAF/FAS Thematic Areas The thematic areas (based on the intervention titles) covered by FAS were contract farming, POS technology solutions, digital integration of value chain/market system actors, advisory services on crop protection and management, promotion of agricultural mechanization, promotion of bio-additives, quality input (seeds and fertilizer) supply, new varieties introduction, marketing strategy, digital finance, bank financing, crop processing and marketing, and mitigation of the impact of COVID-19. The most substantial effort involved quality input (seeds and fertilizer) supply (18.6 percent), contract farming (14.3 percent), promotion of marketing strategy (12.9 percent), mitigation of the COVID-19 impact (11.4 percent), promotion of agricultural mechanization (8.6 percent), and crop processing and marketing (7.1 percent).38 38 RDC FY 2021 Quarterly Report: April–June 2021. 20 3.4.4 MAF/FAS Partners’ Perceptions Eighty-four (84) percent of the FAS partner KIs reported that the cooperation with RDC fully met their objectives, and 13 percent stated they were partially met. The core business areas classified by ET and of the objectives are presented in Table 12. Table 12: FAS Core Business Areas and Cooperation Objectives Core Business Area/Number of Grantees Capacity Building Fund Raising Market Promotion Distribution/ Partnership Total Agro-machinery Supplier (4) 1 1 2 3 7 Financier (3) 3 2 1 3 9 ICT Service (5) 3 1 3 4 11 Large-Scale Food Grain Processor and Marketer (1) 1 1 2 Large-Scale Seed & Fertilizer Supplier (6) 5 4 3 12 Poultry, Cattle, & Fish Feed Supplier (1) 1 1 2 Retailer (1) 1 1 2 Small-Scale Food Grain Processor & Marketer (7) 5 1 2 5 13 Small-Scale Seed & Fertilizer Supplier (4) 3 1 3 1 8 Small-Scale Seed Supplier (6) 5 2 4 4 15 Value Chain Linkage Developer (1) 1 1 2 Total 25 10 21 27 83 Percentage 30.1% 12.1% 25.3% 32.5% 100.00% According to interviews with grantees, RDC proved most useful in the distribution management for products and services and collaboration/partnership (32.5 percent), staff capacity building (30.1 percent), market promotion (25.3 percent), and fundraising (12.1 percent). Fundraising support was found to be more beneficial for small-scale business entities. Most of the partner firms (95 percent) reported that they faced no challenges in providing the match funding required for the RDC cooperation project. Most FAS partners (95 percent) expressed the view that the application process for grants was clear and transparent. In addition, 43.4 percent reported that the project reporting requirements were reasonable, while 25 percent found the reporting requirements to be useful for core business reporting. Most of the partner firms (82.1 percent) received training. Of the 39 partner firms interviewed, 53.8 percent, 33.3 percent, 7.7 percent, and 5.1 percent of the partners concluded 1, 2, 3, or 4 project cooperative agreements, respectively. Out of 39 grantees,18 implemented more than one project and reported that they have been awarded a second, third, or fourth grant—either due to the success of their previous project(s) or to promote a new product/service or market channel. Fifteen (15) grants were provided to some of the existing FAS partners to mitigate COVID-19 impacts. Of 39 partner firms interviewed, 32 percent reported that RDC/MAF program management measured the success in the project activities of the partner firms by reviewing milestone deliverables and monitoring the quality of the activities; and 24 percent reported that they measured the success through field visits, Activity monitoring, and interviews followed by analysis of the clients’ feedback. Another 24 percent stated that they measured by evaluating field data such as the number of farmers. On the other hand, 19 percent of partner firms mentioned that they measured results by recording sales and turnover data. Among the partner firms, 66.7 percent reported that their distribution network increased, while 10.3 percent stated that they have not expanded the network; 23.1 percent did not report any change. Based on the data provided via private partner KIIs with six food grain processors and marketers, they had 205 farmer suppliers in 2016 and 745 in 2021. Twenty (20) private-partner firms involved in 21 commercial outreach collectively had 36,566 market actors in 2016 and now have 44,538—a 21.8 percent expansion of commercial outreach of production and post-harvest-related inputs and service. The RDC 2020 APS mentioned, “Estimated access outreach is around 274,091 value chain actors and producers who benefited from USAID/RDC facilitations in the agriculture sector in [the] Feed-the-Future (FTF) zone. The outreach includes 1,136 value chain actors and 272,955 farmers/producers (23,794 from non-RDC crops and 249,161 producers from RDC-promoted crops).”39 The RDC report of Q3, 2021 reported (unofficially), “Grain Procurement access outreach from [the] FTF zone was 98,418; Quality Seed Supply access outreach, 98,418; Crop Protection and Fertilizer Supply, 165,224; and Mechanization Support, 92,860; resulting [in] the Total Access Outreach FY20/Q3 21 of 357,919.”40 Eleven (11) RDC project staff provided a range of opinions on the MAF/FAS impacts, stating: “Scalable systemic effects on business and producer income and nutrition do not depend on the size of [the] accelerators match fund. It depends on the set MAF objectives that are to [some] extent aligned with the company interest and systemic change objectives, and able to engage private partners in this pilot interventions. RDC has taken steps to catalyze market system changes and provide scalable systemic effects on businesses and producers.” “The interventions that RDC has designed have had an impact across all facets of the agri-value chain spectrum. However, in follow-on, additional funds are required to create innovative business models with diverse private actors.” “Working directly with the farmers is more appropriate than working directly with the market actors through MAF. Due to limited funds, [a] few large national-level companies were not interested [in] cover[ing] larger geographic areas in the FTF zone. Thus, the RDC team gave more emphasis on facilitation skills rather than matching funds.” Some of the key challenges noted within KIIs with private partners and RDC staff in running a match￾funding grant scheme include: “Time limitation of the grant project is a factor as RDC provided six-month or one-year grants agreement with a private company. In many cases, this time is not enough to implement a business plan.” “Companies have a large business portfolio. A large RDC grant is less than 1 percent compared to the business volume they are handling. For that specific grant, they didn’t usually maintain a separate documentation system. So, during data verification, it is challenging to trace out the exact volume of the business conducted through RDC grants.” “Change in the company staff responsible for decision making and implementation of the grant project.” 3.4.5 MAF/FAS and Systemic Change Six SCOs were first introduced into the RDC MEL reporting in 2019, with some potential indicators to measure the change. In later RDC reports, the number of SCOs increased to nine, and RDC classified all FAS grants by SCOs (e.g., the FY 2021 Q3 Report). However, as of the time of this evaluation report, the SCOs had not been measured. The RDC subcontracted an “Outcome Harvesting Report” as an initial attempt to describe the scalable models achieved during the life of the Activity and to measure systemic change in the market systems. The report was published in January 2022. The report presents a combination of essay style and brief success stories categorized by 12 common themes. The report also represents a laudable attempt to identify “non-Activity influencing factors” (other players in the field who contributed to the change), which is a good start for future systemic change assessments. 39 RDC, 2020. FY 2020 Annual Performance Survey Report, October 1, 2019–September 30, 2020. 40 ACDI-VOCA, 2021. Feed the Future Bangladesh Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC) Activity, FY 2021 Quarter 3 Report: April￾June 2021, FY 2021 Quarter 3 Report July 30, 2021. 22 The SCOs’ quality, quantity, and potential measurement are discussed as part of EQ 7. 3.4.6 Conclusions Despite the MAF’s slow start in 2017–2018, MAF gained momentum by 2020–2021. Although grantees had few complaints about the recordkeeping system, the overall progress toward RDC’s quantitative objectives in 2020 was satisfactory. By 2020, RDC proved to be ever more astute in improving the ratio of private investment to U.S. investment in FAS activities. MAF and Systemic Change In the absence of any reported measure of systemic change in the evaluation period, the ET is not in the position to draw conclusions as to whether the market system constraints have been addressed in a systemic manner. Some specific impacts of the interventions were addressed in EQ 3. The SCOs’ design and measuring are discussed in EQs 7 and 7.1. 3.5 NUTRITION (EQ 5) 3.5.1 Mixed Message on Commitment to Nutrition Feed the Future’s Goal is to “Sustainably Reduce Global Hunger, Malnutrition and Poverty.” USAID’s Development Objective 2 (DO 2) is a flagship DO for the USG’s FTF strategy globally and for Bangladesh: “Availability, Access, and Utilization of Domestically Produced and Nutritious Foods Increased.”41 The RDC Activity was designed to support the nutrition objective of DO 2 via the following concept: “The overall activity will catalyze market system changes that promote a diversified farm management approach oriented to intensified rice production and higher-value, nutrient-rich crops to increase incomes and improve food security and nutrition in the FTF zone.”42 At RDC’s inception in July 2016, the RDC specified that “to support improved nutrition, RDC will pursue activities that impact the three main FTF nutrition-sensitive agriculture pathways: income, production, and women’s empowerment.” In addition, “ACDI/VOCA will also utilize its NutriMAP tool that provides a road map for identifying the determinants of positive or negative nutritional behaviors and determining the best entry points for integrating nutrition-sensitive activities.” And finally, “For changing nutritional behaviors, effective engagement with men is key as they are responsible for household food shopping in the rural areas.”43 The first RDC Annual Report July 13, 2016–September 30, 2017, contained the following stated objective: “Companies (dal mill owners) shift procurement models to source directly from farmers, providing improved market access, bundled farm advisory services, and household nutrition messaging.” This approach was in line with the USAID Multi-Sectoral Nutrition Strategy 2014–2025, intending to weave or incorporate improved nutrition opportunities within the overall program. At this early stage, RDC identified areas in which the Activity could integrate nutrition-sensitive concepts with the mung beans crop intended to improve nutrition in the ZOI. In 2019, RDC adopted six systemic change objectives including SCO 2: Increased Adoption of Gender- and Nutrition-Sensitive Business Models through increased understanding of the business case for targeting women and nutrition information in sales strategies or procurement plans and improving last-mile service delivery for smallholder farmers.44 Although RDC progress reports make mention of other SCOs, after the adoption of SCO 2, there was no further reference to this objective by RDC. 3.5.2 RDC Activities Related to Nutrition Notwithstanding the mixed message on nutrition, RDC supported several nutrition-related activities. 41 USAID/Bangladesh Country Development Cooperation Strategy FY 2011–FY 2019. 42 RDC Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) Plan–January 2018 (2nd Revised). 43 RDC Project Document 2016, Nutrition Section, p. 30. 44 Feed the Future Bangladesh Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC) Activity Annual Report October 1, 2017–September 30, 2018. 23 During project year 2018–2019, RDC sponsored a nutrition-focused business workshop with partners (grantees). This workshop presented information about integrating nutrition in a way that makes good business sense. Participants explored ways in which nutrition messaging on packaging and advertising, nutrition training of smallholder farmers through crop clinics, and partnerships with food companies to produce nutritious snacks that could be used to raise product sales and improve a company’s image. In the same project year, the NutriChamps cooking competition was launched during National Nutrition Week in May. This initiative coalesced five USAID-supported activities (RDC, Livestock and Nutrition, Ujjiban, the Bangladesh Nutrition Activity [BNA], and the Bangladesh Aquaculture and Nutrition Activity [BANA]) in support of a series of events, nationally, aimed at encouraging the uptake of nutritious foods (zinc rice, mung beans, and fortified sunflower oil partner products receiving RDC support) as well as a balanced diet. Private-sector sponsors were also engaged.45 The final event took place in November 2019, and the series was televised in 2020. Within the RDC FY 2020 Annual Report, nutrition is almost forgotten other than within the “Key Learnings” section that states: “In particular, future programming should incorporate regular stakeholder consultations (broader than partner firms), ensuring feedback from key stakeholders and ensuring buy-in to gender and social inclusion and improved nutrition.” In FY 2021 Q1 and Q2, RDC reported substantial increases in zinc-biofortified rice seed and coordination between RDC and CSISA-MEA for mechanizing the zinc rice harvest. 3.5.3 Stakeholders’ Views on Nutrition During the FPE data collection, 60 percent of respondents reported that the level of nutrition was good, and 90 percent reported a positive change in the level of nutrition within their area. However, only 1 percent perceived a positive change over the past five years. Rather, respondents reported that demand has driven a change in the nutritional value of crops marketed in their area. Twenty-one (21) of the 39 RDC partners (grantees) reported nutrition-related activities, including awareness messages during farmer training and promoting a specific high-nutrition crop, such as mung beans. “… [I]mproved production leading to increased production—which in turn, hypothetically, is expected to result in improved food security.” 3.5.4 Conclusions The RDC has made some efforts to determine the best entry points for integrating nutrition-sensitive activities. However, there is no evidence to suggest that RDC has made any effort to identify the determinants of positive or negative nutritional behaviors. RDC’s designer, implementer, and management have not considered nutrition to be their assigned area of focus and responsibility. The RDC channeled the increased adoption, productivity, and profitability of nutritious non-rice crops (such as mung bean and groundnut), and zinc-rich rice. As a result, the producers increased yield and gross margin on mung bean crops. However, the zinc-rich rice had a lower productivity and producer preference (producers prefer slender grain), whereas current zinc-rich varieties like bold-type remained challenging. However, the recently released BRRI dhan100 (the report is not yet widely available) would likely overcome this challenge. This variety has the farmers’ preferred trait of high yield and the consumers’ preferred trait of a non-sticky slender grain. It also has a zinc content of 25.6 milligrams per kilogram of rice.46 45 FY 2019 Annual Report: October 1, 2018–September 30, 2019. 46 https://www.harvestplus.org/knowledge-market/in-the-news/Bangladesh-welcomes-newest-zinc-rice-variety-brri-dhan100. 24 3.6 GENDER (EQ 6) 3.6.1 RDC Commitment to Gender At nearly the midway point for RDC, a preliminary gender analysis was conducted which found: “… [T]here are clear social norms and patriarchal institutions that will shape the ways RDC interacts with women and men. Leadership positions remain rare for women, despite relatively common membership in social groups. Statistics on women’s membership and participation in producers’ groups are incomplete, but discomfort with speaking in public appears to be closely linked to low leadership rates. Creating awareness of the social norms that silence women’s voices and identifying and supporting women willing to lead (i.e., positive deviants) may enable more women to be active in these groups.”47 A great deal of progress has been made in gender equity and women’s empowerment in Bangladesh in recent years, as evidenced by an improved score on the 2017 Global Gender Gap Index as well as an improved score on the USAID Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index (WEAI). Nevertheless, women continue to face significant challenges around access to resources and information, a heavy time burden related to household responsibilities and restrictive social norms.48 Women in rural households tend to live in a conservative environment where they are restricted on several counts, e.g., participation in meetings, movement outside their limited space, work opportunities, doing household chores that are not required of their male counterparts, access to education, access to information and digital media, etc. In the RDC Activity, gender integration is achieved by prioritizing three WEE parameters: 1. Improving women’s access to market, where access to market means an increased number of sales to women, increased purchases or joint purchases of inputs, and increased access to services and knowledge. 2. Increasing women’s decision-making power—specifically, decisions about agricultural production and access to and decision-making power over productive resources (expenditure and income). 3. Increasing women’s leadership roles. The RDC has been notably proactive about seeking resolutions to gender issues. For example, the Activity has partnered with LightCastle Partners in the Unnoty Gender Accelerator Program. The LightCastle Partners market tested a proprietary accelerator program, “Unnoty,” designed for the domestic market to address these major issues and other ancillary aspects of women becoming entrepreneurs or expanding their existing businesses. “Unnoty” caters to all the needs of an entrepreneur to accelerate their business—starting from knowledge and technical skill enhancement to access to finance and networking with trade stakeholders. Apart from the mentoring and business value chain development, the program also facilitated follow-up and post-training assistance to aid the participants with full assistance from LCP and market stakeholders. The accelerator had a holistic approach and a well-rounded curriculum to ensure both theoretical and practical implementation for the entrepreneurs. The program successfully aided 50 graduates, helping them to start or expand their businesses.49 The RDC created transformational business relationships between sunflower seed oil-processing companies and both male and female farmers in the sunflower seed sector. Sunflower is a low maintenance crop, and it is easy for women to manage most of the associated field 47 Feed the Future Bangladesh RDC Activity Preliminary Gender Analysis Report, February 2018. 48 USAID/Bangladesh – DO 2 Gender Analysis – January 2019. 49 LightCastle Partners, October 27, 2019. 25 activities. When harvesting, soft sunflower stems help women to cut down plants easily; women involved in sunflower production said that because of the tall plant size, it is convenient for them to work in the field without giving a thought about social barriers. Post-harvest tasks are mostly done by the female household members. Bank Asia has already finalized the list of 30 agri-loan recipients, and the bank plans to complete disbursing the loans by the end of October 2020. Of these 30, five recipients will be directly from RDC’s Gender Accelerator Graduate Program. Bank Asia has also selected 50 Agent Banks and started banking and COVID-19 awareness-related marketing via phone calls and SMS blasts. Through RDC’s Gender Accelerator Program (GAP), Bank Asia carried out marketing activities directly targeting women customers. In addition, BRAC Bank gave out loans to more than 1,000 female farmers.50 According to RDC, every FAS was reviewed with a gender lens, and the RDC gender team provided technical assistance with customized gender-integrated activities that had clear commercial advantages for each business model.51 Of the 39 private-sector firms with FAS grants, 28 reported being engaged in women and youth empowerment activities as a part of their cooperation with RDC—with the most common engagement being targeting more women to become clients. Most companies set a goal of 10 to 20 percent inclusion of women clients, while others set higher goals—including one that specifically selected 80 percent of women clients. Another project formed a farmers’ association consisting of 21 women seed growers. The ET also interviewed 100 VCAs and LSPs affiliated with the RDC-FAS private partners (grantees). Seventy (70) percent reported having women and youth as clients, 71 percent said that they had more women and youth clients than five years ago, and 69 percent anticipate improving business due to women being involved. Table 13: Women in the Eyes of VCAs in the RDC Project Area Issue Response (% respondents) Yes No VCAs having any women and youth clients 70 30 VCAs that experienced change in the number of women and youth clients in the last five years 71 29 VCAs that experienced any potential of business improvement due to an increase in women’s involvement 69 31 VCAs that participated in women’s empowerment programs as part of the RDC Activity 0 100 VCAs that expected the RDC Activity to succeed in women’s empowerment and improving women’s roles and access to markets 4 96 Per VCA and LSP interviews, increased involvement by women in business activities remains restricted by tradition within the ZOI according to 52 percent of respondents, while 43 percent saw no obstacles to increased women involvement in their business operations. When asked how women and youth are involved in their business, 38 percent reported women as clients and 43 percent did not know. Finally, as to be expected, 96 percent of respondents were not aware if RDC had helped to empower women or had improved their access to markets. The latest RDC Annual Progress Report states: “Gender and Social Inclusion: Only 2 percent of the producers sampled across cropping systems are women. This relates to social norms which discourage women from cultivating field crops and gender 50 RDC FY 2020 Annual Report: October 1, 2019–September 30, 2020. 51 Feed the Future Bangladesh Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC) Activity Annual Report, October 1, 2017–September 30, 2018. 26 inequalities with respect to access to productive assets such as land. The same report notes: “Focus group discussions with producers indicate that the main barrier to gender and youth inclusion is land ownership or holding by women—almost zero with the poor and women participants. For gender and social inclusion, future programs require direct delivery or accelerator initiatives to supplement a market systems approach.” 3.6.2 Conclusions The RDC operated under the concepts of WEE SCO 2: “Increased adoption of gender- and nutrition￾sensitive business models.” As such, every FAS private-partner Activity proposal was reviewed with a gender lens. The VCAs and LSPs reported 70 percent of clients as women and youth, and they report more women and youth clients than five years ago, which indicates a positive trend. Despite proactive efforts to empower women within the ZOI, in general, little has changed over the past five years, as per most VCA interviews. Key informants concluded that social (cultural/traditional) as well as family obligations prevent women from entering employment. Women typically remain only in post-harvest roles within the crops targeted. The latest RDC APS found that only 2 percent of the producers sampled across cropping systems are women, which suggests that more effort is required to involve women in market systems. 3.7 MONITORING, EVALUATION AND LEARNING (EQ 7) 3.7.1 RDC MEL and FTF Guidance Overview The ET was not provided access to the RDC Learning Evaluation and Analysis Platform (LEAP) designed and managed by ACDI/VOCA. The ET was informed it was proprietary and could not be shared with external evaluators.52 This lack of access to the RDC LEAP and performance management and monitoring reports limited the ET’s understanding of how RDC’s data is collected and processed in real time. However, the documents, KIIs, and partner reports available to the ET provided it with sufficient information to evaluate the quality of RDC’s MEL. The ET also had a useful, albeit somewhat limited, glimpse of the internal MEL quality management process. During the RDC implementation, ACDI-VOCA commissioned two internal reviews of RDC’s MEL system to improve data collection, data quality, staff capacity, tracking systems, and reporting (2018 and 2019). This effort resulted in a more robust MEL system, judging by the MEL and progress reports in 2019 to 2021. Further, USAID conducted a data quality assessment (DQA) of RDC in 2018.53 The only anomaly that the ET noted was a non-conventional use of the word “attribution” in the meaning of “intervention” or “monitoring.” This different understanding of the concept of attribution of the project results was also demonstrated in the 11 RDC staff KIIs. 3.7.2 New FTF Indicator Handbook 2018 and Impact on RDC MEL In 2018, FTF introduced new and revised definitions and indicators specifically for market system programs. The RDC MEL approach was originally designed to collect, measure, and report data in the “classic” FTF projects, i.e., providing direct support to beneficiaries where the measures of attribution and systemic change had not been major concerns. Both FTF54 and RDC have attempted to adjust the indicators and 52 It is unusual that a USAID-funded activity would use only a restricted-access MEL system not accessible to evaluators. The ET made several attempts to gain access to LEAP but was denied each time. 53 Not yet available to ET. 54 FTF Indicator Handbook 2018. 27 MEL methods to reflect the needs of market system programs. These adjustments helped to measure systemic change. The trade-offs when a “facilitative approach” is followed are that “direct beneficiary” determinations and tracking them become challenging because partner firms do not always want to maintain or share their clientele base with external parties. Similarly, and consequently, the direct attribution also becomes challenging. According to FTF Indicator Handbook 2018: “An individual or entity is a participant if she/he/it comes into direct contact with the set of interventions (goods or services) provided or facilitated by the project.” The terminology of “direct beneficiaries” was changed to “participants” when describing the universe captured by IM-level indicators to better align with market system-based approaches. It does not consider “spillover”55 beneficiaries as participants, which may be contradictory to the very market system purpose to facilitate the diffusion and copying of innovations/interventions. The RDC has not yet measured the systemic change of its interventions. It is possible that the RDC’s, like any other activity’s introductory innovation impact, has been greater than measured. This has been partially addressed by some FTF indicators measured by RDC, e.g., “number of producers adopting at least one new method/technology.” There is potential for developing more spillover indicators. The FTF Indicator Handbook 2018 further notes: “Monitoring results for producer participants reached through market-strengthening projects can be particularly challenging … if collecting the data from assisted firms required for some indicators is not possible, IPs should consider the concept of a ‘market shed’ or ‘catchment area’ to identify the geographic area that defines the population to be reached by the market being strengthened, and then conduct a survey among that population of producers who are participating in the market, and thus would be considered project participants. For example, a project is encouraging agro-dealers to use community agents to bring fertilizers closer to the target population and thus expanding the market shed of these fertilizer suppliers. The project could define the geographic area as the expanded market to be reached over time and use surveys to collect baseline and annual data for applicable producer-level indicators from the population in that geographic area.” In 2019, RDC changed their performance verification approach from “facilitated monitoring” to the “catchment area” approach and, therefore, the results generated by these two different approaches are not comparable. 3.7.3 RDC Monitoring Direct Participant Results and Attribution (EQ 7.1) The use of different survey methods at different times to monitor RDC’s progress and measure results makes it difficult to compare results across the Activity’s five years. The RDC 2017 baseline and the 2018 APS were developed based on the census (crop cluster) methodology, while the 2019 and 2020 APS used the “catchment area” method. The “catchment area” approach to monitor and report the RDC results and the scarcity of direct participants’ data56 posed challenges to ET both in verifying the Activity’s targets achieved and their attribution. In addition, the FTF indicator definitions underwent multiple revisions over the last five years, which also affects the activities' reporting. At least 20 multi-million-dollar projects funded by USAID and other donors have been operating in the FTF ZOI concurrently with RDC activity, not to mention approximately $300 million of FTF investment in the ZOI before the start of the RDC Activity (approximately 10 percent of all donor support). However, 55 The synonym of “indirect beneficiaries.” According to the FTF Indicator Handbook 2018: “An indirect beneficiary is someone who does not have direct contact or interaction with the project or the actors whom the project is supporting, but still benefits.” 56 The ET received very limited data on direct participants: approximately 2 percent of the total participant outreach reported in 2020. 28 except for CSISA and some nutrition activities, there is no reference to other USAID and non-USAID￾funded activities and their impacts on the same beneficiaries in RDC’s MEL or reporting. 3.7.4 The COVID-19 Pandemic Impact on RDC’s Performance Based on all existing evidence, it is plausible that RDC gained momentum by FY 2020 with the MAF/FAS Fund interventions and significantly increased the outreach and other indicators. However, the Activity managed to achieve a nearly tenfold increase in outreach between October 2020 and June 202, even amid the pandemic. The RDC has been proactive and, in many instances, successful in promoting the remote work and marketing with partners. However, RDC partners (e.g., Dynamic Agro, Konika, Lal Teer, and other grantees) reported significant challenges working remotely with VCAs and, specifically, with farmers, as per the Reports 2021: “Compared to the hands-on support on the farmers’ ground, this is obvious that the remote support through [a] phone call is less convenient. A person can understand easily when he is taught in person.” “It is difficult to make the farmers understand different issues through phone calls. This is mostly due to the lack of basic education at [the] farmers’ level.” The exponential growth of outreach between October 2020 and June 2021 resulted partly from the two different approaches used; however, the business results of the FAS partners suggested that 80 to 90 percent of the RDC Activity’s successes are attributable to RDC. Overall, by the end of the Activity in December 2021, RDC partners had demonstrated strong performance. This was achieved despite earlier thinking that results for agribusinesses could be negatively impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and early 2021. The stronger-than-expected performance is, to a great extent, due to the RDC’s support. It is also partially due to competition in the agribusiness market that had to find new ways to adapt to the challenging operational conditions by creating and applying new outreach, marketing, and procurement methods. The GOB’s stimulus measures (e.g., subsidies, interest rate caps, etc.) have also contributed to the sector’s resilience. 3.7.5 Conclusions 1. RDC and ACDI/VOCA had a very robust MEL system designed to effectively measure both the standard and some of the custom market system-related FTF indicators. 2. With the MSD-related changes and trade-offs for beneficiary tracking, and based on the totality of the analysis and evidence, it can be reasonably concluded that the Activity has at least achieved its targets. 4. LESSONS LEARNED Some of the lessons learned from the RDC activity implementation and this final performance evaluation include the following: • Market System Development (MSD). The MSD approach has demonstrated the benefits of working with national, regional, and local market players—particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, when RDC partners demonstrated a high level of resilience and resourcefulness that allowed RDC to continue operations and even overachieve some of its targets in the final two years of operations. Also, RDC was instrumental in ensuring its private partner competitiveness through co-creation, facilitation, and buying down risks of innovation. Future MSD projects in the agribusiness sector in Bangladesh will be able to build on RDC’s successes and the trust built with market actors, without having to start from scratch. 29 • Collaborating, Learning and Adapting. The activity has gone through a valuable learning curve of engaging private partners and shifting the private sector’s mindset toward a facilitative approach. The RDC also proved that there is appetite for market actors working in the agricultural sector to co-invest and try new models, which is encouraging for future MSD Activities in Bangladesh. The USAID Mission’s involvement, experimentation, flexibility, and co-creation with the implementing partner is also a new and valuable CLA experience in this activity. • MSD Cooperation Modalities. The RDC had a mixed experience with the FAS modality and FAS reporting. What was a useful experience reported by some smaller partners proved to be less meaningful and/or an extra bureaucratic burden for larger partners. • Gender and Youth. With low levels of women’s participation in agricultural employment and business, the activity developed positive lessons in women-to-women entrepreneurship, female bank agents/micro-merchants, and marketing and processing models that are definitely worth further development (see Recommendations). The activity could have benefited from having a greater focus on youth, who also have a much higher adoption rate of new technology/ICT innovation compared to older stakeholders. • FTF Zone of Influence Promotion. One of the advantages of the MSD facilitation approach was the partnership with national versus local businesses. This allowed larger players with existing services and products to expand their operations within the FTF ZOI and become more inclusive in their approaches, to the benefit of local producers and value chain actors. • Mechanization. The activity has demonstrated the benefits of mechanization in rice and other crop sectors. The support of mechanization service centers, training local service providers, and introduction of asset-based financing and franchise schemes have demonstrated promising results. If properly packaged for further use, these models have a good potential for scaling up. Utilization of rice transplanters has been challenging from the cost/benefit perspective. • Crop Diversification. Successful diversification was somewhat limited by market price fluctuations and adverse weather conditions. What proved to be good for food and income resilience has not proved to be as good for longer-term business practices. Crops prone to suffer from adverse weather conditions are particularly challenging to advance and promote via donor development projects with only a five-year project life. However, RDC’s promotion of climate￾resilient crops, e.g., short-stem maize, and better practices in crop protection, mechanization, and procurement provided valuable lessons on how to partially mitigate the challenges of diversification. • Nutrition-intensive Crops. Despite the known health benefits of zinc rice, available varieties must produce acceptable yields and profit for producers as well as meet consumer preferences and viable retail price points. • Bio-solutions. Environmentally friendly and production-efficient models in agricultural bio￾solutions e.g., Trichoderma seed inoculants, bio-pesticides, etc., developed by RDC faced limitations related to supply, regulatory restrictions, and an immature demand side. However, lesson learned from successful partnerships suggests that there is good potential for the increasing adoption of bio-solutions and the bio-solutions market. • Access to Finance/Banking. The success of the integration, reorientation, and expansion to formal banking of the existing micro-merchant networks in (remote) rural areas has proven to be one of the most valuable lessons learned. In addition, RDC found that there is potential for a high level of women engagement. The RDC learning how to reduce the partner banks’ risk in expanding in rural areas is another success story worth replicating alongside the modern digital banking solutions (mobile banking, POS, input credit). (See Recommendations.) 30 • Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). The COVID-19 pandemic pushed the activity and its private partners to scale up and adapt various ICT solutions for remote work. • Integrated Services. The RDC guided private partners to learn the benefits of integrated delivery advisory, seed improvement, crop protection, farm management, financial, marketing, and procurement service—improving partners’ outreach in the FTF zone and the bottom line. • Scalable Models. Strictly speaking, most of the innovations promoted by RDC have been tested for years and even decades by other USAID and non-USAID players in Bangladesh. However, the “facilitation” for private partners’ approach was innovative. Unfortunately, due to apparent time constraints, RDC was unable to “package” successful models to assist in future replication. The RDC’s “Outcome Harvesting Report” issued after the activity ended was the first attempt to make an inventory of, summarize, and describe the “scalable models.” However, a better packaging of the know-how could be achieved to assist future projects. • Systemic Change. There are numerous MEL guidelines and reports intended to structure the SCOs. However, a lack of clear definitions of the expected systemic change, systemic change objectives (SCOs) and how to measure the SCOs from the start was a challenge to the activity. This led to some confusion with operational and FTF indicators and, finally, was not fully defined or measured until the end of the activity. As with the scalable results, the lesson learned is that activities should have sufficient time and adequate methodology to analyze and measure the systemic changes that could also realistically result from more than one USAID activity. 5. RECOMMENDATIONS Drawing on the findings and conclusions presented above, the following are recommendations to inform future USAID programming in the areas of agricultural policy, research, and planning: • MSD Activities’ Implementation Phases. Based on the ET’s experience with MSD, it takes an average of 18 months for an activity to develop an initial portfolio of partnerships with the private sector. The ET recommends an 18-month market research and partnership building period for future MSD activities, at least 36 months of implementation, and a 12-month scalable models analysis/packaging, replication, and dissemination phase. • Scalable Models. Market System Development activities are recommended to develop “know￾how” packages (e.g., manuals, guides, sample investment plans, etc.) for the successful scalable models and lessons learned cases for models that did not work. • Monitoring, Learning and Evaluation (MEL). Activities’ MEL systems should be available for analysis for USAID, external monitors, and evaluators authorized by USAID. If USAID contractors use proprietary data management systems, evaluators still should be able to examine what and how the relevant data is fed into the system, how and by whom it is processed, and receive real￾time MEL reports by indicators, outputs, and outcomes. • MSD Cooperation Modalities. It is worth considering customized cooperation agreements to fit different types of private partners. There may be a potential for large international/national partners to fully fund the USAID-provided technical assistance/expertise, while some of the smaller partners with promising models could be initially fully financed by USAID with the funding phase-out provision. • Policy Advocacy. Due to regulatory bottlenecks for seed and commodity trading in Bangladesh, it is recommended to incorporate policy advocacy in future MSD activities. A collective strategy and plan with private partners and agribusiness associations as well as direct work with the GOB 31 agencies should be considered. Scaling of new technologies at the local level and their sustainability largely depends on the endorsement of public agencies, especially the DAE in the crop sector. • Bio-solutions. Further support to promote bio-solutions in agriculture is recommended as part of environment protection, promotion of “green” consumer preferences, enhanced productivity, and producer incomes. Collaboration with national and international research institutions and laboratories with best practices in bio-solutions development, testing, regulations, and promotion is highly recommended. • Zinc Rice. Increased consumption of zinc biofortified rice has been an important USAID goal. The realistic challenge has been the development of varieties which result in high yields for farmers and meet consumer preferences for attributes and price. The new BRRI dhan 100 apparently meets all these requirements. As availability of this new variety becomes more plentiful, future USAID-funded projects involving rice should focus on this new variety or similar ones. • Banking and Access to Finance. The Bank Asia, BRAC, and City Bank agent models supported by the activity are recommended for further assessment and dissemination. Further support for developing asset-based financing products, particularly for agri machinery acquisition, will be needed in FTF. • Gender and Youth. The culturally and socioeconomically adapted women engagement models developed by the activity should be widely replicated in FTF and nationwide. Further gender-role promotion is necessary with private and government partners. Digital/ICT literacy programs for women and youth should be incorporated in any activity to reduce the digital divide, along with developing accessible internet access device and resources for gender. Training programs for youth focusing on mechanization will encourage them to remain engaged in agricultural occupations. • Mechanization. In future activities dealing with agricultural mechanization, it is recommended to develop manuals and business plan examples for farmers, dealers, and businesses to demonstrate the benefits of mechanization for a range of crops. Step-by-step ‘’how to franchise” manuals can be developed for public use. Future USAID MSD investments should target resolving cost/benefit challenges of critical equipment such as rice transplanters. • Getting Partners to Take New Products. Further MSD activities that reduce risks of brand￾new innovations and phase out of scaled support are recommended in future activities. A stronger focus on partnering with firms which have established processing facilities and market share at the consumer level could be more effective in encouraging producers to grow profitable and nutrient￾rich foods intended for processing. The result of these relationships will ensure long-term financial benefits for producers and opportunities for processing firms to expand their market position. • Crop Diversification. Future agriculture-related activities may consider introducing greater flexibility for types of crops. For example, having one project dedicated to horticulture while another is dedicated to ground crops often results in lost opportunities and/or conflicts between implementers. Often the private-sector firms targeted as potential partners in Bangladesh have product lines that involve several sub-sectors of agricultural production. Therefore, implementers working within a “silo” miss opportunities of potential benefit to producers. With a more flexible approach, farmer household incomes may become a more important achievement measure than aggregate yields and outputs per crop. • Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). The future competitiveness of the agricultural sector will, to a great extent, depend on ICT adoption rates and further inclusive innovations. It is recommended to support affordable hardware, software, and connectivity solutions for the rural population. However, the marginal and remote farmers, women, and youth 32 are at risk of digital divide. Cooperation with the government and NGOs is necessary to focus on digital access forvulnerable groups. • Integrated Services. It is recommended to scale up the integrated services tested by the activity, with increased focus on women and youth. • Privacy Concerns. Privacy and digital security of all USAID activities’ stakeholders should be seriously addressed and protected from activity onset. At the same time, USAID contractual mechanisms should clearly and explicitly state that USAID auditors and evaluators must have access to some of the private information of the stakeholders by default, with an option of certain exclusions. This should be extended to MSD partner agreements. • Access to Information for Evaluators/MEL Accessibility. It is recommended that USAID includes a requirement for all activities to maintain audit- and evaluation-accessible MEL systems, with the capacity to produce real-time MEL reports by any USAID-approved activity/FTF indicator, gender, and other relevant data, even if the contractor partner also uses the data in their proprietary data systems. • Systemic Changes. It is recommended to define the systemic changes that USAID/FTF want to achieve in Bangladesh/FTF ZOI and the indicators to measure the systemic change, and conduct ex-post and/or midterm Outcome Harvesting/ Systemic Changes evaluations for a cluster of activities—including RDC, Livestock, Nutrition, Horticulture, and Aquaculture. Instead of focusing on the attribution of each activity, we should identify, quantify, and package for replication the successful scalable models and progress on the systemic changes. 33 ANNEXES 34 ANNEX 1: SCOPE OF WORK USAID/Bangladesh Tasking Request – S029 Date of Request: November 22, 2020 Type of Task: Final performance evaluation for the Feed the Future Rice and Diversified Crops Activity. Description of Activity: (Guidance – please provide a short summary of the activity that will receive service/s; it should contain at minimum the objectives of the activity, anticipated results (or results if available) major challenges to implementation, and major successes); (Guidance – if this an assessment or special study, please provide topic, necessary explanation, and rationale for undertaking) This is the final performance evaluation for the Feed the Future Bangladesh Rice and Diversified Crops activity, hereafter referred as the Rice and Diversified Crops activity. The activity is being implemented by ACDI/VOCA. The activity will catalyze market system changes that promote a diversified farm management approach oriented to intensified rice production and higher-value, nutrient-rich crops that will increase incomes and improve food security and nutrition in the Feed the Future (FTF) zone. This Activity will achieve its targets through facilitative interventions (targeted technical assistance) that create scalable market system impacts that ultimately benefit rural households with the added value of expanding opportunities for women and youth. The $1.5 million Market Accelerator Fund will support strategic public-private partnerships with national and regional agribusinesses and business development service and facilitation providers. The Market Accelerator Fund will have a minimum leverage requirement of 1:1 but will be established on an individual basis where co-investments will be determined based on the level of facilitation intensity required. Below is a brief description of the activity objective and anticipated main results: Activity Objective: Improve Food Security through Systemic Changes that Increase Rural Incomes The Rice and Diversified Crops activity will achieve this overall objective through increasing farm productivity and value chain actors’ (particularly smallholder farmers’) participation in profitable market systems. The Activity will facilitate strategic, market system-strengthening interventions to improve rice intensification and diversification within a competitive and inclusive market system. The Rice intensification will allow farming households to secure greater quantities of affordable rice and transition to profitable and diversified rice-based cropping patterns as well as generate off-farm income opportunities. These outcomes will positively impact food security by increasing and diversifying incomes and improving availability and access to nutrient-rich crops. Result 1: Increased Farm Productivity The Activity will continually identify the most effective and viable entry points within the seed, inputs, improved management practices, information, and services sectors. This requires identifying market system actors and market incentives for addressing the systemic constraints that affect each of the three major production related functions. The Rice and Diversified Crops activity interventions promote profitable rice-based cropping systems by creating the business case to invest in diversified cropping patterns. By aligning incentives and market actors, the activity will facilitate the wide scale adoption of promising technologies for rice and diversified crop production that lead to cost savings for farmers and market actors, enhanced farming practices, and develop inclusive business models. 35 Result 2: Increased Participation in Profitable Market Systems. The Rice and Diversified Crops activity increases smallholder participation in profitable market systems by ensuring that rice and selected crops are both increasingly competitive, in terms of growth, value addition, and governance, as well as inclusive, in terms of the potential benefit for large numbers of smallholders, farmers and entrepreneurs. The Activity will achieve this result through facilitating collaboration and cooperation among system actors. Vertical cooperation will be enhanced so that lead firms have a more direct relationship with their suppliers, providing embedded services such as access to improved inputs and new technologies, product information, and financing. Horizontal cooperation will come through organization among farmer groups, miller associations, or brokers. Additionally, the Rice and Diversified Crops activity focuses on expanding supporting market actors that provide critical PHH and market information services to smallholders such as PHH, storage, and transport. Please see attached the activity Program Description for more details. The total estimated cost (TEC) for the Rice and Diversified Crops activity is $24,480,000 and the duration is July 13, 2016, to July 12, 2021. Research Question: (Guidance – If an evaluation, please provide at least 3 research questions the evaluation team will consider) 1. To what extent has the Rice and Diversified Crops activity been successful in achieving it’s Intermediate Results 1 and 2? 2. How effective has the Rice and Diversified Crops activity’s implementation approach been in strengthening of the relevant market systems, namely: 1. ensuring that the incentives for each market system actor are aligned with the desired intervention and expected market system change; 2. facilitating increased levels of cooperation (both horizontal and vertical); and 3. catalyzing investment from market system actors, both public and private, to adapt and scale up investments in commercializing new technologies, inclusive business models, or value chain upgrading strategies 3. How successful has the activity been in using the Market Accelerator Fund to support the activity’s objectives and address targeted market system constraints? 4. How successful has the activity been in: 1. identifying the determinants of positive or negative nutritional behaviors and determining the best entry points for integrating nutrition-sensitive activities? 2. collaborating with the CSISA-Mechanization activity to strengthen access to machinery and tools through expanded commercial outreach of machinery manufacturers, dealers, and local service providers? 5. How successful has the Rice and Diversified Crops activity been in effectively integrating gender considerations and ensure equitable access for women, increase female engagement and empowerment, and promote women entrepreneurs? 6. How effective has the activity’s MEL approach and tools been in measuring market system change? What are some of the lessons learned and based on lessons learned, what are some scalable interventions/technologies? 36 Geographic Coverage (Guidance – If this is third-party monitoring, please provide locations of sites to be visited) The evaluation will cover the RDC working areas within the 21 districts of the Feed the Future Zone of Influence (FTF ZOI). Dates of performance and timeline: (Guidance – Please provide an anticipated start date and or completion date. Please note that, depending on the complexity of the requested services, the period of performance, from initiation to completion, can be significant) Expected start date is o/a February 1, 2021, with field work commencing o/a February 10, 2021. Team Composition/Qualifications of Consultants USAID recommends a three-person team for undertaking this evaluation. The team will include a Team Leader/Evaluation Specialist, a Markets System/Business Development Specialist, and an Agronomist. Team Leader/Evaluation Specialist (International): The Team Leader will: 1. Have a master’s degree or higher degree in a relevant discipline such as Agriculture, International Development, Economics, Business Administration or Monitoring and Evaluation. 2. Have at least 15 years of experience in evaluating projects with focus on agribusiness, market systems development, public-private partnerships, for USAID or other international development or donor agencies. 3. Have significant experience in designing quantitative and qualitative surveys/studies/evaluations 4. Have strong knowledge and experience of crop cycles and production, value chains, support markets, finance etc. 5. Have knowledge of USAID Feed the Future program, USAID regulations and systems, performance monitoring and evaluation guidance, evaluation policy, gender policy, annual reporting etc. The team leader will provide overall leadership for the team, and s/he will finalize the evaluation design, coordinate activities, arrange periodic meetings, consolidate individual input from team members, and coordinate the process of assembling the findings and recommendations into a high quality document. The team leader will possess good organizational and team building skills. S/he must demonstrate cultural sensitiveness, particularly when interacting with a range of stakeholders. S/he will lead the preparation and presentation of the key evaluation findings and recommendations to the USAID/Bangladesh team and the major stakeholders. S/he will have excellent communications and writing skills in English. Markets System/Business Development Specialist (National): The Markets System/Business Development Specialist will: 1. Have a minimum of a master’s degree in agriculture, marketing, business, finance, and economics 2. Have 10+ years of experience in business development, market systems approach, and private sector engagement 3. Have strong knowledge of agricultural production systems in Bangladesh, including on the major crop production practices and markets 4. Have significant knowledge and experience in evaluations and/or assessments of projects with similar scopes 5. Have strong analytical skills 37 6. Have strong oral communications and writing skills in English The Markets System/Business Development Specialist will provide technical assistance in the evaluation of the market system development, and private sector engagement interventions of the Activity. S/he will actively participate in the desk review of materials and assist the team leader in developing methodologies, work plans and report outlines. S/he will assist the team leader in setting and conducting interviews with relevant stakeholders and actively take part in these. S/he will participate in team meetings, site visits, and draft the report of the evaluation. S/he will also participate in presenting the report to USAID or other stakeholders and be responsible for addressing pertinent comments provided by USAID/Bangladesh or other stakeholders. Agronomist (National): The Agronomist will: 1. Have a minimum of a master’s degree in agronomy, agricultural extension, or other agriculture related fields 2. Have a minimum of 10 years of experience in diversified crops production and value chain strengthening 3. Awareness of industry trends, technology, and developments 4. Strong research, decision making, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills 5. Have significant knowledge and experience in evaluations and/or assessments of projects with similar scopes 6. Have strong oral communications and writing skills in English The Agronomist will provide guidance and technical assistance within the scope of the evaluation of the activity. S/he will actively participate in the desk review of various evaluation documents and tools, secondary source of information review, and assist the team leader in developing methodologies, work plans and report outlines and drafts. S/he will assist the team leader in setting and conducting interviews with relevant stakeholders and will actively participate in those assigned tasks. S/he will participate in team meetings, site visits, and draft the evaluation report. S/he will also participate in presenting the report to USAID or other stakeholders and be responsible for addressing pertinent comments/questions provided by USAID/Bangladesh or other stakeholders. Deliverables: (Guidance – In a bullet format, please provide a list of anticipated deliverables (e.g. Design proposal; Draft questionnaires, protocols and other data collection instruments; Updated SOW, if applicable; Draft Report; Mission Presentation; Final Report in electronic version that incorporates comments, statements of difference (if applicable], and appendices; data sets; etc.) The evaluation team will provide deliverables as per the USAID Bangladesh standard evaluation requirements. 38 ANNEX 2: STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS Primary Stakeholders/FAS Grantee Analysis (Based on the FAS data provided by RDC on 4/22/2021) No USAID Facilitation Location/Working Areas/ Place of Performance Head Office Location** Private Sector Partner 78 Promotion of Agri Machineries in the FTF Zone. Whole FTF area Dhaka Abedin Equipment Limited 75 Promotion and awareness creating of Combine Harvester and rice transplanter in the FTF zone. Whole FTF area Dhaka ACI Motors Limited 38 Promote inoculants as part of nutrient management for the higher profitability of pulses and oilseeds farmers Jhenaidah, Magura, Jashore, Kushtia, Norail, Meherpur, Barisal, Potuakhali, Barguna, Bhola, and Faridpur Dhaka Advanced Chemical Industries Limited 72 COVID-19 Response Chuadanga, Jhenaidah, Jashore, Magura, Meherpur, Barishal, Bhola, Patuakhali, Bargu Dhaka 69 COVID-19 Response Barishal, Faridpur, Gopalganj, Khulna, Bagerhat, Jessore, Magura, Jhenaidah, Chuadanga, Meherpur and Kustia Dhaka 21 Improving access to healthy rice seedlings through the development of seedling grower businesses FTF zone Dhaka 29 Reaching Quality Agri-inputs to untapped Farmers through Infopreneurs FTF zone Dhaka 43 Promotion of two new high-yielding rice varieties Jashore and Jhenaidha Dhaka 44 Establish inclusive inputs distribution and marketing channel of Sunflower, Rice and Maize crop in Southern Delta Barishal, Barguna, Potuakhali, Faridpur, Khulna, Bagerhat Dhaka 81 Promote inoculants as part of nutrient management for the higher profitability of pulses and oilseeds farmers. Jhenaidah, Magura, Jashore, Kushtia, Norail, Meherpur, Barisal, Potuakhali, Barguna, Bhola, and Faridpur Dhaka 25 Digital Financial Inclusion for Smallholder Farmers Southern region of Bangladesh Khulna Agro-input retailers' network (AIRN) 45 Ideal value chain of high-yielding varieties BRRI Dhan72 and BRRI Dhan74 zinc rice seed and grain FfF Zone Jashore Ali Seed Farm 63 COVID-19 Response FTF zone Jashore 79 Promotion of Agri Machineries in the FTF Zone. Whole FTF area Sylhet/Dhaka Alim Industries Ltd. 39 No USAID Facilitation Location/Working Areas/ Place of Performance Head Office Location** Private Sector Partner 30 Piloting advisory services and professional application of crop protection products to better serve farmers Chuadanga, Jhenaidah, Jashore Dhaka Auto Crop Care Limited 59 COVID-19 Response Chuadanga, Jhinaidha, Jashor, Magura, Meherpur, Kustia, Rajbari, Khulna, Bagerhat, Satkhira, Faridpur, Gopalganj Dhaka 24 Digital Financial Inclusion for Smallholder Farmers Southern region of Bangladesh Dhaka Bank Asia Limited 65 COVID-19 Response Entire Feed The Future Zone (Southwestern Bangladesh) Dhaka 3 Provision of farmer advisory services through company managed crop clinics Jashore Dhaka Bayer Crop Science Limited 42 Making digital shift in agronomic advisory services to meet the needs of farmers and connecting distribution channels for ensuring quality inputs (hybrid rice and maize seed and crop protection) in FTF zone. Barishal and Khulna region Dhaka 61 COVID-19 Response Barishal and Khulna region Dhaka 60 COVID-19 Response Bhola distict Dhaka Bombay Sweets & Co. Ltd. (BSCL) 12 Contract grower scheme for aromatic rice and mustard production. Jashore Dhaka 27 Production and procurement of groundnut from char island farmers through intermediary led procurement business model. Bhola District Dhaka 53 Study tour of US peanut processing equipment manufacturer and supplier FTF zone Dhaka 70 COVID-19 Response Entire Feed the Future Zone (Southwestern Bangladesh) Dhaka BRAC Bank Limited 58 To instigate Feed the Future agribusinesses in adopting e￾commerce digital platform to market, advertise regional procured rice & diversified crops to the lucrative urban customers of the greater Dhaka region. Leveraging ICT technologies to improve quality, efficiency, and growth of inclusive business models. Entire Feed the Future Zone (Southwestern Bangladesh) Dhaka Chaldal Limited 64 COVID-19 Response Entire Feed the Future Zone (Southwestern Bangladesh) Dhaka 40 No USAID Facilitation Location/Working Areas/ Place of Performance Head Office Location** Private Sector Partner 52 Promotion and marketing of quality sesame seed, Short duration T. Aman seed by introducing a comprehensive Sesame Advisory Service (SAS) for sesame farmers in FTF zone Faridpur, Rajbari, Kushtia, Jhenaidah, Magura and Khulna Dynamic Agro Science 74 COVID-19 Response Chuadanga, Jhenaidah, Jashore, Magura, Meherpur, Barishal, Bhola, Patuakhali, Barguna 73 Promote the use of quality inputs including micronutrients, Bio￾stimulant and Trichoderma in the FTF zone. Chuadanga, Jhenaidah, Kushtia, Meherpur, Narail, Magura, Satkhira,Khulna, Bagerhat, Faridpur, Rajbari, Barishal, Bhola, Barguna,Patuakhali, Shariatpur, Madaripur, Gopalganj and Jashore Dhaka Haychem (Bangladesh) Limited (HBL) 28 Piloting I Soft Point of Sales (POS) Technology Solutions with 4 Jashore-based Dealers Jashore Dhaka I Soft 7 Establishing "One stop agriculture service centre" in FTF Zone Jashore, Barishal Dhaka Ispahani Agro Ltd. 57 Ispahani Agro Ltd.’s ultimate approach to the farmers is ‘Total Crop Management’ (TCM). Entire FTF area Dhaka 46 To expand sesame exports further and aims to reach a volume of 2000 MT in the coming season Rajbari, Faridpur and Kushtia Rajbari JADID Corporation 9 Production and marketing of Black Sesame by contract growers for an export market. Barishal Dhaka JADID Grain Industries Ltd (JGIL) 1 Procurement through collection points of 600 MT of Bari mung6 mung bean for sale to dal processors. Crop to be produced by 1,000 farmers in 40 groups in Patuakhali District trained in mung bean production by JF Barishal Dhaka Just Farming Bangladesh 13 Using incentives to secure farmer loyalty in a contract grower scheme. Jashore Chuadanga Konika Seed Company (KSC) 48 Increase farmers’ access to new agri￾machineries, premium crop varieties and technologies Chuadanga, Meherpur, Jhenaidah, Kushtia, Jashore, Magura, Narail, Faridpur and Rajbari districts Chuadanga 62 COVID-19 Response Chuadanga, Meherpur, Jhenaidah, Kushtia, Jashore, Magura, Narail, Faridpur and Rajbari districts Chuadanga 4 Spreading mechanized farming to FTF zones' farmers Jashore, Barishal Dhaka Krishibid Farm Machinery & Automobiles Ltd. 71 COVID-19 Response Barishal, Khulna, Jashore region Dhaka Lal Teer Seed 35 Limited 33rd Annual Georgia peanut tour, USA FTF zone Dhaka 41 No USAID Facilitation Location/Working Areas/ Place of Performance Head Office Location** Private Sector Partner 26 Piloting Link-Up Point of Sales (POS) Technology Solutions with 3 Jashore-based Dealers Jashore Dhaka Link-Up Technology Ltd. 22 Piloting Mediasoft Point of Sales (POS) Technology Solutions with 4 Jashore-based Dealers Jashore Dhaka Mediasoft Data Systems Ltd. 55 Promotion and marketing of quality sesame seed, by introducing a comprehensive Sesame Advisory Service (SAS) for sesame farmers in FTF zone. Rajbari, Kushtia , Khulna, Madaripur, Faridpur , Magura, Jhinaidoho, Jessore Dhaka Metal Agro Ltd 14 Procuring quality sunflower through a subcontract system in Khulna Division Khulna Mymensingh MRT Agro Products BD Limited 16 Promoting maize production in the Southern region through an alliance between input and feed companies Rajbari, Faridpur, Bhola, Patuakhali, Barishal and Jhenaidah Dhaka NAAFCO (PVT.) Limited 33 33rd Annual Georgia peanut tour, USA FTF zone Dhaka 47 To develop a robust and effective distribution channel for agricultural inputs integrating smallholder farmers in the FTF Zone Barguna, Potuakhali, Bhola, Barisal, Gopalgonj, Bagerhat, Jheinadah, Khulna, Faridpur. Dhaka 54 Increase farmers' awareness on quality sesame production and procurement. Khulna, Satkhira, Jashore, Narail, Chuadanga, Jhenaidah, Magura, Narail, and Rajbari Khulna Natural Agro Process Centre 67 COVID-19 Response Khulna, Satkhira, Jashore, Narail, Chuadanga, Jhenaidah, Magura, Narail, and Rajbari Khulna 2 Procurement of 500 MT sunflower from 1,500 farmers in Barguna & Patuakhali districts. Farmers organized into groups, with collection points and trained in sunflower production by NCPL Barishal Dhaka Northern Consumer Products Ltd. 19 Strengthening sunflower growers to ensure quality grain for sustainable processing, branding, and marketing of edible sunflower oil Barguna, Patuakhali, Pirojpur Dhaka 11 Integrated marketing strategies to support hybrid rice production Jashore, Barishal Dhaka Partex Agro Limited 37 Test and promote varietal performance of new high-yielding USA variety groundnut seed and strengthen a robust customer￾oriented distribution channel for existing variety groundnut seed and inputs Faridpur, Jashore, Barisal Dhaka 34 33rd Annual Georgia peanut tour, USA FTF zone Dhaka 42 No USAID Facilitation Location/Working Areas/ Place of Performance Head Office Location** Private Sector Partner 5 Sourcing quality maize from the southern region through inclusive procurement models Jashore Khulna PCF Feed Industries 39 Promote improved varieties of CORTEVA maize seed and strengthen a robust customer￾oriented distribution channel for higher production of maize Jhenaidah, Chuadanga, Kushtia, Meherpur, Pirojpur, Bhola, Faridpur, and Rajbari Dhaka Petrochem Bangladesh Limited 41 Collaborative works lead by input company increase farmer access to quality hybrids for getting better yield and guaranty of marketing in the FTF zone Jashor, Norial, Magura, Bagerhat, Gopalganj, Borisal, Kustia, Rajbari, Madaripur Dhaka 56 Promote improved varieties of CORTEVA maize and rice seed and expansion of the market of those for higher profitability of farmers in FTF zone. Hybrid Rice: Khulna, Shatkhira, Chuadanga, Meherpur, Pirojpur Hybrid Maize: Jhenaidah, Chuadanga, Meherpur, Kushtia Dhaka 8 Using farmer training in rice production and facilitating market access for farmers to rice mill managed markets as an innovative approach to fine grain hybrid rice seed marketing Barishal Dhaka 10 Promoting maize cultivation in the southern region through an inclusive customer focused business model Jashore, Barishal Dhaka 36 Expansion of Krishi Hub and digital platform for selling inputs and procuring farmers goods from the FTF zone Chudanga, Jhinaidha, Borguna, Potuakhali Dhaka PRAN GROUP 20 Introduce formal contract farming to produce quality mung bean and processing & marketing of mung dal Nalchity, Barishal Sadar and Bakergonj Barishal Prantojon Agro Enterprise 80 Mitigating quality mung bean seed shortage and low productivity through enhancing branding and marketing of improved quality mung bean seed and inoculant combo offer in Char/Remote areas of FTF zone. Barishal, Jhalokathi, Patuakhali, Barguna and Bhola Barishal Prantojon Agro Enterprise 49 To instigate Bangladeshi farming community in utilizing digital communication to improve agricultural outcomes by bringing the farmers community closer together through Robi’s specially designed social media platform titled “Krishi Bhai” Entire FTF Zone (Southwestern Bangladesh) Dhaka Robi Axita Limited 43 No USAID Facilitation Location/Working Areas/ Place of Performance Head Office Location** Private Sector Partner 6 Process, promote and market mung dal by sourcing quality mung beans through a contract farming system Barishal Barguna SACO Enterprise 17 Processing, Promote and Market Mung Dal by Sourcing Quality Mung Beans through Contract Farming System Barguna District Barguna 50 SUKUMAR VANDER plans to focus on the 15 most potential Haat Bazars around their processing mill in Faridpur and potential bazars of FTF to expand their sesame procurement, processing and marketing business and aims to reach a volume of 2500 MT in the coming season Faridpur, Rajbari, Jhinaidha, Magura, Kustia Sukumar Vendor 18 Promoting Sunflower cultivation in Southern Part of Bangladesh Southern part of Bangladesh Dhaka Supreme Seed Company 31 Limited Piloting face-to-face advisory services to better serve farmers FTF zone Dhaka 77 To enhance credit offering to micro, small and medium (MSME) enterprises and develop and promote financial products for agricultural equipment. Riding on the distribution channels of financial institutions, a strong supply chain financing footprint can be leveraged to catalyze the adoption of Asset Based Financing Instruments (ABF) in the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Feed the Future (FTF) zone Entire Feed the Future Zone (Southwestern Bangladesh) Dhaka The City Bank Ltd. 15 Mechanized rice production using a rebate incentive system Jashore Dhaka The Metal (Pvt.) Limited 32 33rd Annual Georgia peanut tour, USA FTF zone Dhaka 76 Promotion of Metal’s Mechanized Agro Solutions Through Franchise Model. Whole FTF area Dhaka 51 Supply Chain Development for Quality Seed and Grain of Premium Rice Varieties Narail, Jashore, Magura, Faridpur, Rajbari and Gopalganj district. Narail Ujirpur Organic Multipurpose Cooperative Society Limited (UOMCSL) 66 COVID-19 Response Narai, Jashore, Magura, Faridpur, Rajbari and Gopalgonj Districts Narail 23 Piloting Unisoft Point of Sales (POS) Technology Solutions for 3 Jashore￾based Dealers Jashore Dhaka Unisoft Systems Limited 44 No USAID Facilitation Location/Working Areas/ Place of Performance Head Office Location** Private Sector Partner 40 Promote inoculants as part of nutrient management for the higher profitability of pulses and oilseeds farmers Chuadanga, Jhenaidah, Jashore Dhaka Xplore Business Limited 68 COVID-19 Response Chuadanga, Jhenaidah and Jashore Dhaka ** Tbc in consultation with RDC/BMEL before field visits start. Secondary Beneficiaries – Producers and Local Value Chain Actors Beneficiary Breakdown by Type No Farmers 6,699 Aggregators 38 Extension Agents 16 Input Dealer 670 Local Service Provider (LSP) 6 Retailer 548 Trader 132 Total Non-farmers/LSP 1,410 RDC Partners Public Administration and Research Organizations No Location Organization/Department 1 Mymensingh Department of Agronomy 2 Gazipur Oilseed Research Center, BARI 3 Bogra Bio-technology Department 4 Barishal Sadar DAE 5 Barishal Sadar BADC 6 Wazirpur, Barishal DAE 7 Barishal Sadar BADC 8 Rahamatpur, Barishal BARI, Barishal 9 Barishal Sadar DAE Barishal 10 Faridpur BARI, Faridpur 11 Khulna ATI, Khulna 12 Khulna DAE, Khulna 13 Khulna DAE, Khulna 14 Khulna Khulna University 15 Chuadanga DAE, Chuadanga 16 Meherpur DAE, Meherpur 45 ANNEX 3: KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS MAF/FAS Partners No Date District Gender Organization Name Owner/Hire Position 1 7-Jul-21 Barguna Male SACO Enterprise K.S.M Fakhrul Alam Founder Proprietor 2 7-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Link-Up Technology Ltd. Md. Mozammel Hossain CEO CEO 3 7-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Robi Axiata Ltd. Shahriar Sabrir Khan Employee Manager, Digital VAS & New Businesses 4 10-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Auto Crop Care Limited. Abul Bashar Md. Kamal Employee Business manager – seed. 5 10-Jul-21 Dhaka Male The Metal Pvt. Limited Md. Mahmudul Hassan Employee Sr. Executive – business development. 6 10-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Haychem (Bangladesh) Ltd. Md. Kamrul Alam Employee Manager – sales and marketing 7 10-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Bayer Crop Science Limited Md. Johirul Islam Employee Channel engagement manager 8 11-Jul-21 Barisal Male Prantojon Agro Enterprise Md. Tauhedul Islam Shahazada Proprietor Proprietor 9 12-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Partex Agro Limited Md. Mostafizur Rahman Former Employee Lead, Marketing and Business Development 10 14-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Xplore Business Ltd. Sabbir Ahmed Director Director 11 17-Jul-21 Dhaka Male BRAC Bank Ltd. S M Saiful Islam Employee Head of Agriculture Finance 12 20-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Just Farming Mohammad Harunur Rashid Partner Chief Operating Officer. 13 25-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Agriculture Input Retailers Network (AIRN) Zunaed Rabbani CEO CEO 14 25-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Abedin Equipment Ltd. Md. Rizwanur Rahman Employee Assistant Manager – Sales and Marketing 15 26-Jul-21 Dhaka Male NAAFCO (Pvt.) Ltd. Md. Sultan Mahmud Employee General Manager (Business development) 16 26-Jul-21 Dhaka Male ACI Seeds, ACI Limited S S R M Mahe Alam Sorwar Employee Assistant Manager – Corporate Sales 17 27-Jul-21 Khulna Male Poultry, Cattle and Fish Feed (PCF) Feed Salim Ullah Gazi Employee Project In-charge 18 27-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Krishibid Farm Machinery and Automobiles Ltd. Abu Hena Mastafa Kamal CEO CEO 19 27-Jul-21 Jessore Male Ali Seeds Farm Md. Shahanwas Ali Proprietor Proprietor 20 28-Jul-21 Dhaka Male The City Bank Limited A. Mahbubur Rahman (his colleague who also attended: Mr. Firoz Salah: 01813-658472) First Vice President Head of products 46 No Date District Gender Organization Name Owner/Hire Position 21 28-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Ispahani Agro Ltd. Ashraf Uddin Ahmed DGM DGM 22 28-Jul-21 Dhaka Male I Soft Sarwar Hossain CEO CEO 23 29-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Northern Consumer Products Ltd. Md. Mahbub-ul-Alam Employee Head of Operations 24 7-Aug-21 Dhaka Male Supreme Seed Company Ltd. Md. Mahtab Uddin Director Deputy Managing Director 25 1-Jul-21 Dhaka, Syhet Male Alim Industries Ltd. Engr. Md. Humayun Kabir Employee General Manager 26 7-Jul-21 Chuadanga Male Konika Seed Company (KSC) Md. Nur Alam Liton Factory owner Proprietor 27 15-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Unisoft System Limited Mostofa Zaman Employee Head of software development 28 10-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Petrochem (Bangladesh) Limited Md. Shakhawat Hossain Employee Senior Manager-Market Development 29 15-Jul-21 Narail Male Ujirpur Organic Multipurpus Cooperative society ltd. Md.Abdul Kuddus Employee Project Manager 30 18-July-21 Dhaka Male Bombay Sweets and Co. Ltd. Narayan Datta Supply Chain Management Department. Assistant Manager 31 26-July-21 Dhaka Male Pran Agro Business Ltd. Kamruzzaman Tito Pran Agro Business Ltd. AGM 32 11-Jul-21 Dhaka Male JADID Grain Industries Ltd. (JGIL) Jayed Al Kawser Factory owner (Proprietor) 33 14-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Lal Teer Seed Limited Mohammad Ishtiaque Alam International Business & Projects Manager 34 18-July-21 Dhaka Female Bank Asia Limited Rumana Akhter Tulee Employee First Assistant Vice President 35 8-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Chaldal Ltd. Naveed Akbar Senior Director, Chaldal Ltd 36 7-Jul-21 Khulna Male Natural Agro Process Centre Md.Habibur Rahman Akon Proprietor Factory Owner 37 13-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Mediasoft Data Systems Ltd. Md. Nuruzzaman Jony Employee Manager Business Development 38 7/11/2021 Dhaka Male JADID Corporation Jayed Al Kawser Factory owner (Proprietor) 39 24-Jul-21 Mymensingh Male MRT Agro Products BD Limited Rafiqul Islam Director (Operation) 47 KIIS – USAID, Research Institutions, Government, and RDC Managers and Specialists No Date District Gender Organization Name Position 1.1 8-Jul-21 Dhaka Female USAID Bangladesh Farzana Yasmeen Program Management Specialist, Economic Growth Office 1.2 8-Jul-21 Dhaka Male USAID Bangladesh Jacob Morrin Agriculture Officer, RDC Agreement Officer Representative (AOR) 1.3 8-Jul-21 Dhaka Male USAID Bangladesh Mohammad Sayed Shibly Project Management Specialist, Economic Growth Office 2 19-Jul-21 Dhaka Male CSISA Tim Russel RDC COP in 2018, SSTA in CSISA 3 26-Jul-21 Dhaka Male FTF Bangladesh Nutrition Activity (BNA) Jamal Khetran COP 4 16-Jul-21 Dhaka Male USAID Bangladesh Anar Khalilov Ex-AOR for RDC 5 8-Jul-21 Dhaka Male USAID Bangladesh Osagie Aimiuwu Deputy Director Office of Economic Growth 6 24-Jun-21 Dhaka Male RDC Cuan Opperman COP 7 23-Jul-21 Dhaka Male RDC Sami Saran Team Lead – Core Market Systems 8 28-Jul-21 Dhaka Male RDC Mayaz Kabir Market Systems Manger – Finance & ICT 9 23-Jul-21 Dhaka Male RDC A F M Mominul Haque Market Systems Manager 10 28-Jul-21 Barishal Male RDC Kallol Kumar Roy Market Systems Manager 11 31-Jul-21 Dhaka Male RDC Bilash Mitra Team Lead-MEL 12 29-Jul-21 Dhaka Female RDC Anne Kola Director of Finance & Administration 13 28-Jul-21 Dhaka Male RDC Ramendra Chandra Sarkar Market Systems Manager 14 29-Jul-21 Jashore Male RDC A K M Ferdous Market Systems Manager 15 28-Jul-21 Dhaka Male RDC Md. Haider Jahan Khan Market Systems Manager 16 29-Jul-21 Dhaka Female RDC Bidowra Tahmin Khan Team Leader, Support Market Systems and Social Inclusion 17 6-Jul-21 Narail Male Department of Agriculture and Extension Kbd S M Ferdous, PhD Principal (Ex DD, DAE, Narail), ATI-Khulna 18 6-Jul-21 Khulna Male Department of Agriculture and Extension Md. Nazrul Islam Seed Certification officer, Khulna 19 6-Jul-21 Chuadanga Male Department of Agriculture and Extension Kbd Ali Hasan Ex-DD, DAE Office, Chuadanga, and AD￾Khamarbari, Dhaka 20 8-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Consiglieri Pvt. Ltd., APS 2019 Subcontractor Abdullah Al Shakib Director of Research 21 9-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Capacity Building Service Group (CBSG), APS 2019 Subcontractor Joyanta Roy Co-founder and Chairman 22 9-Jul-21 Dhaka Male Data Management Aid (DMA), APS 2019 Subcontractor Maqbul Hossain Bhuiyan Executive Director 23 12-Jul-21 Mymensingh Male Bangladesh Agricultural University Dr. M A Kader Professor (on lien), Dept. of Agronomy 48 No Date District Gender Organization Name Position 24 14-Jul-21 Bogra Male Rural Development Academy (RDA), Bogra Md. Mizanur Rahman Director – Agriculture 25 15-Jul-21 Barisal Male Bangladesh Agricultural Development Corporation - BADC Md. Abid Hasan Asstt. Director, BADC, Barisal 26 19-Jul-21 Dhaka Male IRRI, Dhaka Md. Sirajul Islam Chief of Party, FTF BD IRRI Rice Breeding Public Private Partnership Platform Activity 27 27-Jul-21 Jessore Male District Seed Certification Office, Jessore and Jhenaidah Kbd. Md. Abdul Kader District Seed Certification Officer, Jessore and Jhenaidah 28 29-Jul-21 Magura Male DAE, Magura Sushanta Kumar Pramanik DD, DAE, Magura 29 30-Jul-21 Khulna Male Seed Certification Agency, Khulna Division Paresh Kumar Roy Regional Seed Certification Officer 30 30-Jul-21 Meherpur Male DAE, Meherpur Shopon Kumar Kha DD - DAE, Meherpur 31 5-Jul-21 Barishal Male DAE, Barishal Proshanto Halder AEO, UAO Office 32 5-Jul-21 Gazipur Male BARI, CSO Plan BD, Gazipur Dr.Mubarak Ali Agricultural researcher 33 5-Jul-21 Khulna Male Khulna University Bidhan Chandra Sarkar Associate professor 34 5-Jul-21 Barishal Male BADC Dr.Md.Akter Hossain Khan DD 35 14-Jul-21 Barishal Male BARI Raziuddin Scientific Officer, OFRD 36 11-Jul-21 Jassore Male CSISA/CIMMIYT Dr. Shafiqul Islam Khandakar CIMMYT Hub Manager 37 5-Jul-21 Faridpur Male BARI Dr. Selim Ahmed Pricipal Scientific Officer, RARS-Faridpur 49 ANNEX 4: DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS এ�েন� ৪: তথ� সং�েহর উপকরণ Final Performance Evaluation of Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC) Activity আরিডিস কায ��েমর চূড়া� কম �দ�তার মূল�ায়ন Key Informant Interview Guideline Target group: USAID Mission, USAID Projects, GOB Partners, Research Institutes, Other Development Partners �ধান তথ�দাতার সা�াৎকােরর িনেদ�িশকা অভী� েগা��: ইউএসএআইিড িমশন (USAID Mission), ইউএসএআইিড এর �ক�সমূহ (USAID Activity), সরকারী সহেযাগী সং�া, গেবষণা �িত�ানসমূহ, ও অন�ান� উ�য়নমুলক সহেযাগী �িত�ানসমূহ Date: তািরখ: Start Time: ��র সময়: End Time: সমাি�র সময়: Location: অব�ান: Upazila: উপেজলা: District◌ঃ েজলাঃ Respondent’s category উ�রদাতার ধরণ USAID RDC/ACDI-VOCA CSISA/CIMMIYT LPIN/ACDI-VOCA BANA/WorldFish GOB Partners DAE Research Institutes Other Donors ১. ইউএসএআইিড ২.আরিডিস/এিসিডআই-েভাকা ৩. িসএসআইএসএ/ িসআইএমএমআেইায়াই�ট ৪. এলিপআইএন/এিসিডআই-েভাকা ৫. িবএএনএ /ওয়া��িফশ Sex: 1. Male 2. Female 3. Third Gender িল�ঃ ১। পু�ষ ২। মিহলা ৩। তৃতীয় িল� Age: বয়স Education: িশ�া 50 ৬. সরকারী সহেযাগী সং�া ৭. িডএই ৮. গেবষণাকারী �িত�ান 9. অন�ান� দাতাসং�া Organization: সং�া: Respondent’s Name, Positions and Contacts: উ�রদাতার নাম, পদবী ও েযাগাযেগর না�ার: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Interviewed by: সা�াৎকার �হণকারী Note taker: তথ� িলিপব�কাির Facilitator: েফিসিলেটটর Note to Moderator: মডােরটেরর করনীয় িবষয়সমুহঃ It is possible that not all selected interviewees may have detailed knowledge of the RDC activity. However, their views on RDC operations may be informative for the evaluation as they are involved in the technical and geographical areas where RDC operates. In this case, some of the RDC activities should be explained in more detail before collecting the views of the interviewee. আরিডিস কায ��ম স�েক�িনব �ািচত সকল সা�াৎকার �দানকারীর িবশদ �ান নাও থাকেত পাের। তেব আরিডিস এর কায ��ম স�েক�তােদর মতামত তথ�মূলক হেত পাের কারণ আরিডিস েযখােন কায ��ম পিরচালনা কের েসখােনর েভৗগিলক অব�ান ও �যু��র সােথ তারা জিড়ত। এ ে�ে� সা�াৎকার �দানকারীর মতামত সং�েহর আেগ তােক আরিডিসর িকছ� কায ��েমর িবশদভােব ব�াখ�া �দান ক�ন।। Informed consent KII Thank you for taking the time to talk to us today. My name is _________ and my colleague’s name is ___________. We work for BMEL on behalf of USAID and are conducting an evaluation of the USAID-funded “Feed the Future Bangladesh Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC)” Activity implemented by ACDI/VOCA. This Activity has been implemented in 26 districts in southern Bangladesh’s Zone of Influence (ZOI) over the past five years. You and/or your organization have been recommended to us as one of the key stakeholders able to provide expert insights on this topic. Your participation in this interview is voluntary. I would like to ask you some questions regarding the RDC Activity. Your views will inform our recommendations about future USAID programming in Bangladesh. We 51 encourage you to be as candid as possible. There are no right or wrong answers to the questions. Whatever you say will be helpful to us. Would you kindly agree to participate in this interview? It will take about one hour. KII �হেণর স�িত আমােদর সােথ আজ কথা বলার সময় েদওয়ার জন� আপনােক ধন�বাদ। আমার নাম .............এবং আমার সহকম�র নাম.....................। আমরা ইউএসএআইিড (USAID) এর িবেমল (BMEL) কায ��েম কাজ কির এবং ইউএসএআইিড (USAID) -এর অথ �ায়েন পিরচািলত “ িফড দ� িফউচার বাংলােদশ রাইস এ� ডাইভারিসফাইড �পস (আরিডিস) কায ��েমর মূল�ায়ন পিরচালনা করিছ যা এিসিডআই/েভাকা (ACDI/VOCA) কতৃ�ক বা�বািয়ত হে� । এই কায ��ম গত পাঁচ বছর যাবত দি�েণর Bangladesh’s Zone of Influence (ZOI) এর ২৬ �ট েজলায় বা�বায়ন করা হেয়েছ। আপিন এবং / অথবা আপনার সংগঠন এই িবষেয় িবশদ তথ� সরবরাহ করেত পারেবন িবধায় অন�তম ে�কেহা�ার িহসােব আমােদর কােছ সুপািরশ করা হেয়েছ। এই সা�াত্কাের আপনার অংশ�হণ ে��ামূলক। আিম আপনােক আরিডিস (RDC) কায ��ম স�িক�ত িকছ� �� �জ�াসা করেত চাই। আপনার মতামত/ দৃ��ভি� বাংলােদেশ ইউএসএআইিড (USAID) এর ভিবষ�ত কায ��ম পিরক�নায় সুপািরশ করেত আমােদর সহয়াতা করেব। আপিন যথাস�ব িনেজ েথেক স�ঠক তথ� �দান করেবন বেল আশা কির। এখােন �ে�র স�ঠক বা ভ�ল উ�র িনেয় িচি�ত হবার েকান কারন েনই। আপিন যা মতামত �দান করেবন তা আমােদর জন� সহায়ক হেব। আপিন িক এই সা�াত্কাের অংশ িনেত স�ত আেছন? সা�াত্কার �দােন এক ঘ�া সময় লাগেব। Confidentiality Before we begin, I want to let you know that any information or examples we gather during this interview will not be attributed to you personally. Your privacy will be protected. We will not include your name or any information that would make it possible for anyone to identify you when they read our report. We also ask that what we discuss today remains with us alone, and you do not share with others when we have gone. My colleague and I will take notes to make sure we do not miss any important points you make. This tape recorder will make sure I do not miss what you tell me. (Show the recorder to the respondent.) Your information and opinion are very important to us. েগাপনীয়তা সা�াত্কার �� করার আেগ, আিম আপনােক জানােত চাই েয, এই সা�াত্কােরর সময় আমরা েয তথ� বা উদাহরণ সং�হ করব তা ব���গতভােব আপনার জন� �িতর কারণ হেব না বা আপনােক দায়ী করা হেব না। আপনার েগাপনীয়তা সুরি�ত করা হেব। যখন েকউ আমােদর �িতেবদন�ট পড়েব তখন আপনােক সনা� করা স�ব এমন েকানও তথ� বা আপনার নাম অ�ভ��� করা হেব না । আমরা আরও অনুেরাধ করিছ েয, আমরা আজ যা আেলাচনা করব তা েকবল আমােদর মেধ� থাকেব। আমরা যখন চেল যাব তখন আপিন অন�েদর সােথ এসকল তথ� আেলাচনা করেবন না। আপনার েদয়া ���পূণ �তথ� েযন বাদ না যায় বা ভ�ল না হয় তা িন��ত করেত আমার সহকম� এবং আিম তথ�সমূহ িলেখ িনেবা /িলিপব� করেবা। এছাড়া এই েটপ েরকড�াের (সা�াত্কারকারীেক েরকড�ার েদখান) মাধ�েম আমরা সা�াত্কার�ট েরকড�করব যার ফেল েকান তথ� বাদ বা ভূ েল েগেল েশাধের িনেত পারব । আপনার তথ� এবং মতামত আমােদর জন� খুব ���পূণ �। 52 Right to ask questions and report concerns You have the right to ask questions about this evaluation and to have those questions answered by us before, during or after the interview. Do you have any questions for me at this time? If you have any questions about the evaluation at a later stage, feel free to send an e-mail to the Bangladesh Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Activity Chief of Party, John Roscoe, at: jroscoe@engl.com সা�াতকার�দানকারীর ্ �� �জ�াসা এবং উে�গ �কাশ করার অিধকার সা�াত্কােরর আেগ, চলাকালীন সমেয় বা পের এই মূল�ায়ন স�েক�আপিন আমােদর েয েকান �� �জ�াসা করেত পােরন এবং আমরা আপনার �ে�র উ�র িদব। এই মু�েত�আপনার িক আমার জেন� েকানও �� আেছ? পরবত� পয �ােয় যিদ মূল�ায়ণ স�েক�আপনার েকানও �� থােক তেব িনি� �ধায় বাংলােদশ মিনটিরং, ইভালু�েয়শন এ� লািন �ং অ�াি�িভ�ট (িবএমইএল) এর িচফ অফ পা�ট�John Roscoe েক , jroscoe@engl.com এই ইেমইল এ�াে�স এ ইেমইল ে�রণ করেত পারেবন। Consent You are free to not respond to any of our questions or to stop the interview at any time. Do you agree to participate in this interview today? Yes No [IF THE RESPONDENT SAYS “YES,” BEGIN INTERVIEW. IF HE/SHE SAYS “NO,” END INTERVIEW] স�িত আপিন আমােদর েকানও �ে�র জবাব নাও িদেত পােরন বা েয েকানও সময় সা�াত্কার�ট িনি� �ধায় ব� কের িদেত পােরন। আপিন িক আজ এই সা�াত্কাের অংশ িনেত রা�জ? হ�াঁ/ না [যিদ �িত��য়া “হ�াঁ" জানায় তেব সা�াত্কার �� ক�ন; যিদ “না,” বেল তেব সা�াত্কার সমা� কের িদন] Questions �� সমূহ Responses �িত��য়া/উ�রসমূহ The Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC) Activity aims to catalyze market system changes that promote a diversified farm management approach oriented to intensified rice production and higher-value, nutrient-rich crops to increase incomes and improve food security and nutrition in the Feed the Future (FTF) zone. RDC’s anticipated project results include: 1. 500,000 farmers in the FTF zone will have access to new and improved products, services, and/or market channels. 2. 50% expansion of commercial outreach in the FTF zone (ZOI) of production and post-harvest-related inputs and services. 3. 50% expansion of commercial procurement by collaborating companies in the FTF zone (ZOI). RDC will reach these targets through facilitative interventions (targeted technical assistance) that create scalable market system impacts that ultimately benefit rural households with the added value of expanding opportunities for women and youth. The $1.5 million Market Accelerator Fund will support strategic public-private partnerships with national and regional agribusinesses and business development service and facilitation providers. The Market Accelerator Fund will have a minimum leverage requirement of 1:1 but will be established on an individual basis where co-investments will be determined based on the level of facilitation intensity required. 53 আরিডিস (RDC) বাজার ব�ব�ার পিরবত�েনর উে�েশ� ব�মূখী ও ৈবিচ�ময় খামার পিরচালনার মাধ�েম িনিবড় ধান চাষ এবং উ�মূেল�র পু��কর ফসল উৎপাদেনর পথ �দশ �ন কেরেছ যার ফেল Feed the Future (FTF) zone এর আিধবািসেদর আয় বৃ�� এবং খাদ� িনরাপ�া সুিন��ত হেব । আরিডিস (RDC) কায ��েমর �ত�ািশত ফলাফল�িলর মেধ� রেয়েছ: 1. এফ�টএফ (FTF) েজােনর ৫০০,০০০ কৃ ষকগন নত� ন এবং উ�ত পণ�, পিরেষবা এবং বাজাের �েবশ করেত পারেব। 2. এফ�টএফ (FTF) েজােন ফসল উত্পাদন ও সং�হ স�িক�ত ইনপুট এবং পিরেষবািদর বািণ�জ�ক �সার ৫০% স�সারণ হেব। 3. এফ�টএফ (FTF) েজােনর সহেযাগী সং�া�িলর সহায়তায় বািণ�জ�কভােব ফসল সং�হ ৫০% স�সারণ হেব। আরিডিস( RDC) উপযু� ই�ারেভনশন (িনিদ�� �যু��গত সহায়তা) এর মাধ�েম এই ল�� অজ�ন করেব যা বধ �নশীল বাজার ব�ব�ার িন��ত করেব; যার ফেল �ামীণ পিরবার�েলা িবেশষ কের নারী ও যুবসমাজ সুিবধােভাগ করেব ও আিথ �কভােব উপকৃ ত হেব। ইহার ১.৫ িমিলয়ন মােক�ট এ��লােরটর তহিবল েকৗশলগত সরকারী- েবসরকারী অংশীদাির� এর মাধ�েম জাতীয় এবং আ�িলক কৃ িষ ব�বসা, ব�বসািয়ক উ�য়ন পিরেষবা এবং পিরেষবা �দানকারীেদরেক সহেযািগতা করেব। মােক�ট এ��লােরটর তহিবেলর নূ�নতম িলভােরেজর অনুপাত হেব ১:১। তেব ব���গত উে�ােগও ইহা �িত��ত হেত পাের; েস ে�ে� সহ-িবিনেয়ােগর (co-investments) মা�া িক পিরমান সাহায� সহেযািগতার �েয়াজন হেব তার উপর িনভ�র করেব । RDC Project Approach and Theory of Change আরিডিস (RDC) কায ��েমর েকৗশল এবং িথওরী অব েচ� A.1 Please introduce yourself, briefly describe your organization/project and your role in this organization/project. আপনার পিরচয় িদন, সংে�েপ আপনার সং�া / �ক� এবং এই সং�া / �কে� আপনার ভূ িমকা বণ �না ক�ন। A.2 Are you familiar with USAID Rice and Crops Diversification Project? If Yes, provide more detail on RDC. আপিন িক আরিডিস (RDC) কায ��েমর সােথ পিরিচত? যিদ হ�াঁহয়, আরিডিস (RDC) স�েক�িব�ািরত বলুন Yes/No হ�াঁ/ না A.3 Are you aware of any major changes/trends and challenges in farm crops and market structures related to food within Bangladesh over the last five years (apart from COVID-19)? আপিন িক গত পাঁচ বছের বাংলােদেশর অভ��ের খােদ�র সােথ স�িক�ত কৃ িষ ফসল এবং বাজার কাঠােমােত েকান বড় পিরবত�ন / �বণতা এবং চ�ােল� স�েক�জােনন (করনা বােদ? Most marketable crops Most nutritional crops Most exported crops Policies Administrative barriers Value chain bottlenecks Research and development capacity Investment levels GOB support 54 Technical skills Climate Change Gender/Youth involvement সব �ািধক িবপণনেযাগ� ফসল সব �ািধক পু��কর ফসল সব �ািধক রফতািনকৃ ত ফসল নীিতমালা �শাসিনক বাধা ভ�ালুেচইন বাধা গেবষণা এবং উ�য়ন �মতা িবিনেয়ােগর �র সরকাির সহায়তা �যু��গত দ�তা জলবায়ুপিরবত�ন েজ�ার / যুবকেদর অংশ�হণ A.4 When did you start your cooperation with RDC? আরিডিসর (RDC) সােথ আপনার সহেযািগতামুলক কাজ কেব �� কেরেছন? A.5 With the view of the RDC objectives, what do you think about the overall approach of RDC, i.e., providing support to market actors vs direct support to smallholder farmers? আরিডিসর (RDC) উে�শ��িল িবেবচনা কের আপিন আরিডিসর সামি�ক কায ��ম স�েক�কী ধারনা কেরন, িবেশষ কের �ু � কৃ ষকেদর সরাসির সহায়তার িবপিরেত বাজার ব�বসািহেদর সহায়তা �দান স�েক�? A.6 From the development perspective, what are the benefits and risks to concentrate effort on private business rather than via NGOs or directly to smallholders? উ�য়েনর দৃ��েকাণ েথেক, এন�জও বা সরাসির �ু � উেদ�া�ােদর মাধ�মএ না কের েবসরকাির ব�বসা �িত�ােন সহেযািগতা করার সুিবধা এবং ঝুঁ িক স�েক�আপনার মতামত কী? EQ1. To what extent has the Rice and Diversified Crops activity been successful in achieving its Intermediate Result 1 “Increased Farm Productivity”? 55 EQ1. আরিডিসর (RDC) কায ��েমর মধ�বত� ফলাফল-১ " খামার উত্পাদনশীলতা বৃ��" অজ�েন কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? B.1 How does your organization/project measure farm productivity? আপনার সং�া / �ক� কীভােব খামােরর উত্পাদনশীলতা পিরমাপ কের? B.2 The RDC project chose rice, maize, pulses and oilseed as the most prospective and impactful crops and related value chains on which to focus support. In your opinion, how important are these crops within the FTF zone (Southern and coastal areas of Bangladesh)? Has there been a change in the relative importance of these specific crops within the ZOI during the last five years? আরিডিস (RDC) �ক��ট ধান, ভ��া, ডাল, েতলবীজ এবং এ স�িক�ত ভ�ালুেচইনেক সবেচেয় স�াবনাময় এবং লাভজনক িবেবচনা কের সহায়তা �দান কের। আপনার মেত, এফ�টএফ েজােন (বাংলােদেশর দি�ণ এবং উপকূ লীয় অ�ল) এই ফসল�িল কতটা ���পূণ �? গত পাঁচ বছের এই অ�েল এই ফসল�েলার আেপি�ক ��ে�র েকানও পিরবত�ন হেয়েছ িক? Rice Maize Pulses: Mung bean Lentil Oil seeds: Sunflower Sesame Groundnut Mustard ধান ভ��া ডাল: মুগ ডাল মসুর েতল বীজ: সূয �মুখী িতল িচনাবাদাম সিরষা B.3 What systemic constraints have rice, maize, pulses, and oilseed faced within the ZOI faced in the last five years? Have there been any improvements in relation to the constraints? গত পাঁচ বছের এফ�টএফ েজােন (ZOI) ধান, ভ��া, ডাল এবং েতলবীেজর স�সারণ ও উৎপাদেনর ে�ে� িক প�িতগত েকান বাধার স�ুখীন হেয়েছ? এ সকল বাধা দুরীকরেন েকান উ�িত হেয়েছ িক? Seed/Improved Seed Quality inputs Inputs supply chains Producer inputs education Procurement/distribution Produce quality Produce quantities Lack of mechanization Monopoly/oligopolies of supplies 56 Monopoly/oligopolies in procurement Lack of information Gender involvement Youth involvement Other বীজ / উ�ত বীজ �ণগতমানস�� ইনপুটস/ ইনপুট সরবরাহ েচইন ইনপুট উৎপাদনকারীর িশ�া সং�হ / িবতরণ �ণগতমানস�� উত্পাদন উত্পাদেনর পিরমাণ যাি�কীকরেণর অভাব একেচ�টয়া / ব�মূখী সরবরাহ একেচ�টয়া / ব�মুখী সং�হ স�িক�ত তেথ�র অভাব িল� স�ৃ�তা যুবকেদর স�ৃ�তা অন�ান� B.4 Do you believe RDC has helped address all or some of these constraints? Please specify. আপিন িক মেন কেরন েয আরিডিস(RDC) এই সম� বাধাসমূহ অথবা িকছ�বাধা সমাধান করেত সহায়তা কেরেছ? িনিদ�� কের বলুন. B.5 RDC and its private partners in the MAF program have facilitated a range of interventions. Which of those, in your opinion have been most beneficial for smallholder producers? এমএএফ (MAF) কম �সূিচর অধীেন আরিডিস এবং েবসরকাির সহেযাগী �িত�ান সমূহ িবিভ� কম �সূিচ বা�বায়ন কেরেছ। আপনার মেত এর মেধ� েকান �েলা �ু � কৃ ষকেদর জন� সবেচেয় েবশী উপকারী? Field Days Field Schools/trials/demonstrations Input promotion incentives Information on new input products (fertilizer, agrochemicals, inoculants) Improved seed Developing local service providers for mechanization Product awareness campaigns Marketing information Remote advice via mobile applications Post-harvest technologies 57 Expanding bank agent networks Facilitating GOB support Other মাঠ �দশ �নী মাঠ �ু ল / �ায়াল/ �দশ �ন ইনপুট �চার �েনাদনা নত� ন ইনপুট পণ� স�িক�ত তথ� (সার, কৃ িষ রাসায়িনক, ইেনাকু ল�া�) উ�ত বীজ যাি�কীকরেণর জন� �ানীয় পিরেষবা সরবরাহকারীেদর গেড় েতালা পণ� সেচতনতা ক�াে�ইন িবপণেনর তথ� েমাবাইল অ�াি�েকশন�িলর মাধ�েম দরবত� ূ পরামশ � ফসল সং�েহা�র �যু�� ব�াংক এেজ� েনটওয়াক��িলর স�সারণ সরকারী সহায়তা বৃ�� অন�ান� B.6 If you specialize in this area, what is your opinion of the RDC’s choice of most promoted inputs? আপিন যিদ এই ে�ে� িবেশষ� হন তেব আরিডিস'র (RDC) সব �ািধক �চািরত ইনপুট�িল স�েক�আপনার মতামত কী? Thrichoderma bio-pesticide Fawligen Fertera Zinc bio-fortified rice Inoculants �াইেকাডাম �া বােয়া-কীটনাশক ফাওিলেজন েফরেটরা �জ� বােয়া ফ�ট�ফাইড রাইস ইেনাকু ল�া�স B.7 Has your organization/project been involved in the above or similar activities directly as an RDC partner or independently in the FTF zone? Please describe your work/cooperation. Did you coordinate with RDC? How? আপনার সং�া / �ক��ট এফ�টএফ েজােন উপেরা� বা একই রকম কায ��ম বা�বায়েন আরিডিসর (RDC) সহেযাগী িহসােব 58 বা এককভােব কাজ কেরেছ? আপনার কাজ / সহেযািগতা স�েক�বণ �না ক�ন। আপিন আরিডিসর সােথ সম�য় কেরেছন? িকভােব? B.8 Are you aware of other GOB or donor initiatives involved in the same activities in FTF zone? Please specify. আপিন িক অবগত আেছন েয অন�ান� সরকারী বা দাতা সং�া এফ�টএফ েজােন একই কায ��েমর সােথ জিড়ত? েজেন থাকেল িনিদ�� কের বলুন। EQ 2. How successful has the activity been in collaborating with the CSISA-Mechanization activity to strengthen access to machinery and tools through expanded commercial outreach of machinery manufacturers, dealers, and local service providers? EQ 2. এই কাজ��ম য�পািত িনম �াতা, িডলার এবং �ানীয় পিরেষবা সরবরাহকারীেদর বািণ�জ�ক �সােরর মাধ�েম য�পািত ও সর�ামািদ সহজ লভ�তা েজারদার করেত িসসা েমকানাইেজশন কায ��েমর (CSISA￾Mechanization) সােথ সম�েয় কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? C.1 Are you involved in/aware of the USAID CSISA Mechanization Project? আপিন িক ইউএসএআইিড িসসা েমকানাইেজশন (USAID CSISA Mechanization) �কে�র সােথ জিড়ত / এ �ক� সমে� আপিন িক জােনন? Yes/No হ�াঁ/ না C.2 What services did CSISA provide in FTF? Who were the key beneficiaries? িসসা (CSISA) কায ��ম এফ�টএফ েজােন িক েসবা সরবরাহ কেরিছল? �ধান সুিবধােভাগী কারা িছল? C.3 Did CSISA and RDC coordinate their activities? How? িসসা এবং আরিডিস (CSISA and RDC) িক তােদর কায ��েমর সম�য় সাধন কেরিছল? কীভােব কেরিছল? C.4 How many producers, local service providers and other market actors have benefited from both RDC and CSISA activities? How has their income been impacted? িসসা এবং আরিডিস (CSISA and RDC) কায ��ম েথেক কতজন কৃ ষক, �ানীয় পিরেষবা সরবরাহকারী এবং অন�ান� বাজার পিরচালনাকারী উপকৃ ত হেয়েছন? তােদর আেয়র উপর এর িক �ভাব পেড়েছ? C.5 Have you heard of RDC-facilitated machinery and equipment sales and service franchisee scheme? If so, in your opinion, has it been successful and scalable? আপিন িক আরিডিস (RDC) এর য�পািত ও সর�াম িব�য় এবং পিরেষবা ��া�াই�জ �ীেমর কথা �েনেছন? যিদ �েন থােকন, 59 তেব আপনার মেত, এ�ট িক সফল হেয়েছ এবং �সার লাভ করেছ? EQ3. To what extent has the Rice and Diversified Crops activity been successful in achieving its Intermediate Result 2 “Increased Participation in Profitable Market Systems”, and strengthening of the relevant market systems? EQ3. আরিডিসর (RDC) কায ��েমর মধ�বত� ফলাফল-২ "লাভজনক বাজার ব�ব�ায় অংশ�হণ বৃ��", এবং এ স�িক�ত বাজার ব�ব�া শ��শালীকরেণ কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? D.1 What systemic constraints exist in the supplier markets in the FTF ZOI? Has RDC addressed those and if so, how? এফ�টএফ েজােন (FTF ZOI) সরবরাহকারী বাজার�িলেত িক িক বাধা রেয়েছ? আরিডিস (RDC) িক এ�েলা সমাধান কেরেছ? যিদ কের থােক তেব কীভােব কেরেছ? D.2 What systemic constraints exist in the buyer markets in the ZOI? Has RDC addressed this issue and if so, how? এফ�টএফ েজােন (FTF ZOI) ে�তার বাজার�িলেত িক িক বাধা রেয়েছ? আরিডিস (RDC) িক এ�েলা সমাধান কেরেছ? যিদ কের থােক তেব কীভােব কেরেছ? D.3 In your view, what are the best tools to measure a systemic market change in a donor development project which has a limited lifespan? আপনার মেত ���ায়ী দাতা সং�ার উ�য়ন (donor development project) �কে�র িসে�িমক বাজার পিরবত�েনর পিরমােপর উ�ম ট�লস বা উপাদান�েলা কী কী? D.4 How important is it for producers to have an effective and efficient operating market structure at the national, regional and district-level intermediary level, upstream and downstream? উৎপাদেকর জন� জাতীয়, আ�িলক এবং েজলা পয �ােয়র মধ�বিত�, উধ �গামী এবং িন�গামী �ের কায �কর এবং দ� বাজার পিরচালনাকাির কাঠােমা থাকা কতটা ���পূণ �? Very important, reduces costs and risks Detrimental, increases input prices and decreases produce sales price For remote areas, it is the only way to provide better access to markets for producers খুব ���পূণ �, ব�য় এবং ঝুঁ িক �াস করেব �িতকারক, ইনপুট মূল� বৃ�� কের এবং িব�য়মূল� �াস কের �ত�� অ�ল�িলর জন� এ�ট কৃ ষকেদর জন� বাজাের �েবশ করার একমা� উপায় । D.5 In your view, have RDC/MAF incentives to private partners been properly aligned with the desired intervention and expected market system change? আপনার দৃ��েত, েবসকাির অংশীদারেদর েদয়া RDC/MAF এর �েনাদনা িক �ত�ািশত কায ��েম এবং বাজার ব�ব�ার পিরবত�েনর সােথ স�ঠকভােব সম�য় করেছ? 60 D.6 In your opinion, has RDC been successful in commercializing new technologies in FTF agricultural markets? Please specify আপনার মেত, আরিডিস িক এফ�টএফ এলাকায় কৃ িষ বাজাের নত� ন �যু��র বািণ�জ�কীকরেণ সফল হেয়েছ? িনিদ�� কের বলুন। EQ 4. Market Accelerator Fund (MAF). How successful has the activity been in using the Market Accelerator Fund to support the activity’s objectives and address targeted market system constraints? EQ 4. Market Accelerator Fund (MAF)◌ঃ কায ��েমর উে�শ��িলেক বা�বায়ন করেত এবং অভী� বাজার ব�ব�ার সীমাব�তা�িল েমাকািবলায় মােক�ট এ��লােরটর তহিবল ব�বহাের কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? E.1 Do you believe that $1.5 Market Accelerator match funding facility (MAF) can provide a scalable systemic effect on business and producer income and nutrition in Southern coastal Bangladesh (FTF/ZOI)? আপিন িক িব�াস কেরন েয $১.৫ মােক�ট এ��লােরটর ম�াচ ফা��ং সুিবধা (MAF) বাংলােদেশর দি�ন উপকূ লীয় (FTF/ZOI) এলাকার ব�বসা এবং কৃ ষকেদর আয় ও পু��র ে�ে� �মবধ �নশীল প�িতগত পিরবত�েন �ভাব েফেলেছ? E.2 In your opinion, has RDC facilitated increased levels of horizontal cooperation in the ZOI? আপনার মেত, আরিডিস িক এফ�টএফ এলাকায় অনুভূ িমক (horizontal) সহেযািগতার মা�া বৃ�� কেরেছ? Yes No Please provide examples হ�াঁ না উদাহরণ �দান ক�ন E.3 In your opinion, has RDC facilitated an increased level of vertical cooperation in the ZOI? আপনার মেত, আরিডিস িক এফ�টএফ এলাকায় ভা�ট�েকল/ল�ালি� সহেযািগতার মা�া বৃ�� কেরেছ? Yes No Please provide examples হ�াঁ না উদাহরণ �দান ক�ন E.4 What are the key challenges running a match funding grant scheme with private sector grantees? েবসরকারী খােতর অনুদান�হনকািরেদর সােথ ম�াচ ফা��ং অনুদান প�িত পিরচালনায় মূল চ�ােল��িল কী কী? Reporting Alignment of objectives Measuring business results vs development impacts Mismatch between donor and business decisions process/funding িরেপা�ট�ং উে�শ�সমূেহর সাম�স�পূন �তা ব�বসার ফলাফল ও উ�য়ন পিরমাপ করা 61 দাতা এবং ব�বসািয়ক িস�া� ���য়া / ফা��ং এর মেধ� েযাগসু� না থাকা E.5 RDC reports it has raised more in private investment through MAF scheme that initially planned. Is this a sign of success or does it raise the question as to if private partners needed the grant money in the first place? আরিডিস এর িরেপাট�অনুযায়ী, এমএএফ ি�েমর �াথিমক েয পিরক�না করা হেয়েছ তােত েবসরকারী িবিনেয়াগ আরও েবেড়েছ। এ�ট িক সাফেল�র ল�ণ? অথবা েবসরকারী অংশীদারেদর �থম অনুদােনর অেথ �র �েয়াজন িছল িকনা েসই �� ৈতির কের? EQ5. How successful has the activity been in identifying the determinants of positive or negative nutritional behaviors and determining the best entry points for integrating nutrition-sensitive activities? EQ5. পু��র ইিতবাচক বা েনিতবাচক আচরন সনা�করণ এবং পু��-সংেবদনশীল কায ��ম স��� করার জন� েসরা পদে�প িনধ �ারেণ কায ��ম�ট কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? F.1 What do you think is the overall food security and nutrition situation in the ZOI is in 2021 versus 2016? ২০২১ ও ২০১৬ সােলর মেধ� এফ�টএফ এলাকার সামি�ক খাদ� সুর�া এবং পু��র পিরি�িত স�েক�আপনার মতামত উে�খ ক�ন Good Reasonable Some food insecurity Not optimally balance diets (families, women, youth) ভাল যু��যু� িকছ� টা খাদ� িনরাপ�াহীনতা পিরপূণ �ভােব সুষম খাদ� নয় (পিরবার, মিহলা, যুবক) F.2 Are you involved in zinc rice seed improvement, production, consumption, sales or distribution? What has been the dynamics of the zinc rice demand in the last five years and why? আপিন িক �জ� ধােনর বীজ উ�য়ন, উত্পাদন, েভাগ, িব�য় বা িবতরেণর সােথ জিড়ত? গত পাঁচ বছের �জ� ধােনর চািহদার গিতিবিধ েকমন িছল বেল আপিন মেন কেরন? Yes/No হ�াঁনা Increased Decreased No change েবেড়েছ �াস েপেয়েছ পিরবত�ন েনই F.3 Do you think the nutritional value of the crops marketed in the ZOI has had impact on the demand in the last five years? Which crops and what impact? Share of high nutrition value crop___ has increased because of 1) changed nutrition patterns; 2) price; 3) access to inputs/services; 3) other 62 আপিন কী মেন কেরন েয, পু�� সমৃ� ফসল িবপণন করায় গত পাঁচ বছের এফ�টএফ এলাকায় চািহদার উপর এর �ভাব পেড়েছ? েকান ফসল এবং িক �ভাব? Share of high nutrition value crop ____has decreased because of 1) changed nutrition patterns; 2) price; 3) access to inputs/services; 3) other উ� পু��মােনর ফসেলর চািহদা বৃ�� েপেয়েছ কারণ- ১) পু��র ধরেণর পিরবত�ন হেয়েছ; ২) দাম; ৩) ইনপুট / পিরেষবার �হন; ৪) অন�ান� উ� পু��মােনর ফসেলর চািহদা �াস েপেয়েছ কারন -১ ১) পু��র ধরেণর পিরবত�ন হেয়েছ; ২) দাম; ৩) ইনপুট / পিরেষবার �হন; ৪) অন�ান� েকান পিরবত�ন েনই F.4 Have you heard of or participated in any nutrition and food security promotion programs or events organized by RDC project? Have they been successful? আপিন িক আরিডিস আেয়া�জত পু�� এবং খাদ� িনরাপ�া �চার িবষয়ক কম �সূচী বা ইেভ� এর কথা �েনেছন বা অংশ কেরেছন? এ�েলা িক সফল হেয়েছ? Event, year কম �সূচী/ইেভ�, বছর EQ6. How successful has the Rice and Diversified Crops activity been in effectively integrating gender considerations and ensure equitable access for women, increase female engagement and empowerment, and promote women entrepreneurs? EQ6. আরিডিসর (RDC) কায ��েম েজ�ার/িল� এর স�ৃ�তা কতটা সফল ভােব করেত েপেরেছ এবং নারীেদর জন� ন�ায়স�ত �েবশািধকার িন��ত করেত, নারীেদর স�ৃ� ও �মতায়ন করেত এবং নারী উেদ�া�ােদর উদ্বু� করেত কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? G.1 Do you have any women and youth clients? How has the number of your women and youth clients changed in the last five years? আপনার িক েকানও নারী এবং যুবক �াহক আেছ? গত পাঁচ বছের কীভােব আপনার নারী এবং যুবক �াহেকর সংখ�ার পিরবত�ন হেয়েছ? Yes/No Increased Remained the same Decreased হ�াঁ /না েবেড়েছ একই রকম আেছ �াস েপেয়েছ G.2 Do you see any potential of your business improvement due to better women involvement? আপিন িক নারীেদর ভালভােব যু� হবার কারেণ আপনার ব�বসােয়র উ�িতর েকান স�াবনা েদখেছন? What are the obstacles for better women involvement? Yes No Cultural/traditional Education Business/negotiation skills Family obligations 63 নারীেদর ভালভােব যু� হবার জন� বাধা�িল কী কী? Hard physical work হ�াঁ না সাং�ৃিতক / �থাগত িশ�া ব�বসায় /চ��� বা আেলাচনার দ�তা পািরবািরক বাধ�বাধকতা কেঠার শারীিরক পির�ম G.3 Have you participated in any nutrition and food security programs? আপিন িক েকান পু�� ও খাদ� িনরাপ�া করমসুিচেত অংশ�হণ কেরিছেলন? If yes, as part of the RDC project? Please specify হ�াঁহেল, আরিডিস �কে�র অংশ িহসােব? িনিদ��কের বলুন Yes/No হ�াঁনা G.4 What do you do to involve women in your business, as workers, business managers, clients? How many women and youth are involved in your operations now? Five years ago? �িমক, ব�বসায়ী ম�ােনজার, �াহক িহসােব আপনার ব�বসােয়র সােথ নারীেদর জিড়ত করার জন� আপিন কী কেরন? এখন আপনার ব�বসায় কতজন মিহলা এবং যুবক কাজ করেছ? পাঁচ বছর আেগ কতজন কেরেছ? Number সংখ�া G.5 In your opinion, has the RDC project succeeded in women empowerment and improving their roles and access to markets. If so, how? আপনার মেত, আরিডিস �ক��ট কী নারী �মতায়েন, নারীেদর ভূ িমকা বৃ��েত এবং বাজাের �েবশািধকার বৃ��েত সফল হেয়েছ? যিদ তাই হয়, িকভােব? Women-to-women business Women-targeted training and promotion Women finance schemes Awareness campaigns Diversity trainings Other নারী েথেক নারী ব�বসায়ী নারী েক��ক �িশ�ণ এবং �চার নারীেক��ক অথ �ায়ন ি�ম সেচতনতামুলক ক�াে�ন ৈবিচ��ও ব�মূখী �িশ�ণ অন�ান� 64 G.6 From your experience, what are the most effective ways to involve women and youth in agricultural value chains? আপনার অিভ�তা েথেক, নারী ও যুবকেদর কৃ িষ ভ�ালুেচইেন স�ৃ� করার সবেচেয় কায �কর উপায়�িল কী? EQ7. How effective has the activity’s MEL approach and tools been in measuring market system change? EQ7. বাজার ব�ব�ার পিরবত�ন পিরমােপ আরিডিস এর MEL approach and tools কতটা কায �কর িছল? EQ7.1 To what extent can RDC MEL data be reasonably attributed to the Rice and Diversified Crops interventions? What are the trade-offs between using survey data through a "market shed" or "catchment area" approach compared to assisting private sector firms to maintain a comprehensive customer or supplier lists? In the event that the private sector firms do not or cannot produce a comprehensive customer or supplier list, what impact would this have on USAID's ability to assess the number of beneficiaries attributed to the activity? EQ7.1 আরিডিসর MEL েডটা আরিডিসর ই�ারেভনশেনর যু��স�ত ফলাফল িনধারেন কতট�কুভ�িমকা েরেখেছ? েবসরকারী খােতর সং�া�িলেক সহায়তা কের এক�ট িবস্তৃত �াহক বা সরবরাহকারী তািলকা ৈতির বা কের "মােক�ট েশড" বা "ক�াচেম� এিরয়া" িভি�ক জিরপ েডটা ব�বহােরর সুিবধা কী? যিদ েবসরকারী খােতর সং�া�িল �কে�র সুিবধােভাগীর সংখ�া িনধ �ারণ করেত না পাের তেব ইউএসএয়াইিড কীভােব এ কায ��েমর �ভাব পিরমাপ করেত সমথ � হেব? H.1 Are you aware of similar initiatives by GOB or other donor projects in the ZOI that focus on market actors and systemic changes that have successfully achieved a positive impact on behalf of smallholder producers? Please briefly describe the size and results of the operations. আপিন জােনন িক সরকারী বা অন�ান� দাতা সং�া এফ�টএফ েজােন অনু�প �ক� �হন কেরেছ যা বাজােরর এ�া�র এবং িসে�িমক পিরবত�েন কাজ কেরেছ যা �ু � কৃ ষক বা উৎপাদকেদর উপর ইিতবাচক �ভাব েফেলেছ? এর ফলাফল�িল সংে�েপ বণ �না ক�ন? RDC did not directly support farmers and there have been many other similar support projects operating in the ZOI over the past 5 years. In your opinion, how would you determine if particular changes in farmer and other beneficiary incomes in the ZOI are attributable to RDC or any individual project? আরিডসী কৃ ষকেদর সরাসির সহেযািগতা কেরিন এবং িবগত ৫ বছের এফ�টএফ েজােন আরও অেনক অনু�প সহায়তা �ক� চালুরেয়েছ। আপনার মেত, এফ�টএফ েজােনর কৃ ষক এবং অন�ান� উপকারেভাগীেদর আেয়র িবেশষ পিরবত�ন�িল আরিডিস বা েকানও �কে�র কারেণ হেয়েছ িকনা তা আপিন কীভােব িনধ �ারণ করেবন? H.2 RDC relies on the MAF grantee reports and annual surveys to measure the impact on market actors and farmers. Do you believe these monitoring tools are sufficient to measure broad impact? আরিডিস এমএএফ �া� �িতেবদন এবং বািষ �ক জিরেপর উপর িনভ�র কের মােক�ট এ�র ও কৃ ষকেদর উপর �কে�র 65 ই��া�/ফলাফল িনণ �য় কের। আপিন িক িব�াস কেরন েয, এই মিনটিরং ট�লস বড় পিরসের �কে�র ই��া�/ফলাফল িনণ �য় করার জন� যেথ�? H.3 In your project/organization, do you regularly use client/beneficiary surveys to measure the results? Do you use extrapolation from a survey sample as an impact measure or do you collect data on all individual primary and secondary beneficiaries? আপনার �ক� / সং�ায়, ফলাফল�িল িনণ �েয়র জন� িক িনয়িমত �াহক / উপকারেভাগী জিরপ পিরচালনা কের? আপিন িক নমুনা িভি�ক জিরপ কের এ��ােপােলশন (extrapolation) এর মাধ�েম ফলাফল িন�প কেরন না সকল �ধান ও অ�ধান উপকারেভাগীেদর েডটা সং�হ কেরন? H.4 What are the challenges in using ‘farm income’ or ‘farm margins’ as a proxy for ‘producer household income’? ‘উত্পাদেকর পািরবািরক আেয়র’ বদেল ‘খামােরর আয়’ বা ‘খামােরর লাভ’ ব�বহাের কী চ�ােল� রেয়েছ? Similarly, what are the challenges of using ‘local market actor income’ as a proxy for his/her household income একইভােব, তার / তার পিরবােরর আেয়র বদেল ‘�ানীয় বাজােরর এ�া�র ইনকাম’ ব�বহার করার ে�ে� চ�ােল��িল কী? H.5 Can you suggest any additional approaches to measuring project impacts on the farmers and market players? Possibly, any other proxy indicators? কৃ ষকেদর এবং বাজােরর এ�া�রেদর উপর �কে�র �ভাব/ফলাফল িনণ �য় করার জন� আপিন িক েকান অিতির� প�িতর পরামশ �িদেত পােরন? স�বত, অন� েকান বদিল (proxy) সূচক? H.6 How would you define a replicable/scalable business model? By what criteria? আপিন কীভােব এক�ট �িত�পেযাগ�/ �মবধ �নশীল ব�বসােয়র মেডল িনধ �ারণ করেবন? েকান মানদে�র িভি�েত করেবন? EQ7.2 What are some of the lessons learned and based on lessons learned, what are some scalable interventions/technologies? EQ7.2 এ �কে�র িশ�ণীয় িবষয়সমূহ িক িক? িশ�ণীয় িবষয়সমূহ এর িভি�েত এ �কে�র �মবধ �নশীল কায ��ম/�যু�� �িল িক িক? I.1 What are the most successful and scalable business models developed in the RDC project or in your project/organization working within the ZOI. এফ�টএফ েজােন কাজ কের আরিডিস �কে�র সবেচেয় সফল ও �মবধ �নশীল ব�বসােয়র মেডল েকান�ট? অথবা আপনার 66 �ক� / সং�া ব�বসােয়র মেডল েকান�টেত সব �ািধক সফল/�মবধ �নশীলতা লাভ কেরেছ। I.2 We would appreciate if you could share any lessons learned from the RDC project or from the activities of your project/organization that could be relevant for future USAID programming in the agricultural sector within the ZOI. আপিন আরিডিস �ক� েথেক িশেখেছন বা আপনার �ক� / সং�ার কায ��ম েথেক িশেখেছন এমন েকান িশ�ণীয় িবষয়/মতামত বলুন যা এফ�টএফ েজােন কৃ িষ খােত ভিবষ�েত USAID এর কায ��ম �হেনর �াসি�ক হেত পাের Thank you for your valuable contribution to this evaluation! এই মূল�ায়েন আপনার মূল�বান মতামত �দােনর জন� আপনােক ধন�বাদ! Signature of Facilitator ___________________________ Date: _________________________ Signature of Record Keeper _______________________ Date: ________________________ সা�াৎকার �হণকারীর �া�র ___________________________ তািরখ: _________________________ সা�াৎকার েরকড�িলিপব�কািরর �া�র _______________________ তািরখ: _________________________ 67 Final Performance Evaluation of Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC) Activity আরিডিস কায ��েমর এর চূড়া� পারফরম�া� মূল�ায়ন KII Guideline Target group: Market Accelerator Fund (MAF) Partners/Fixed Amount Subawardees (FAS)/Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Partners �ধান তথ�দাতার সা�াৎকােরর িনেদ�িশকা অভী� েগা��: MAF পাট�নার/ FAS পাট�নার/MOU পাট�নার Date: তািরখ: Start Time: ��র সময়: End Time: সমাি�র সময়: Location: অব�ান: Upazila: উপেজলা: District েজলা Respondent’s category: উ�রদাতার ধরণঃ Private Company NGO Financial Organization Research Institution Other (specify) ১০. েবসরকারী সং�া ১১. এন�জও ১২. আিথ �ক সং�া ১৪. গেবষণা �িত�ান ১৫. অন�ান� (িনিদ��) Sex: 4. Male 5. Female 6. Third Gender েজ�ারঃ ১। পু�ষ ২। মিহলা ৩। তৃতীয় িল� Age: বয়স Education: িশ�া FAS Number (if applicable): FAS ন�র (�েযাজ� ে�ে�): Organization: সং�াঃ Respondent’s Name: উ�রদাতার নাম: 68 Respondent’s address উ�রদাতার �ঠকানা Respondent’s mobile number: উ�রদাতােদর েমাবাইল ন�র: Respondent’s e-mail: উ�রদাতােদর ইেমল: Affiliation and Position: অিধভ��� এবং অব�ান: Interviewed by: সা�াত্কারকািরর নাম: Note taker: েনাট সং�াহক: Facilitator: ফ�ািসিলেটটর: Informed Consent KII Thank you for taking the time to talk to us today. My name is _________ and my colleague’s name is ___________. We work for BMEL on behalf of USAID and are conducting an evaluation of the USAID-funded “Feed the Future Bangladesh Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC)” Activity implemented by ACDI/VOCA. This Activity has been implemented in 26 districts in southern Bangladesh’s Zone of Influence (ZOI) over the past five years. You and/or your organization have been recommended to us as one of the key stakeholders able to provide expert insights on this topic. Your participation in this interview is voluntary. I would like to ask you some questions regarding the RDC Activity. Your views will inform our recommendations about future USAID programming in Bangladesh. We encourage you to be as candid as possible. There are no right or wrong answers to the questions. Whatever you say will be helpful to us. Would you kindly agree to participate in this interview? It will take about one hour. KII �হেণর স�িত আমােদর সােথ আজ তথ� �দােন সময় েদওয়ার জন� আপনােক ধন�বাদ। আমার নাম .............এবং আমার সহকম�র নাম.....................। আমরা ইউএসএআইিড (USAID) এর BMEL -এ কাজ কির এবং ইউএসএআইিড (USAID) -এর অথ �ায়েন পিরচািলত “ িফড দ� িফউচার বাংলােদশ রাইস এ� ডাইভারিসফাইড �পস (RDC) কায ��েমর মূল�ায়ন পিরচালনা করিছ যা এিসিডআই/েভাকা (ACDI/VOCA) কতৃ�ক বা�বািয়ত হে� । এই কায ��ম গত পাঁচ বছের দি�েণর Bangladesh’s Zone of Influence (ZOI) এর ২৬ �ট েজলায় বা�বায়ন করা হেয়েছ। আপিন এবং / অথবা আপনার সংগঠন�ট এই িবষেয় িবশদ তথ� সরবরাহ করেত স�ম, তাই অন�তম ে�কেহা�ার অংশ িহসােব আমােদর কােছ সুপািরশ করা হেয়েছ। এই সা�াত্কাের আপনার অংশ�হণ ে��ােসবী। আিম আপনােক আরিডিস (RDC) কায ��েমর স�িক�ত িকছ��� �জ�াসা করেত চাই। আপনার মতামত�িল বাংলােদেশ ভিবষ�েত ইউএসএআইিড (USAID) এর কায ��ম অব�াহত রাখেত আমােদর িরেপাট� �দােন সহয়াতা করেব। আমরা আশা করিছ আপিন যথাস�ব স�ঠক তথ� �দান করেবন। এখােন �ে�র স�ঠক বা ভ�ল উ�র িনেয় িচি�ত হবার েকান কারন েনই। আপিন যা মতামত �দান করেবন তা আমােদর পে� সহায়ক হেব। আপিন িক এই সা�াত্কাের অংশ িনেত স�ত আেছন? সা�াত্কার �দােন এক ঘ�া সময় লাগেব। Confidentiality 69 Before we begin, I want to let you know that any information or examples we gather during this interview will not be attributed to you personally. Your privacy will be protected. We will not include your name or any information that would make it possible for anyone to identify you when they read our report. We also ask that what we discuss today remains with us alone, and you do not share with others when we have gone. My colleague and I will take notes to make sure we do not miss any important points you make. This tape recorder will make sure I do not miss what you tell me (Show the recorder to the respondent). Your information and opinion are very important to us. েগাপনীয়তা সা�াত্কার �� করার আেগ, আিম আপনােক জানােত চাই েয এই সা�াত্কােরর সময় আমরা েয তথ� বা উদাহরণ সং�হ করব তা ব���গতভােব আপনার জন� �িতকর হেব না বা আপনােক দায়ী করা হেব না। আপনার েগাপনীয়তা সুরি�ত করা হেব। যখন েকউ আমােদর �িতেবদন�ট পড়েব তখন আপনােক সনা� করা স�ব এমন েকানও তথ� বা আপনার নাম অ�ভ��� করা হেব না । আমরা আরও আ�� করিছ েয আমরা আজ যা আেলাচনা করব তা েকবল আমােদর কােছই থাকেব এবং আশা কিছ েয আমরা যখন চেল যাব তখন আপিন অন�েদর সােথ এসকল তথ� আেলাচনা করেবন না আপনার েদয়া েয েকানও ���পূণ �তথ� েযন আমরা িমস না বা ভ�েল না যাই তা িন��ত করেত আমার সহকম� এবং আিম তথ�সমূহ �েয়াজেন িলেখ িনব। সা�াত্কার �ট এই েটপ েরকড�ার�ট আমরা েরকড�করব েযন আমরা িমস না কির (সা�াত্কারকারীেক েরকড�ার েদখান)। আপনার তথ� এবং মতামত আমােদর জন� খুব ���পূণ �। Right to ask questions and report concerns You have the right to ask questions about this evaluation and to have those questions answered by us before, during or after the interview. Do you have any questions for me at this time? If you have any questions about the evaluation at a later stage, feel free to send an e-mail to the Bangladesh Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Activity Chief of Party, John Roscoe, at: jroscoe@engl.com �� �জ�াসা এবং িরেপাট�স�েক�সা�াত্কারকারীর অিধকার সা�াত্কােরর আেগ বা পের এই মূল�ায়ন স�েক�আপিন আমােদর েয েকান �� �জ�াসা করেত পােরন এবং আমরা আপনার �ে�র উ�র িদব। এই মু�েত�আপনার েকানও �� আেছ? পরবত� পয �ােয় যিদ মূল�ায়ণ স�েক�আপনার েকানও �� থােক তেব িনি� �ধায় বাংলােদশ মিনটিরং, মূল�ায়ন, এবং লািন �ং অ�াি�িভ�ট (BMEL) িচফ অফ পা�ট�John Roscoe, at: jroscoe@engl.com এ ইেমইল ে�রণ করেত পারেবন। Consent You are free to not respond to any of our questions or to stop the interview at any time. Do you agree to participate in this interview today? Yes No [IF THE RESPONDENT SAYS “YES,” BEGIN INTERVIEW. IF HE/SHE SAYS “NO,” END INTERVIEW] স�িত আপিন আমােদর েকানও �ে�র জবাব নাও িদেত পােরন বা েয েকানও সময় সা�াত্কার�ট িনি� �ধায় ব��ের িদেত পােরন। আপিন িক আজ এই সা�াত্কাের অংশ িনেত রা�জ? হ�াঁ/ না 70 [যিদ �িত��য়া জানায় “হ�াঁ”, হয় সা�াত্কার �� ক�ন। যিদ িতিন / িতিন বেলন “না,” সা�াত্কার সমা� কের িদন] Questions Responses Remarks EQ 4. Market Accelerator Fund (MAF). How successful has the activity been in using the Market Accelerator Fund to support the activity’s objectives and address targeted market system constraints. EQ 4. Market Accelerator Fund (MAF) কায ��েমর উে�শ��িলেক বা�বায়ন করেত এবং টােগ �ট বাজার ব�ব�ার সীমাব�তা�িল েমাকািবলায় মােক�ট এ��লােরটর তহিবল ব�বহাের কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? The Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC) Activity aims to catalyze market system changes that promote a diversified farm management approach oriented to intensified rice production and higher-value, nutrient-rich crops to increase incomes and improve food security and nutrition in the Feed the Future (FTF) zone. RDC’s anticipated project results include: 1. 500,000 farmers in the FTF zone will have access to new and improved products, services, and/or market channels. 2. 50% expansion of commercial outreach in the FTF zone of production and post-harvest-related inputs and services. 3. 50% expansion of commercial procurement by collaborating companies in the FTF zone. The Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC) Activity বাজার ব�ব�ার পিরবত�েন উত্ সািহত কের যা এক�ট ব�মূখী ও ৈবিচ�ময় খামার পিরচালনার সহায়তা কের ধােনর উত্পাদন এবং উ�মূেল�র, পু��কর সমৃ� ফসেলর িন�য়তা েদয় এবং যার ফেল Feed the Future (FTF) zone এ আয় বৃ�� পােব এবং খাদ� সুর�া িন��ত হেব । আরিডিস (RDC) �কে�র �ত�ািশত ফলাফল�িলর মেধ� রেয়েছ: FTF zone এর ৫০০,০০০ কৃ ষেকর নত� ন এবং উ�ত পণ�, পিরেষবা এবং / অথবা বাজােরর চ�ােনল�িলেত অ�াে�স থাকেব। FTF zone এর উত্পাদন ও ফসল সং�হ স�িক�ত ইনপুট এবং পিরেষবািদর বািণ�জ�ক �সােরর ৫০% স�সারণ। FTF zone এর এর সহেযাগী সং�া�িলর সহায়তায় বািণ�জ�ক �িকউরেম� এর ৫০% স�সারণ। A.1 How long have you worked for your company? আপিন কত িদন আপনার সং�ার জন� কাজ কেরেছন? 71 A.2 What is your company’s core business/es? (Select all that apply.) আপনার েকা�ািনর মূল ব�বসা কী? (�েযাজ��ট িনব �াচন ক�ন) Seed Improvement Seed Distribution Fertilizer Production Fertilizer Distribution Agro-chemicals Production Agro-chemicals Distribution Agro-machinery Production Agro-machinery Distribution Aggregation Trade intermediary Processing Marketing Exports Nutrition Agricultural Extension Crop Protection Advisory Post-harvest Handling Advisory Financial services ICT services Other (specify) উ�ত বীজ বীজ িবতরণ সার উত্পাদন সার িবতরণ কৃ িষ রাসায়িনক উত্পাদন কৃ িষ রাসায়িনক িবতরণ কৃ িষ য�পািত উত্পাদন কৃ িষ য�পািত িবতরণ এ�াি�েগশন ব�বসা মধ��তাকারী Specify by crop, service, product and sub￾service/sub-product শস�, পিরেষবা, পণ� এবং উপ-পিরেষবা / উপ-পণ� িনিদ�� ক�ন 72 ���য়াজাতকরণ িবপণন রফতািন পু�� কৃ িষ স�সারণ শস� সংর�ণ পরামশ �দাতা ফসল সং�েহা�র পিরচালনার পরামশ � অথ �ৈনিতক েসবা সমূহ আইিস�ট েসবা িনিদ�� অন�ান�) A.3 What is the and the title of your project and the period of your company’s cooperation with RDC? (year’s start – year’s end) আপনার �কে�র িশেরানাম এবং RDC এর সােথ আপনার সং�ার সহেযািগতার সময়কাল উে�খ ক�ন? (বছেরর �� - বছেরর েশষ) A.4 Have you been directly involved in the partnership with the RDC activity? আপিন িক RDC এর কায ��েমর সােথ সরাসির যু� হেয়িছেলন? Yes, full time Yes, part time No, but I am well informed of our company’s project with RDC. No [stop the interview and ask to refer to colleague/s with the knowledge of the activity] হ�াঁ, পুেরা সময় হ�াঁ, খ�কালীন না, তেব আিম RDC এর সােথ আমােদর সং�ার �ক� স�েক� ভালভােব অবিহত। না [সা�াত্কার ব� ক�ন এবং কায ��ম স�েক�জােনন এমন সহকম�েদর নাম বলেত বলুন] If “No’, stop the interview and ask to refer to colleague/s with the knowledge of the activity যিদ "না" হয় তেব সা�াত্কার�ট ব� ক�ন এবং কায ��ম স�েক� জােনন এমন সহকম�েদর নাম বলেত বলুন 73 A.5 What were the key objectives of your company’s cooperation with the RDC Activity? (Select all that apply.) RDC এর কায ��েমর সােথ আপনার সং�ার সহেযািগতার মূল উে�শ��িল কী িছল? (�েযাজ��ট িনব �াচন ক�ন) 1. Increase sales 2. Raise funding for existing products/services 3. Explore/establish new distribution channels 4. Develop new product/service 5. Improve the company’s capacity 6. Improve staff’s project management skills 7. Facilitate Government support 8. Develop new marketing tools 9. Increase end-user awareness of products. 10.Provide COVID-19 related support (protective equipment, safe points of sale, etc.) 11.Other (specify) ১. িব�য় বৃ�� ২. িবদ�মান পণ� / পিরেষবা�িলর জন� তহিবল বাড়ােনা ৩. নত� ন িবতরণ চ�ােনল�িল অে�ষণ / �াপন করা ৪. নত� ন পণ� / পিরেষবার েডভলপ ৫. েকা�ািনর স�মতা বৃ�� করা ৬ কম�েদর �ক� পিরচালনার দ�তা বাড়ােনা ৭ সরকারী সহায়তার সুেযাগ পাবাড় েজাণয সহেযািগতা করা ৮. িবপণেনর নত� ন ট�লস েডভলপ করা ৯. পণ� স�েক�সব �েশষ ব�বহারকারীেদর সেচতনতা বৃ�� করা ১০. COVID-19 স�িক�ত সহায়তা সরবরাহ করা (�িতর�ামূলক Request to specify by crop or service if more than one একািধক হেল �প বা পিরেষবা �ারা িনিদ�� করার জন� অনুেরাধ ক�ন 74 সর�াম, িনরাপদ িব�য় �ান, ইত�ািদ) ১১. অন�ান� (িনিদ�� ক�ন) A.6 Has the cooperation with RDC met or is expected to meet your company’s expectations for each of the selected objectives above? RDC িক আপনার �ত�াশা পূরণ কেরেছ বা িনব �ািচত �িত�ট উে�শ� ল�� েরেখ আপনার সং�ার �ত�াশা পূরণ করেব? Yes No Partially (specify) হ�াঁ না আংিশকভােব (িনিদ�� ক�ন) Read the previous question’s options and provide the answer against selected objective. পূব �বত� �ে�র িবক�সমূহ পড়ু ন এবং িনব �ািচত উে�শ� ল�� েরেখ উ�র িদন A.7 What types of RDC project support have proved most useful for your company? List the top three. েকান ধরেনর RDC �ক� সমথ �ন আপনার সং�ার পে� সবেচেয় কায �কর �মািণত হেয়েছ? শীষ �িতন�ট তািলকাব� ক�ন। A.8 Did you face any challenges in proving the match funding required for the RDC cooperation project? RDC সহেযািগতা �কে�র জন� �েয়াজনীয় তহিবল �মাণ করার ে�ে� আপিন িক েকানও চ�ােলে�র মুেখামুিখ হেয়েছন? Yes No Comments হ�াঁ না ম�ব� A.9 Do you think the RDC Invitation for Applications/Request for Proposals process clear and transparent? আপিন িক মেন কেরন RDC এর অ�াি�েকশন/ ��াব জমা েদয়ার ���য়া�েলা পির�ার এবং ��? Yes No Other/Remarks (specify) হ�াঁ না অন�ান� / ম�ব� (িনিদ��) A.10 Have the grant/project reporting requirements been (select all answer options that apply) অনুদান / �কে�র িরেপা�ট�ং এর শত�াবিল স�েক� আপনার মতামত িক (উ�র িনব �াচন ক�ন) Reasonable Easy to follow Difficult to follow Excessive 75 Useful for your core business reporting ১. যু��স�ত ২. অনুসরণ করা সহজ ৩. অনুসরণ করা ক�ঠন ৪. অত�িধক ক�ঠন ৫. আপনার মূল ব�বসােয়র �িতেবদেনর জন� সহজ A.11 Did you receive any training for the RDC project monitoring, evaluation, learning and reporting? আপিন িক RDC এর �ক� পয �েব�ণ, মূল�ায়ন, েশখা এবং িরেপা�ট�ংেয়র জন� েকানও �িশ�ণ েপেয়িছেলন? Yes No Comments হ�াঁ না ম�ব� A.12 How many projects cooperative agreements have you concluded with RDC? RDC এর সােথ আপিন কত�ট �কে�র সমবায় চ��� স�াদন কেরেছন? 1 2 3 A.13 If you have implemented more than one project with RDC, what were the main reasons you file second (third) application? আপিন যিদ RDC েত একািধক �ক� বা�বায়ন কেরন তেব আপিন ি�তীয় (তৃতীয়) আেবদন করার মূল কারণ�িল কী িছল? A.14 How has RDC/MAF program management measure your success in the project/s? RDC/MAF ে�া�াম ব�ব�াপনা আপনার �ক� সাফল� কীভােব পিরমাপ কেরেছ? A.15 Has your company’s distribution network increased in the period of your project with RDC? How many local market actors (retailers, distributors, traders, input providers) did you sell/procure through at the begging and at the end of the project? Number at the beginning of the project Number at the end of the project (estimate if an ongoing activity) Not applicable 76 RDC এর �কে�র সময়কােল িক আপনার সং�ার িডি�িবউশন েনটওয়াক� বৃ�� েপেয়েছ? �কে�র েশেষ আপিন কত�িল �ানীয় বাজােরর এ�া�র (খুচরা িবে�তা, পিরেবশক, ব�বসায়ী, ইনপুট সরবরাহকারী) িব�য় / সং�হ কেরেছন? �কে�র ��েত সংখ�া �কে�র েশেষ সংখ�া (চলমান কায �কলাপ যিদ থােক) �েযাজ� নয় EQ7. Monitoring, Evaluation ad Learning/CLA. How effective has the activity’s MEL approach and tools been in measuring market system change. EQ7. বাজার ব�ব�ার পিরবত�ন পিরমােপ MEL approach and tools কতটা কায �কর হেয়েছ? EQ7.1 What are the trade-offs between using survey data through a "market shed" or "catchment area" approach compared to assisting private sector firms to maintain a comprehensive customer or supplier lists? In the event that the private sector firms do not or cannot produce a comprehensive customer or supplier list, what impact would this have on USAID's ability to assess the number of beneficiaries attributed to the activity? EQ7.1 RDC MEL তথ� Rice and Diversified Crops ই�ারেভনশন এ কতট�কুযু��স�ত ভ�িমকা েরেখেছ? এক�ট িবিবধ �াহক বা সরবরাহকারীর তািলকা বজায় রাখেত েবসরকারী খাত সং�া�িলেক সহায়তা করার জন� "মােক�ট েশড" বা "ক�াচেম� এিরয়া" প�িতর ত� লনায় জিরপ তথ� ব�বহােরর মেধ� ে�ড অফ�িল কী কী? যিদ েবসরকারী খাত সং�া�িল এক�ট িবস্তৃত �াহক বা সরবরাহকারী তািলকা ৈতির বা না করেত পাের, তেব এই কায ��েমর জন� �কে�র সুিবধােভাগীর সংখ�া িনধ �ারেণর উপর এর কী �ভাব পড়েব? B.1 What local intermediary/vale chain actor/service provider level data (if any) have you been collecting and reporting to RDC as a result of your project? আপিন RDC েক �িতেবদন েদয়ার জন� আপনার �কে�র ফলাফল স�িক�ত েকান �ানীয় মধ��তাকারী / ভ�ালুেচইন এ�া�র/ পিরেষবা �দানকািরর তথ� সং�হ কেরেছন? Distribution network tracking/management/GIS system Sales Tonnes Litres Incomes Other িডি�িবউশন েনটওয়াক� ��ািকং / ম�ােনজেম� / �জআইএস িসে�ম িব�য় টন িলটার আয় অন�ান� B.2 What producer level data if any have you been collecting and reporting to RDC due to your project? Producer sales Sales to producer 77 আপিন RDC েক �িতেবদন েদয়ার জন� আপনার �কে�র ফলাফল স�িক�ত েকান উত্পাদক �েরর তথ� সং�হ কেরেছন? Producer Yields Producer margins Areas under improved management areas Mechanization at producer level We do not collect producer level data কৃ ষেকর িব�য় কৃ ষেকর কােছ িব�য় কৃ ষেকর েমাট ফলন কৃ ষেকর লাভ/মা�জ�ন পিরচালনার জন� েকান েকান িবষেয় উ�িতর �েয়াজন কৃ ষক পয �ােয় যাি�কীকরণ আমরা কৃ ষক পয �ােয় তথ� সং�হ কির না B.3 How do you collect producer level data? আপিন কীভােব উত্পাদক �েরর তথ� সং�হ কেরন? Reporting from local distributors, traders, partners Direct producer surveys Field trial reports Field Days External statistics data (e.g., GOB) �ানীয় িডি�িবউটর, ব�বসায়ী, পাট�নারেদর কাছ েথেক �িতেবদন করা সরাসির কৃ ষক জিরপ িফ� �ায়াল িরেপাট� মাঠ িদবস পিরসংখ�ান তথ� (উদাঃ সরকাির) B.4 Have you faced any challenges in developing and maintaining consumer or supplier management information systems? আপিন িক েভা�া বা সরবরাহকারী পিরচালন তথ� িসে�ম িবকাশ এবং বজায় Yes (specify) No হ�াঁ (িনিদ�� কের বলুন)) না 78 রাখার ে�ে� েকান চ�ােলে�র মুেখামুিখ হেয়েছন? EQ6. How successful has the Rice and Diversified Crops activity been in effectively integrating gender considerations and ensure equitable access for women, increase female engagement and empowerment, and promote women entrepreneurs? EQ6. Rice and Diversified Crops activity কায �করভােব েজ�ার স�ৃ� িবষয়সমুহ সম�য় কেরেছ এবং নারীেদর জন� ন�ায়স�ত �েবশািধকার িন��ত করেত, নারীেদর স�ৃ� হওয়া এবং �মতায়ন বৃ�� এবং নারী উেদ�া�ােদর �চাের কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? C.1 Has your company been involved in any women and youth empowerment activities as part of RDC cooperation project/s? আপনার সং�া�ট িক RDC সহেযািগতা �কে�র অংশ িহসােব আপনার সং�া�ট েকানও মিহলা এবং যুব �মতায়েনর কােজ জিড়ত? Yes, specify No হ�াঁ (িনিদ�� কের বলুন)) না Ask to provide examples উদাহরণ C.2 In your opinion, has the role of women in agricultural market systems changed in the last five years; as a result of your project with RDC or in general? আপনার মেত, আপনার �কে�র বা RDC এর কারেণ গত পাঁচ বছের নারীর ভূ িমকা কৃ িষে�� বাজার ব�ব�ায় েকান পিরবত�ন এেনেছ? আপনার �কে�র বা RDC এর আেলােক ব�খা ক�ন? Increased Somewhat No change বৃ�� েপেয়েছ িকছ� টা পিরবত�ন েনই C.3 Can you provide successful example/s of women involvement in the agri-market system? আপিন িক কৃ িষ বাজার ব�ব�ায় মিহলােদর জিড়ত থাকার সফল উদাহরণ স�েক� বলেত পারেবন? Encourage to share any project-related or general experience related to gender েজ�ার স�িক�ত, �ক�- স�িক�ত বা সাধারণ অিভ�তা বলেত উত্ সািহত ক�ন EQ5. How successful has the activity been in identifying the determinants of positive or negative nutritional behaviors and determining the best entry points for integrating nutrition-sensitive activities? EQ5. ইিতবাচক বা েনিতবাচক িনউ��শনাল িবেহিভয়ার সনা�করণ এবং পু��-সংেবদনশীল কায ��ম সুসংহত করার জন� েসরা পদে�প িনধ �ারেণ কায ��ম�ট কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? D.1 Has your company been involved in any food security and nutrition activities as part of the RDC cooperation? Yes, specify No Don’t know 79 আপনার সং�া িক RDC এরসহেযািগতার অংশ িহসােব েকানও খাদ� সুর�া এবং পু�� কায ��েম জিড়ত? হ�াঁ, িনিদ�� ক�ন না জািন না D.2 Has the food security situation in your company’s area of operations improved in the last five years? আপনার েকা�ািনর কায ��েমরর ফেল খাদ� িনরাপ�ার পিরি�িত িক গত পাঁচ বছের উ�ত হেয়েছ? Yes Somewhat No Don’t know হ�াঁ িকছ� টা না জািন না D.3 Please provide example/s of successful nutrition or food security activities সফল পু�� বা খাদ� সুর�া কায ��েমর উদাহরণ উে�খ ক�ন Encourage to share any project-related or general experience related to nutrition and food security পু�� এবং খাদ� সুর�া স�িক�ত, �ক�-স�িক�ত বা সাধারণ অিভ�তা েথেক বলেত উত্ সািহত ক�ন EQ1. To what extent has the Rice and Diversified Crops activity been successful in achieving its Intermediate Result 1 “Increased Farm Productivity”? EQ1. Rice and Diversified Crops activity “মধ�বত� ফলাফল-১" খামার উত্ পাদনশীলতা বৃ��" অজ�েন কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? E.1 In your opinion, has your project with RDC improved the agricultural productivity in FTF zone (in hectares and volume)? আপনার মেত, RDC এরসােথ আপনার �ক��ট িক FTF েজােন (েহ�র এবং আয়তেন) কৃ িষে�ে�র উ�িত কেরেছ? Yes No Not sure Not measured হ�াঁ না িন��ত না মািপ নাই 80 E.2 In your opinion, have producers in FTF zone have got improved access to agricultural inputs due to your project? আপনার মেত, এফ�টএফ েজােনর কৃ ষকরা িক আপনার �কে�র কারেণ কৃ িষ উপকরণ�িলেত েবিশ �েবশািধকার েপেয়েছ? Definitely Somewhat No Not applicable ��ভােব িকছ� টা না �েযাজ� নয় E.3 In your opinion, have producers received better access to buyers/sales options due to your project with RDC? আপনার মেত, এফ�টএফ েজােনর কৃ ষকরা িক আপনার �কে�র কারেণ ে�তা / িব�য় এর ে�ে� েবিশ �েবশািধকার েপেয়েছ? Definitely Somewhat No Not applicable ��ভােব িকছ� টা না �েযাজ� নয় E.4 In your opinion, which of the market constraints has your project with RDC helped to improve for producers? (Select all that apply.) আপনার মেত, RDC এর সােথ আপনার �ক��ট বাজােরর সীমাব�তার ে�ে� কৃ ষকেদর েকান েকান ে�ে� উ�িত করেত সহায়তা কেরেছ (িনব �াচন ক�ন) Access to: Technical information Market information Improved farming methods Intensified Rice Improved/New Varieties Better/diversified Cropping Patterns Mechanization Access to Inputs Access to Improved Seed Expanded produce distribution channels Access to Exports 81 Access to Finance Government Support Access to Innovation (ICT, new research data) Other (specify) �েবশািধকার: �যু��গত তথ� মােক�ট/বাজার তথ� উ�ত কৃ িষকাজ প�িত ইেটনিসফাইড রাইস উ�ত / নত� ন জাত ভাল / িবিবধ �িপং প�াটান �স যাি�কীকরণ ইনপুট অ�াে�স উ�ত বীজ অ�াে�স উত্ পাদন বৃ�� িডি�িবউশন চ�ােনল এ�েপাট�এে�স ফাইন�া� অ�াে�স সরকারী সহেযািগতা উ�াবেন সহায়তা (আইিস�ট, নত� ন গেবষণা তথ�) অন�ান� (িনিদ�� ক�ন) EQ3. To what extent has the Rice and Diversified Crops activity been successful in achieving its Intermediate Result 2 “Increased Participation in Profitable Market Systems”, and strengthening of the relevant market systems, namely: EQ3. Rice and Diversified Crops activity মধ�বত� ফলাফল-২ "লাভজনক বাজার ব�ব�ায় অংশ�হণ বৃ��", এবং স�িক�ত বাজার ব�ব�া শ��শালীকরেণ কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? 3a. ensuring that the incentives for each market system actor are aligned with the desired intervention and expected market system change. 82 ৩ এ। �িত�ট মােক�ট িসে�ম এ�া�রেদর ইনেসন�টভ �কে�র �ত�ািশত ই�ারেভনশন এবং �ত�ািশত বাজার ব�ব�ার পিরবত�েনর সােথ স�িক�ত েরেখ �িত�ট মােক�ট িসে�ম এ�া�রেদর ইনেসন�টভ িন��ত করা 3b. facilitating increased levels of cooperation (both horizontal and vertical). ৩ িব। সহেযািগতার মা�ার (অনুভূ িমক/হরাইেজ�াল এবং উ��/ভা�ট�েকল) সুিবধা বাড়ােনা 3c. catalyzing investment from market system actors, both public and private, to adapt and scale up investments in commercializing new technologies, inclusive business models, or value chain upgrading strategies. 3 িস। নত� ন �যু��, ইনক্ লুিসভ ব�বসািয়ক মেডল বা ভ�ালুেচইন আপে�িডং েকৗশলেক বািণ�জ�কীকরেণ িবিনেয়ােগর জন� সরকারী এবং েবসরকারী উভয় মােক�ট এ�া�রেদর অনু�ািনত করা F.1 In your opinion, have incentives provided to each market actor in your project with RDC been well aligned with the projected positive change? আপনার মেত, RDC এর সােথ আপনার �কে�র �িত�ট মােক�ট এ�া�রেদর �েণাদনা েদওয়া হেয়েছ, যা ইিতবাচক পিরবত�েনর সােথ সাম��পূণ �? Yes Somewhat No, please expand what can be improved হ�াঁ িকছ� টা না, িকভােব উ�ত করা যায় তা ব�াখ�া ক�ন F.2 Has your project with RDC facilitated increased levels of cooperation in your area of business? RDC এর সােথ আপনার �ক��ট িক আপনার ব�বসােয়র ে�ে� সহেযািগতার মা�া বৃ�� কেরেছ? Horizontally: Yes No Vertically: Yes No Please provide examples: অনুভূ িমকভােব/হরাইজ�ালভা েব: হ�াঁ না উ��ভােব/ ভা�ট�েকলভােব: হ�াঁ 83 না উদাহরণ �দান ক�ন F.3 Can you please provide examples of specific new or improved service/s developed for the farmers, distributors, retailers, buyers or end users? কৃ ষক, পিরেবশক, খুচরা িবে�তা, ে�তা বা সব �েশষ ব�বহারকারীেদর জন� িনিদ�� বা উ�ত পিরেষবাসমুহ উদাহরণসহ উে�খ ক�ন। Please provide examples: উদাহরণসহ বণ �না ক�ন F.4 In your opinion, which of the market constraints has your project with RDC helped resolve for local value chain actors? (Select all that apply.) আপনার মেত, RDC এর সােথ আপনার �ক��ট বাজার সীমাব�তার ে�ে� �ানীয় ভ�ালুেচইন এ�া�রেদরেক সমাধান করেত সহায়তা কেরেছ? (িনব �াচন ক�ন) Access to: Technical knowledge Management skills Market information Improved farming methods Intensified rice Improved/new varieties Mechanization Access to inputs Access to improved seed Expanded/new distribution channels Access to exports Access to finance Access to innovation Government support (ICT, new research data) Other (specify) �েবশািধকার: �যু��গত তথ� মােক�ট/বাজার তথ� উ�ত কৃ িষকাজ প�িত 84 ইেটনিসফাইড রাইস উ�ত / নত� ন জাত ভাল / িবিবধ �িপং প�াটান �স যাি�কীকরণ ইনপুট অ�াে�স উ�ত বীজ অ�াে�স উত্ পাদন বৃ�� িডি�িবউশন চ�ােনল এ�েপাট�এে�স ফাইন�া� অ�াে�স সরকারী সহেযািগতা উ�াবেন সহায়তা (আইিস�ট, নত� ন গেবষণা তথ�) অন�ান� (িনিদ�� ক�ন) F.5 Has your company developed new private and/or public partnerships due to the RDC project? আপনার সং�া�ট RDC �কে�র ফলাফল িহসােব নত� ন ব���গত এবং / অথবা পাবিলক অংশীদাির� গেড় ত� েলেছ? Yes (specify) No হ�াঁ (িনিদ�� ক�ন) না F.6 Has your company upgraded its value chain due to the RDC project? আপনার সং�া�ট িক RDC �কে�র ফলাফল িহসােব এর ভ�ালুেচইন েকৗশল�িল আপে�ড কেরেছ? Yes (specify) No হ�াঁ (িনিদ�� ক�ন) না F.7 Has your company invested in commercializing new technologies due to the RDC project? আপনার সং�া িক RDC �কে�র ফলাফল িহেসেব ��প নত�ন �যু�� বািণ�জ�কীকরেণ িবিনেয়াগ কেরেছ? Yes (specify) No হ�াঁ (িনিদ�� ক�ন) না 85 EQ7.2 What are some of the lessons learned? And based on lessons learned, what are some scalable interventions/technologies? EQ7.2 িশ�ণীয় িবষয়সমূহ ও িশ�ণীয় িবষয়সমূহ এর উপর িভি� কের কেয়ক�ট িশখন, িকছ� �হনেযাগ� ও �েয়াগেযাগ� �যু�� G.1 How relevant and appropriate was the program design and intervention to the communities and markets in the FTF areas in Bangladesh? ে�া�াম�ট িডজাইন বাংলােদেশর FTF অ�েলর কিমউিনট ও বাজার�িলর জন� কতটা �াসি�ক এবং উপযু�? Very relevant Somewhat relevant Not relevant খুব �াসি�ক িকছ� টা �াসি�ক �াসি�ক না G.2 How adaptable has been your project approach with RDC for the changing business environment, climate, and other factors, including COVID-19 pandemic? ব�বসােয়র পিরেবশ, জলবায়ুএবং COVID-19 মহামারী সহ অন�ান� কারণ�িলর সােথ খাপ খাওয়ােত RDC এর সােথ আপনার �ক� কতটা অিভেযাজ� হেয়েছ? Highly adaptable (provide examples of change) Somewhat adaptable Not adaptable (not fast enough) অত�� অিভেযা�জত (পিরবত�েনর উদাহরণ উে�খ ক�ন) িকছ� টা মািনেয় েনওয়া যায় অিভেযাজ� নয় (যেথ� �ত নয়) G.3 What are some key lessons learned from your experience of cooperating with the RDC project? RDC �কে� সহেযািগতা করার অিভ�তা েথেক কী কী ���পূণ � িবষয় িশেখেছন? Funding levels Funding timeliness Project design Project Management Staff capacity Supplier/customer tracking and information systems Infrastructure Policies Other ফা��ং েলেভলস সমেয়াপেযাগী অথ �ায়ন 86 �কে�র নকশা �ক� পিরচালনা কম�েদর দ�তা সরবরাহকারী / �াহক ��ািকং এবং তথ� িসে�ম অবকাঠােমা নীিতমালা অন�ান� G.4 What have been the key successes of the project or the business models that can be scalable in your company and for other market players? �ক� বা ব�বসািয়ক মেডল�িলর মূল সাফল��িল কী িছল যা আপনার সং�ায় এবং অন�ান� বাজােরর এ�া�রেদর জন� �হনেযাগ� হেত পাের? Please describe: অনু�হ কের বণ �না ক�ন G.5 Regarding the activities for the involvement your company had with RDC, to what extent will the activities continue when the relationship with RDC expires? RDC এর সােথ �কে�র েময়াদ েশষ হেয় েগেল িক আপনার �িত�ােনর কায ��ম অব�াহত থাকেব? 1. Not confident at all 2. Somewhat confident 3. Fairly confident 4. Extremely confident ১. েমােটও আ�িব�াসী নয় ২. িকছ� টা আ�িব�াসী ৩. েমাটামু�ট আ�িব�াসী ৪. অত�� আ�িব�াসী G.6 Please provide any further comments, suggestions, and recommendations for future programming improvement. ভিবষ�েত ে�া�ািমং উ�িতর জন� েকানও ম�ব�, পরামশ �এবং ��াব থাকেল মতামত িদন। Thank you for your valuable contribution to this evaluation! 87 এই মূল�ায়েন আপনার মূল�বান মতামত �দােনর জন� আপনােক ধন�বাদ! Signature of Facilitator ___________________________ Date: _________________________ Signature of Record Keeper _______________________ Date: ________________________ সা�াৎকার �হণকারীর �া�র ___________________________ তািরখ: _________________________ সা�াৎকার েরকড�িলিপব�কািরর �া�র _______________________ তািরখ: ______________________ 88 Final Performance Evaluation of Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC) Activity Focus Group Discussion (FGD) Guideline Target group: Primary and Secondary Stakeholders – Market Actors, Value Chain Actors, Local Service Providers, Extension Services, Producers, Millers, Aggregators, Women, Youth েফাকাস �প িডসকাশন (এফ�জিড) গাইডলাইন অভী� েগা��: �াথিমক ও মাধ�িমক ে�কেহা�ার - মােক�ট অ�া�র, ভ�ালুেচইন অ�া�র, েলাকাল সািভ�স ে�াভাইডার, এ�েটনশন সািভ�স, উৎপাদনকারী, িমলার, অ�াি�েগটর, মিহলা, যুব তািরখ: ��র সময়: েশষ সময়: �ান: উপেজলা: েজলা Respondent’s category (not all the categories will be represented at each FGD but at least a group of 3): উ�রকারীর ধরন (সম� িবভাগ �িত�ট FGD েত নয় তেব কমপে� িতন এর এক�ট �েপ �িতিনিধ� করা হেব) Input supplier Local Service Provider Trader Producer Miller MFI/lender ১. ইনপুট সরবরাহকারী ২. �ানীয় সািভ�স সরবরাহকারী ৩. ব�বসায়ী ৪. উৎপাদক ৫. িমলার ৬. MFI/ঋণদাতা Sex: 1. Male 2. Female 3. Third Gender িল�ঃ ১. পু�ষ ২. মিহলা ৩. তৃতীয় িল� Age: বয়সঃ Education: িশ�াঃ FAS Number (if applicable): FAS না�ার (�েযাজ� ে�ে�) �িত�ান: Respondent’s Names, Positions, and Contacts: উ�রদাতার নাম, পদবী এবং না�ারঃ 1. 2. 3. 4. 89 5. Interviewed by: সা�াতকার িনেয়েছনঃ Note taker: েনাট িনেয়েছনঃ Facilitator: ফ�ািসিলেটটরঃ Informed consent KII Thank you for taking the time to talk to us today. My name is _________ and my colleague’s name is ___________. We work for BMEL on behalf of USAID and are conducting an evaluation of the USAID-funded “Feed the Future Bangladesh Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC)” Activity implemented by ACDI/VOCA. This Activity has been implemented in 26 districts in southern Bangladesh’s Zone of Influence (ZOI) over the past five years. You and/or your organization have been recommended to us as one of the key stakeholders able to provide expert insights on this topic. Your participation in this interview is voluntary. I would like to ask you some questions regarding the RDC Activity. Your views will inform our recommendations about future USAID programming in Bangladesh. We encourage you to be as candid as possible. There are no right or wrong answers to the questions. Whatever you say will be helpful to us. Would you kindly agree to participate in this interview? It will take about one hour. KII �হেনর স�িত আমােদর সােথ আজ কথা বলার সময় েদয়ার জন� ধন�বাদ। আমার নাম___________ এবং আমার সহকম�র নামঃ ___________ আমরা USAID এর পে� BMEL এর জন� কাজ করিছ এবং USAID অথ �ািয়ত ও ACDI/VOCA �ারা বা�বািয়ত “Feed the Future Bangladesh Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC)” �কে�র মূল�ায়ন করিছ। এই এি�িভ�ট গত ৫ বছের বাংলােদেশর দি�েনর েজান অফ ইনফ্ লুেয়� (ZOI) ২৬�ট েজলায় বা�বায়ন করা হেয়েছ। এই সমে� তথ�সরবরাহ করেত স�ম িহেসেব আপিন এবং/অথবা আপনার �িত�ানেক অন�তম মূল অংশ িহসােব আমােদর সুপািরশ করা হেয়েছ। এই সা�াত্কাের আপনার অংশ�হণ ে��ােসবী। আিম আপনােক RDC এর কম �কা� স�েক�িকছ� �� করেবা। আপনার মতামত�িল বাংলােদেশর ভিবষ�েত USAID ে�া�ািমং স�েক�আমােদর সুপািরশ�িলেক অবিহত করেব। এখােন েকান ভ�ল বা স�ঠক িকছ�েনই। আপিন যা িকছ�বলেবন সবই আমােদর জন� সহায়ক। আপিন িক অনু�হ কের এই সা�াতকাের অংশ�হণ করেত স�ত আেছন? এটা ঘ�াখােনেকর মেধ�ই হেয় যােব। Confidentiality Before we begin, I want to let you know that any information or examples we gather during this interview will not be attributed to you personally. Your privacy will be protected. We will not include your name or any information that would make it possible for anyone to identify you when they read our report. We also ask that what we discuss today remains with us alone, and you do not share with others when we have gone. My colleague and I will take notes to make sure we do not miss any important points you make. This tape recorder will make sure I do not miss what you tell me. (Show the recorder to the respondent.) Your information and opinion are very important to us. েগাপনীয়তা 90 �� করার আেগ, আিম আপনােক জানােত চাই েযেকান তথ� অথবা উদাহরণ সং�হ কির না েকন এজন� ব���গতভােব আপনার জন� দায়ী করা হেব না। আপনার পিরচয় েগাপন রাখা হেব। আমরা েকাথাও আপানার নাম অথবা আপনােক অন� কােরা িচনেত সুিবধা হয় এমন েকান তথ� রাখেবা না। আমরা আেরা অনুেরাধ করব, আমরা যা আেলাচনা করব তা আমােদর মেধ�ই থাকেব এবং আমরা চেল যাওয়ার পর এ�ট কােরা সােথ েশয়ার করেবন না। আপনার সহকম� েয েকানও ���পূণ �পেয়� আমরা িমস করব না তা িন��ত করেত আমার সহকম� এবং আিম েনাট�িল েনব। এই েটপ েরকড�ার�ট িন��ত করেব েয আপিন আমােক যা বলেছন তা আমরা িমস করিছ না (উ�রদাতােক েরকড�ার�ট েদখান)। আপনার তথ� এবং মতামত আমােদর জন� খুব ���পূণ �। Right to ask questions and report concerns You have the right to ask questions about this evaluation and to have those questions answered by us before, during or after the interview. Do you have any questions for me at this time? If you have any questions about the evaluation at a later stage, feel free to send an email to the Bangladesh Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Activity Chief of Party, John Roscoe, at: jroscoe@engl.com �� �জ�াসা এবং উে�গ িরেপাট�করার অিধকার সা�াতকােরর পূেব �, চলাকালীন সমেয় বা পের আপনার এ�ট স�েক��� করার অিধকার আেছ যার উ�র আমরা িদব। আপনার িক এই মুহেত� ূ েকান �� আেছ? আপনার যিদ পরবত�েত এটা িনেয় েকান �� থােক তাহেল েযেকান সময় বাংলােদশ মিনটিরং, মূল�ায়ন এবং লািন �ং অ�াি�িভ�ট (BMEL) এর িচফ অফ পা�ট�John Roscoe েক jroscoe@engl.com �ঠকানায় ইেমইল করেত পােরন। Consent You are free to not respond to any of our questions or to stop the interview at any time. স�িত আপিন েয েকানও সময় আমােদর েকানও �ে�র জবাব না িদেত পােরন বা েয েকানও সময় সা�াত্কার�ট ব� করেত পােরন। Do you agree to participate in this interview today? Yes No আপিন িক আজেক সা�াতকার িদেত স�ত আেছন? হ�াঁ না [IF THE RESPONDENT SAYS “YES,” BEGIN INTERVIEW. IF HE/SHE SAYS “NO,” END INTERVIEW] [যিদ উ�রদাতা জানায় “হ�াঁ,” সা�াত্কার �� ক�ন। যিদ িতিন “না,” বেলন, সা�াত্কার েশষ ক�ন] Note to Moderator: An FGD may have a mix of stakeholders. Subject to the composition of the group and flow of discussion, use your best judgment about which questions to ask. For example, if no one in the group is engaged in farming, you would not inquire about primary crop production. মডােরটেরর কােছ েনাটঃ একজন FGD িবিভ� ধরেনর ে�কেহা�ারেদর সােথ হেত পাের। েগা���টর গঠন এবং আেলাচনার �বােহর উপর িনভ�র কের েকান �� �জ�াসা করেত হেব এে�ে� আপনার েসরা যু�� ব�বহার ক�ন। উদাহরণ��প, �েপর েকউ যিদ কৃ িষকােজ িনযু� না হয়; আপিন �াথিমক ফসল উৎপাদন স�েক� �জ�াসা করেব না। 91 Questions �� Responses উ�র The Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC) Activity aims to catalyze market system changes that promote a diversified farm management approach oriented to intensified rice production and higher-value, nutrient-rich crops to increase incomes and improve food security and nutrition in the Feed the Future (FTF) zone. ধান এবং িবিবধ ফসেলর (আরিডিস) কায ��ম বাজার ব�ব�ার পিরবত�ন�িলেক উত্ সািহত কের যা Feed the Future (FTF) েজােন ধােনর উৎপাদন এবং উ�-মূল�বান, পু��কর সমৃ� ফসেলর আয় বৃ�� এবং খাদ� সুর�া এবং পু�� খামার পিরচালনার প�িতর �চার কের। RDC’s anticipated project results include: 1. Five hundred thousand (500,000) farmers in the FTF zone will have access to new and improved products, services, and/or market channels. 2. Fifty (50) percent expansion of commercial outreach in the FTF zone of production and post-harvest￾related inputs and services. 3. Fifty (50) percent expansion of commercial procurement by collaborating companies in the FTF zone. আরিডিসর �ত�ািশত �কে�র ফলাফল�িলর মেধ� রেয়েছ 1. FTF েজােনর ৫০০,০০০ কৃ ষেকর নত� ন এবং উ�ত পণ�, পিরেষবা এবং / অথবা বাজােরর চ�ােনল�িলেত অ�াে�স থাকেব। 2. FTF েজােন উৎপাদন এবং ফসল কাটা স�িক�ত ইনপুট এবং পিরেষবািদর বািণ�জ�ক �সােরর 50% স�সারণ। 3. FTF েজােনর সং�া�িল �ারা বািণ�জ�ক সং�েহর 50% স�সারণ। EQ1. To what extent has the Rice and Diversified Crops activity been successful in achieving its Intermediate Result 1: “Increased Farm Productivity”? EQ1. ধান এবং িবিবধ ফসেলর কম �কা� তার �াথিমক ফলাফল ১ "Increased Farm Productivity" অজ�েন কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? A.1 Please briefly introduce yourself to the group and tell us about your business and how long you have been in this business. অনু�হ কের সংে�েপ আপনার পিরচয় িদন এবং আপনার ব�াবসা ও এই ব�াবসায় আপিন কতিদন আেছন তা আমােদর বলুন। A.2 Are you familiar with USAID’s RDC Project or any other USAID projects operating in your area? If yes, what is your role in the project? হ�াঁ /না 92 আপিন িক USAID RDC �েজ� অথবা আপনার এলাকায় পিরচািলত USAID অন� েকান �েজে� কাজ কেরেছন? যিদ কের থােকন, ঐ �েজে� আপিন িক দািয়ে� িছেলন? A.3 What crop markets are you involved in now? And five years ago? িক ধরেনর শস� মােক�েটর সােথ আপিন জিড়ত? এবং ৫ বছর আেগ েকানটা িছল? This year: e.g. rice (types), maize, pulses, oil seed, other 5 years ago: _______________________ এই বছর: েযমন ভাত (�কার), ভ��া, ডাল, েতল বীজ ইত�ািদ 5 বছর আেগ_________________________________ A.4 If during the past 5 years, you changed crops, what were the key reasons for the change? If you changed, how do you market your crops, and what led to the change? যিদ গত ৫ বছের আপিন ব�াবসার শস� পিরবত�ন কের থােকন তাহেল এটার মুল কারন িক িছল? যিদ আপিন আপনার শস� িকভােব বাজারজাতকরন কেরেবন, এটা পিরবত�ন কের থােকন, তাহেল িক পিরবত�ন কেরেছন? ইনপুট মূল� িব�য় মূল� বাজার তথ� শস� / িবিভ� তথ� নত� ন ে�তা উ�ত বীজ জলবায়ুপিরবত�ন / আবহাওয়া নত� ন ঋণ সরকার সমথ �ন আরিডিস সমথ �ন অন�ান� �ক� সমথ �ন যাি�কীকরণ অ�াে�স অন�ান� (উে�খ ক�ন) A,5 Who do you buy inputs from? Seed Fertilizer Pesticides Trichoderma Inoculum খুচরা িবে�তা, �িত�ান, রা�দতূ কৃ ষক, অন�ান� আরও ভাল দাম 93 A.5.1 Other (specify) Please advise if there have been changes in your input sources within the last five years, and the reasons why. আপিন কার কাছ েথেক ইনপুট িকেনেছন? বীজ সার কীটনাশক �াইেকাডাম �া ইেনাকু লাম অন�ান� (উে�খ ক�ন) যিদ গত ৫ বছের আপিন িবে�তা পিরবত�ন কের থােকন, তাহেল েকন? আরও ভাল পণ� আরও ভাল / নত� ন িবতরণ চ�ােনল ইনপুট উৎপাদেকর কাছ েথেক সমথ �ন ফসল / বাজােরর পিরবত�ন েভাটািধকার পণ� / পরী�ার ফলাফল স�েক�নত� ন তথ� �িশ�ণ / িবে�াভ সরকার সমথ �ন আরিডিস সমথ �ন অন�ান� �ক� সমথ �ন A.6 Has your crop(s) productivity increased due to new/improved inputs? Yields Margins নত� ন বা উ�ত ধরেনর ইনপুেটর জন� আপনার শস� উৎপাদন িক েবেড়েছ? ফলন মুনাফা Yes No Yes No Reasons হ�াঁ না হ�াঁ না কারণ A.7 Have you received any advice or training for improved crop management and post-harvest handling practices and who provided this advice? Use of improved seed Crop protection Cropping patterns/rotation Soil improvement Post-harvest handling Other Department of Agriculture/Extension Service Trader Input supplier Input producer Miller Buyer NGO RDC Project 94 আপিন িক শস� ব�ব�াপনা এবং শস� উে�ালেনর পর িক করেত হেব তার উপর িক েকান পরামশ �বা ে�িনং েপেয়েছন এবং েক পরামশ ��েলা িদেয়েছ? উ�ত বীেজর ব�বহার ফসেলর সুর�া �িপং প�াটান �স / আবত�ন মা�টর উ�িত ফসল কাটার পের পিরচালনা অন�ান� Other কৃ িষ / স�সারণ পিরেষবা িবভাগ ব�বসায়ী ইনপুট সরবরাহকারী ইনপুট উৎপাদনকারী িমলার ে�তা এন�জও আরিডিস �ক� অন�ান� A.8 A.8.1 Have you experienced any significant crop production constraints during the last five years? গত ৫ বছের শস� উৎপাদেনর ে�ে� আপিন িক েকান ধরেনর �িতকু লতার স�ুখীন হেয়েছন? If so, have the constraints been eased/resolved? যিদ হেয় থােকন, তাহেল িকভােব সমাধান কেরেছন? Access to inputs Market/price information Access to finance Crop procurement/sales Quality management Quantity management Climate challenges Access to machinery/mechanization Other A.9 Question to each focus group member: In your opinion, what has led to production constraints being mitigated or resolved during the past 5 years? সকল েফাকাস �প সদস�েদর জন� ��ঃ আপনার মেত, িবগত ৫ বছের উৎপাদেনর বাধা �াস বা সমাধােনর উপায় কী? Extension services Last-mile distribution Lower input prices due to more effective distribution Well-designed incentives for farmers Better access to improved seed Harvest loss management RDC support Other ইনপুট অ�াে�স বাজার / দােমর তথ� 95 অথ �অ�াে�স শস� সং�হ / িব�য় �নমান ব�ব�াপনা পিরমাণ ব�ব�াপনা জলবায়ুচ�ােল� য�পািত / যাি�কীকরণ অ�াে�স অন�ান� স�সারণ েসবা েশষ মাইল িবতরণ আরও কায �কর িবতরেণর কারেণ ইনপুট দাম কম কৃ ষকেদর জন� সু-নকিশত �েণাদনা উ�ত বীেজ আরও ভাল �েবশািধকার ফসল �াস ব�ব�াপনা আরিডিস সমথ �ন অন�ান� A.10 For input providers: What are the best incentives to inspire producers to test new crops and products? ইনপুট সরবরাহকারীেদর জন�ঃ নত� ন শস� পরী�া করার জন� উৎপাদনকারীেদর উৎসািহত করার জন� সবেচেয় ভাল উপায়/�েনাদনা িক হেত পাের? Are you aware of incentives funded by RDC via partners intended to inspire producers to test new crops or products? Have you utilized incentives provided through RDC partners’ support? আপিন িক RDC �ারা পাট�নারেদর মাধ�েম উৎপাদনকারীেদর উৎসািহত করার জন� �েনাদনা েদয়া স�েক�জােনন? আপিন িক �া� �েনাদনা RDC পাট�নারেদর মাধ�েম কােজ লািগেয়েছন? Product promotion prices Volume discounts Built-in product use information/advisory services Field days Field trials Incentives for input suppliers Other পণ� �চার মূল� ভিলউম ছাড় অ�িন �িম �ত পণ� ব�বহােরর তথ� / পরামশ �ক পিরেষবা�িল মােঠর িদন�িল মােঠ পরী�ণ ইনপুট সরবরাহকারীেদর জন� উ�ীপনা 96 অন�ান� EQ 2. How successful has the activity been in collaborating with the CSISA-Mechanization activity to strengthen access to machinery and tools through expanded commercial outreach of machinery manufacturers, dealers, and local service providers? EQ 2.য�পািত িনম �াতারা, িডলার এবং �ানীয় পিরেষবা সরবরাহকারীেদর িবস্তৃত বািণ�জ�ক �চােরর মাধ�েম য�পািত ও সর�াম�িলেত অ�াে�স েজারদার করেত িসএসআইএসএ-েমকানাইেজশন এি�িভ�ট কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? B.1 Have there been key constraints inhibiting farm mechanization? What key constraints existed in 2016? Have there been any improvements in the last five years? Why? খামার যাি�কীকরেণ মুল বাধা িক আেছ? ২০১৬ সােলর িদেক িক ধরেনর মূল সমস�া�েলা িছল? গত ৫ বছের িক এই সমস�া�েলার েকান উ�িত হেয়েছ? েকন? Price Distribution bottlenecks Maintenance Skills/Local service providers availability/skills RDC Project support CSISA Mechanization Project support GOB support Other দাম িবতরণ বাধা র�ণােব�ণ দ�তা / �ানীয় পিরেষবা সরবরাহকারীেদর উপল�তা / দ�তা আরিডিস �ক� সহায়তা িসএসআইএসএ যাি�কীকরণ �ক� সমথ �ন সরকার সমথ �ন অন�ান� B.2 Are you aware of any mechanization support provided by RDC or RDC partners? আপিন িক RDC বা RDC পাট�নার �ারা যাি�কীকরেণ সহায়তা স�েক�জােনন? B.3 If you know, please describe the kind of mechanization services that the CSISA Activity provided. 97 যিদ েজেন থােকন, তাহেল অনু�হ কের CSISA activity যাি�কীকরেণ িক ধরেনর েসবা �দান কের বণ �না ক�ন? B.4 B4.1 How has mechanization impacted producer productivity and sales? যাি�কীকরণ িকভােব উৎপাদকেদর উৎপাদন এবং িব��েত �ভাব েফলেছ? Have you ever used any external advice to calculate the costs and benefits of farm machinery use in the long term? অেনকিদন ধের য� ব�বহাের আপনার ফােম �র খরচ এবং লাভ স�েক�আপিন িক কখেনা বাইেরর কােরা কাছ েথেক পরামশ �েপেয়েছন? Yields Margins Sales Increased/decreased cost per Ha উৎপাদেনর মা�জ�ন িব�য় �িত েহ�র পিরমাণ বৃ�� / �াস Extension services Banks Machinery seller/producer RDC Project CSISA Project Other স�সারণ েসবা ব�াংক য�পািত িবে�তা / উৎপাদনকারী RDC �ক� CSISA �ক� অন�ান� B.5 Have you heard of or used asset-based financing? Are you aware of any banks that offer it for machinery purchase? আপিন িক স�দ-িভি�ক অথ �ায়ন এর কথা �েনেছন বা ব�বহার কেরেছন? আপিন িক এমন েকান ব�াে�র কথা জােনন যারা য�াংশ েকনার ে�ে� এই সুিবধা ব�বহােরর সুেযাগ েদয়? Yes No হ�াঁ না EQ3. To what extent has the Rice and Diversified Crops Activity been successful in achieving its Intermediate Result 2: “Increased Participation in Profitable Market Systems”? 98 EQ3.ধান এবং িবিবধ ফসেলর ��য়াকলাপ “Increased Participation in Profitable Market Systems” এর মধ�বত� ফলাফল 2 অজ�েন কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? C.1 Can each of you describe what goods and services you sell in the market? আপনারা �েত�েক মােক�েট িক ধরেনর পন� বা েসবা িব�� কের থােকন? Traders: Input suppliers: Aggregators: Producers: LSP: Loan provider: ব�বসায়ীরা: ইনপুট সরবরাহকারী: সংকলক: উৎপাদনকারী: এলএসিপ: ঋণ সরবরাহকারী: C.2 C.2.1 Can each of you describe your typical chain of transactions for your key goods/services, from the farm to the consumer (value chain)? আপনারা পন� বা েসবা ফাম �েথেক ে�তা বা েভা�া পয �� েপৗছােনার জন� িক ধরেনর েলনেদন কের থােকন? What are the key bottlenecks in your value chain? Over the past five years, have there been changes within the value chain in which you are involved? For example, have transactions changed or have constraints improved or become more of a problem over the last five years? If there have been changes, how and why have these changes had an impact on your business? আপনার এ ধরেনর কােজ মূল বাধা কী? আপিন েযখােন এ কােজ জিড়ত আেছন, েসখােন গত ৫ বছের েকান পিরবত�ন িক হেয়েছ? উদাহরণ��প, েলনেদন পিরবত�ন বা সমস�ার সমধান বা আেরা সমস�া ৈতির িক এই ৫ বছের হেয়েছ? যিদ েকান পিরবত�ন হেয় থােক, িকভােব এবং েকন এই পিরবত�ন আপনার ব�বসায় �ভাব েফেলেছ? Traders: Input suppliers: Aggregators: Producers: LSP: Loan provider: Transportation: Availability of inputs: Changes in the value chain: Climate: ব�বসায়ীরা: ইনপুট সরবরাহকারী: সংকলক: উৎপাদনকারী: এলএসিপ: ঋণ সরবরাহকারী: 99 পিরবহন: ইনপুট�িলর লভ�তা: ভ�ালুেচইেন পিরবত�ন�িল: জলবায়ু: C.3 What incentives do you use in your business to increase sales/expand customer base? আপিন আপনার িব�� বা ে�তা বাড়ােত িক ধরেনর সুিবধা আপনার ব�বসায় িনেয় আেসন? Product promotion Competitive price Demonstrations ICT (mobile applications, radio, other) Quantity discounts Quality incentives Credit/loans Public-Private Partnerships GOB support engagement Insurance Other পণ� �চার �িতেযাগী মূল� িবে�াভ আইিস�ট (েমাবাইল অ�াি�েকশন, েরিডও, অন�ান�) পিরমাণ ছাড় মান উত্ সাহ ে�িডট/ ঋণ সরকারী-েবসরকারী অংশীদাির সরকার সমথ �ন স�ৃ�তা বীমা অন�ান� C.4 Do you believe incentives as a business tool improve sales/margins for each value chain actor in your line of business? �েণাদনা িব�� বা ে�তা বাড়ােত ব�বসার এক�ট েকৗশল, এটা িক আপিন িব�াস কেরন? Traders: Input suppliers: Aggregators: Producers: 100 LSP: Loan provider: ব�বসায়ীরা: ইনপুট সরবরাহকারী: সংকলক: উৎপাদনকারী: এলএসিপ: ঋণ সরবরাহকারী: C.5 C.5.1 In your opinion, have sales or procurement incentives as a business tool been successful in reaching out to smallholder farmers (less than 5 Ha) or only larger farms in the last five years? আপনার মেত, �ু � কৃ ষকেদর (যােদর জিম ৫ েহ�েরর কম) কােছ েপৗ�ছেনার ে�ে� �য় িব�েয়র �েণাদনা কতট�কুসফল? Has the RDC project helped you expand your outreach to smallholders as your clients? If so, how many smallholder clients did you have five years ago? And now? RDC �ক��ট িক আপনােক �ু �ধারীেদর আপনার �ােয়� িহসােব িনেয় আসার ে�ে� েকান সহায়তা কেরেছ? Each FGD member: Very successful Reasonable increase No change Mainly bigger farms �িত�ট এফ�জিড সদস�: খুব সফল যু��স�ত বৃ�� পিরবত�ন েনই মূলত বড় খামার Number or percentage increase/decrease সংখ�া বা শতাংশ বৃ�� / �াস C.6 C.6.1 In your opinion, have horizontal links/peer cooperation improved in your value chain? Please provide examples. আপনার মেত, আপনার value chain এ horizontal links/peer cooperation আরও উ�ত হেয়েছ? দয়া কের উদাহরণ িদন। Has RDC played a role in horizontal links improvement? Please describe what role if any? Horizontal links উ�য়েন RDC িক েকান ভ�িমকা পালন কেরেছ? যিদ কের থােক তাহেল েসটা িক? Traders: Input suppliers: Aggregators: Producers: LSP: Loan provider: ব�বসায়ীরা: ইনপুট সরবরাহকারী: সংকলক: উৎপাদনকারী: 101 এলএসিপ: ঋণ সরবরাহকারী: C.7 C.7.1 In your opinion, have vertical links in your value chain improved in the last five years? Please provide examples. আপনার মেত, আপনার value chain এ vertical links গত ৫ বছের িক উ�ত হেয়েছ? দয়া কের উদাহরণ িদন। Has RDC played a role in improvement of the vertical links in your value chain? Please describe what role if any. Vertical links উ�য়েন RDC িক েকান ভ�িমকা পালন কেরেছ? যিদ কের থােক তাহেল েসটা িক? Traders: Input suppliers: Aggregators: Producers: LSP: Loan provider: ব�বসায়ীরা: ইনপুট সরবরাহকারী: সংকলক: উৎপাদনকারী: এলএসিপ: ঋণ সরবরাহকারী: C.8 C.8.1 Do you have a contract with next-level buyers? আপিন িক কখনও উপেরর েলেভেলর বায়ারেদর সােথ েযাগােযাগ কেরেছন? Do you have a formal contract to collect or sell your products to farmers/companies? আপনার িক কৃ ষক বা েকান েকা�ািনর সােথ পন� সং�হ বা িব�য় সং�া� আনু�ািনক চ��� হেয়েছ? Yes/No হ�াঁনা Yes/No হ�াঁনা C.9 C.10 For traders/millers: Where and how do you collect farm produce? ব�বসায়ী / িমলারেদর জন�ঃ েকাথায় এবং িকভােব আপিন পন� সং�হ কেরন? Has there been any change in how and where you collected produce in the last five years? আপিন েযভােব এবং েযখান েথেক পন� সং�হ কেরন, গত ৫ বছের িক েসখােন েকান পিরবত�ন এেসেছ? Directly from farmgate Aggregation/farm centers Traders Other সরাসির ফাম �েগট েথেক সম�� / খামার েক��িল ব�বসায়ীরা অন�ান� 102 C.11 Have you received any financial services/new loans in the last five years? From whom and how did it help your business? আপিন িক গত ৫ বছের েকান আিথ �ক েসবা/নত� ন ঋণ �হন কেরেছন? If you received loans, were any due to RDC support? যিদ েলান িনেয় থােকন, তাহেল েসখােন িক RDC’র েকান সহায়তা িছল? Banks; MFIs; Local loan providers; Neighbors Family Expanded client base Bought more produce/inputs/service/tools; Bought equipment/machinery Used for family needs Other ব�াংক; এমএফআই; �ানীয় ঋণ সরবরাহকারী; �িতেবশী পিরবার �ােয়� েবস বাড়ােনা আরও পণ� / ইনপুট / পিরেষবা / সর�াম িকেনেছন; সর�াম / য�পািত িকেনেছন পিরবােরর �েয়াজেন ব�ব�ত হয় অন�ান� EQ 4. Market Accelerator Fund (MAF). How successful has the activity been in using the Market Accelerator Fund to support the activity’s objectives and address targeted market system constraints. EQ 4. Market Accelerator Fund (MAF). ��য়াকলােপর ল���িল এবং ল��যু� বাজার ব�ব�ার সীমাব�তা�িল েমাকােবলায় MAF এর তহিবল ব�বহার করেত কতটা সফল হেয়েছ। D.1 Have you heard of or participated in the RDC Project’s Market Accelerator Fund (MAF) or Market Accelerator Program (MAP)? If yes, how did you hear of it? Have you participated and, if so, what role have you played? আপিন িক RDC �েজে�র Market Accelerator Fund (MAF) অথবা Market Accelerator Program (MAP) কথা �েনেছন বা এেত অংশ িনেয়েছন? যিদ িনেয় থােকন, আপিন েকাথা েথেক �েনেছন এবং িক দািয়ে� িছেলন? Field Day Information campaign Training Received/Read Invitation for Applications/Request for Proposals by phone/in the local newspaper I am a private partner in MAF/MAP I applied but was not successful I applied and received a grant I have business with a company who is MAF private partner/grantee িফ� েড তথ� �চার 103 �িশ�ণ �ানীয় প��কায় েফান �ারা / অ�াি�েকশন�িলর জন� আেবদন�িলর জন� অনুেরাধ / অনুেরােধর পড়ু ন / পড়ু ন আিম এমএএফ / এমএিপ-র এক�ট ব���গত অংশীদার আিম আেবদন কেরিছ িক� সফল হই িন আিম আেবদন এবং এক�ট অনুদান েপেয়িছ এমএএেফর ব���গত অংশীদার / অনুদানকারী এক�ট সং�ার সােথ আমার ব�বসা রেয়েছ D.2 D.2.1 If you are a MAF participant, how would you describe the objectives and operation of this program? আপিন যিদ MAF এর অংশ�হনকারী হন, আপিন িকভােব এই ে�া�ােমর উে�শ� এবং কায �াবলী বণ �না করেবন? How has MAF resulted in changes from your usual operations? Who are the beneficiaries and what are the benefits of your involvement? MAF িকভােব আপনার গতানুগিতক কাজেক পিরবত�ন কেরেছ? কারা এটার সুিবধা পাে� এবং আপনার যু� হওয়ার মাধ�েম আপিন িকভােব লাভবান হে�ন? Market linkages Access to new products New clients (who?) New/improved products New market incentives Better sales/margins Other বাজার সংেযাগ নত� ন পণ� অ�াে�স নত� ন �ােয়� (েক?) নত� ন / উ�ত পণ� নত� ন বাজার উত্ সাহ ভাল িব�য় / মা�জ�ন অন�ান� D.3 Have you received any training as part of MAF/MAP? If so, please specify. আপিন িক MAF/MAP এর অংশ িহেসেব েকান �িশ�ন েপেয়েছন? যিদ েপেয় থােকন, তাহেল েসটা িক? Sales Franchise Client information management Business planning Promotion services Contract management Reporting 104 Other িব�য় েভাটািধকার �ােয়� তথ� পিরচালনা ব�বসািয়ক পিরক�না �চার েসবা চ��� ব�ব�াপনা িরেপা�ট�ং অন�ান� D.4 Over the past 5 years, have you enjoyed improved access to bigger buyers, producers, manufacturers, suppliers, exporters due to MAF/MAP? Please specify why and how. গত ৫ বছের, আপনার িক MAF/MAP এর কারেন বড় বায়ার, উৎপাদক, িনম �াতা, পিরেবশক, রফতািনকারক এেদর সােথ সহজ েযাগােযাগ করেত পারাটা ভাল েলেগেছ? বলুন েকন এবং িকভােব? Traders: Input suppliers: Aggregators: Producers: LSP: Loan providers: ব�বসায়ীরা: ইনপুট সরবরাহকারী: সংকলক: উৎপাদনকারী: এলএসিপ: ঋণ সরবরাহকারী: D.5 D.5.1 Have you been reporting your clients and business data to MAF or your MAF participant partner? আপিন আপনার �ােয়� এবং ব�বসািয়ক তথ� MAF বা MAF এর েকান পাট�নােরর সােথ েশয়ার কেরেছন? If you have been reporting, how did you find the reporting requirements? যিদ কের থােকন, িকভােব েশয়ার করেত হয় এটা েকাথা েথেক েপেয়িছেলন? Yes/No হ�াঁনা Sufficient Yes/No Reasonable Yes/No Excessive Yes/No 105 পয �া� হ�াঁ/ না যু��স�ত হ�াঁ/ না অিতির� হ�াঁ/ না D.6 Overall, do you find the MAF program successful? Please specify what are the key successes and/or lessons learned based on your participation experience. সব �সাকু েল�, আপিন িক েদেখন েয MAF ে�া�ামটা সফল? অংশ�হেনর অিভ�তা েথেক িক ধরেনর সফলতা বা িশ�া আপিন েদেখেছন? Traders: Input suppliers: Aggregators: Producers: LSP: Loan providers: ব�বসায়ীরা: ইনপুট সরবরাহকারী: সংকলক: উৎপাদনকারী: এলএসিপ: ঋণ সরবরাহকারী: D.7 What products or services have you received due to your participation in MAF? িক ধরেনর পন� বা েসবা আপিন MAP েত অংশ�হেনর জন� েপেয়েছন? Farm management advice/training Product training Branding Sales and marketing training Franchising Mechanization Financial services/loan ICT Other খামার পিরচালনার পরামশ �/ �িশ�ণ পণ� �িশ�ণ ��া��ং িব�য় এবং িবপণন �িশ�ণ ��া�াই�জং 106 যাি�কীকরণ আিথ �ক পিরেষবা / ঋণ আইিস�ট অন�ান� EQ5. How successful has the activity been in identifying the determinants of positive or negative nutritional behaviors and determining the best entry points for integrating nutrition-sensitive activities? EQ5. ইিতবাচক বা েনিতবাচক পু�� আচরেণর িনণ �য়কারীেদর সনা�করণ এবং পু��-সংেবদনশীল কারযকলাপ�িলেক সংহত করার জন� েসরা �েবেশর পেয়��িল িনধ �ারেণ কায �কলাপ�ট কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? E.1 How would you rate the situation as related to food security and nutrition within your family, friends and business associates and community? Has there been any change over the past 5 years? খাদ� িনরাপ�া বা পু��র ে�ে� আপিন আপনার পিরবার, �জন এবং ব�বসািয়ক সহেযাগী ও স�দায়েক িকভােব েদেখন? গত ৫ বছের িক েকানও পিরবত�ন হেয়েছ? Good Reasonable Some food insecurity Not optimally balance diets (families, women, youth) ভাল যু��যু� িকছ�খাদ� িনরাপ�াহীনতা উপযু� ভারসাম�হীন খাদ�তািলকা (পিরবার, মিহলা, যুবক) E.2 Are most of your clients subsistence farmers? If so, how does this fact impact your business? আপনার �ােয়� এর েবশীরভােগর জীিবকা িক কৃ িষ? যিদ হয়, এটা িকভােব আপনার ব�বসায় �ভাব েফলেছ? E.3 E.3.1 Are you involved in zinc rice production, consumption, sales, or distribution? আপিন িক �জ� ধান উৎপাদন, খাওয়া, িব�� বা পিরেবশেনর সােথ যু�? What have been the dynamics of the zinc rice demand in the last five years and why? গত ৫ বছের িক �জ� ধােনর চািহদায় িক ধরেনর গিত এেসেছ? েকন? Yes/No হ�াঁনা Increased Decreased No change েবেড়েছ �াস েপেয়েছ পিরবত�ন েনই 107 E.3 Do you think demand has driven a change in the nutritional value of the crops marketed in your area of operation during the last five years? If so, which crops and what has been the impact? আপিন িক মেন কেরন গত ৫ বছের চািহদা আপনার এলাকায় েয ধরেনর শস� বাজাের যায় তার পু��মােন েকান পিরবত�ন এেনেছ? যিদ হয়, িক পন� এবং িক ধরেনর �ভাব েফেলেছ? Share of high nutrition value crop___ has increased because of 1) changed nutrition patterns; 2) price; 3) access to inputs/services; 3) other Share of high nutrition value crop ____has decreased because of 1) changed nutrition patterns; 2) price; 3) access to inputs/services; 3) other No change উ� পু��মােনর ফসল ভােগর ভাগ বৃ�� েপেয়েছ ১) পু��র ধরেণর পিরবত�েনর কারেণ; ২) দাম; ৩) ইনপুট / পিরেষবা অ�াে�স; ৪) অন�ান� উ� পু��মােনর ফসেলর ভাগ ____ এর কারেণ �াস েপেয়েছ ১) পু��র ধরেণর পিরবত�ন হেয়েছ; ২) দাম; ৩) ইনপুট / পিরেষবা অ�াে�স; ৪) অন�ান� পিরবত�ন েনই E.4 Have you participated in any nutrition and food security promotion programs or events organized by the RDC activity? Please specify the program, event, and your role. আপিন িক পু�� এবং খাদ� িনরাপ�া সং�া� েকান ে�া�ােম বা RDC activity �ারা সংগ�ঠত েকান event এ অংশ�হণ কেরেছন? ে�া�াম বা event এবং আপনার দািয়� স�েক�বলুন Event, year ইেভ�, বছর E.5 Do you believe RDC interventions have had an impact on crops being produced and marketed within your area of operations? Have RDC interventions had a positive impact on food security/nutrition behaviors in your area of operations? How about within your own family and community? আপিন িক িব�াস কেরন েয, RDC’র হ�ে�প আপনার কম � এলাকার মেধ� উত্পািদত এবং বাজারজাত করা ফসেলর উপর �ভাব েফেলেছ? আপনার কাজকেম �র ে�ে� RDC’র হ�ে�প িক খাদ� সুর�া / পু�� আচরণ�িলেত ইিতবাচক �ভাব েফেলেছ? আপনার িনেজর পিরবার এবং স�দােয়র মেধ� কীভােব কেরেছ? Please describe. অনু�হ কের বণ �না ক�ন. 108 E.6 Do you think crops and food products with high nutritional value could be beneficial for the improved success of your business? আপিন িক মেন কেরন উ� পু��মান স�ন� পন� এবং খাদ� আপনার ব�বসার সাফল� বৃ��েত সহায়তা করেত পাের? EQ6. How successful has the Rice and Diversified Crops Activity been in effectively integrating gender considerations and ensure equitable access for women, increase female engagement and empowerment, and promote women entrepreneurs? EQ6.ধান এবং িবিবধ ফসেলর ��য়াকলাপ কায �করভােব নারীেদর জন� ন�ায়স�ত অ�াে�স িন��ত করেত, নারীেদর জিড়ত হওয়া এবং �মতায়ন বৃ�� এবং নারী উেদ�া�ােদর �চাের কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? F.1 Do you have any women and youth clients? Has the number of your women and youth clients changed in the last five years? আপনার িক েকান নারী বা ত�ণ �ােয়� আেছ? গত ৫ বছের িক মিহলা বা ত�ণ �ােয়�এর সংখ�ায় েকান পিরবত�ন এেসেছ? Yes/No Increased Remained the same Decreased হ�াঁনা েবেড়েছ একই রকম থাকা �াস েপেয়েছ F.2 F.2.1 Do you see any potential of your business improving due to an increase in women involvement? আপিন িক আপনার ব�বসায় নারী যু� হওয়ার কারেন েকান উে�খেযাগ� উ�িত েদেখন? Are there obstacles to increased involvement of women in your operations? নারী যু� হওয়ার ে�ে� িক ধরেনর বাধা আেস? Yes No Cultural/traditional Education Business/negotiation skills Family obligations Hard physical work হ�াঁ না সাং�ৃিতক / ঐিতহ�বাহী িশ�া ব�বসায় / আেলাচনার দ�তা পািরবািরক বাধ�বাধকতা কেঠার শারীিরক পির�ম 109 F.3 Have you participated in any women empowerment programs as part of RDC project? Please specify. আপিন িক RDC �কে�র অংশ িহেসেব নারীর �মতায়ন সং�া� েকান �েজে� অংশ�হণ কেরেছন? Yes/No হ�াঁ/না F.4 F.4.1 What do you do to involve women in your business, as workers, business managers, clients? আপিন আপনার ব�বসায় কম�, ব�ব�াপক অথবা �ােয়� িহেসেব নারী অ�ভ��� করেত চাইেল িক করেবন? How many women and youth are involved in your operations now? Five years ago? িক পিরমান নারী বা ত�ণ আপনার কােজর সােথ যু� আেছ? ৫ বছর আেগ কতজন িছল? Number সংখ�া F.5 In your opinion, has RDC project succeeded in women empowerment and improving their roles and access to markets? If so, how? আপনার মেত, RDC �ক��ট িক নারীর �মতায়েন এবং তােদর ভূ িমকা উ�ত করেত এবং বাজাের অ�াে�েস সফল হেয়েছ? যিদ হয়, িকভােব? Women-to-women business Women-targeted training and promotion Women finance schemes Awareness campaigns Diversity trainings Other নারী েথেক নারী ব�বসা নারী ল��যু� �িশ�ণ এবং �চার নারী িফনা� ি�ম সেচতনতা �চার ৈবিচ�� �িশ�ণ অন�ান� 110 EQ7. How effective has the activity’s MEL approach and tools been in measuring market system change? EQ7.1 To what extent can RDC MEL data be reasonably attributed to the Rice and Diversified Crops interventions? What are the trade-offs between using survey data through a "market shed" or "catchment area" approach compared to assisting private sector firms to maintain a comprehensive customer or supplier lists? If the private-sector firms do not or cannot produce a comprehensive customer or supplier list, what impact would this have on USAID's ability to assess the number of beneficiaries attributed to the activity? EQ7.বাজার ব�ব�ার পিরবত�ন পিরমােপ MEL প�িত এবং সর�াম�িল কতটা কায �কর হেয়েছ? EQ7.1 ধান এবং িবিবধ ফসেলর হ�ে�েপ RDC MEL েডটা েকান ে�ে� দায়ী করা েযেত পাের? এক�ট িবিবধ �াহক বা সরবরাহকারী তািলকা�িল বজায় রাখেত েবসরকারী সং�া�িলেক সহায়তা করার ত� লনায় "মােক�ট েশড" বা "ক�াচেম� এিরয়া" প�িতর মাধ�েম জিরেপর তথ� ব�বহােরর মেধ� কী কী বািণজ� রেয়েছ? �াইেভট েস�র সং�া�িল েযখােন �াহক বা সরবরাহকারী তািলকা ৈতির পােরনা, েস ে�ে�, ইউএসএআইিড-র এই কায �কলাপ কী ধরেনর �ভাব েফলেব? G.1 Have you ever been a respondent to the RDC Annual Agricultural Survey? If yes, in what year(s)? Did you have a chance to read the Survey Report? আপিন িক কখনও RDCএর বািষ �ক কৃ িষ জিরেপর অংশ�হন কেরেছন? যিদ কেরন, েকান েকান বছের? আপিন িক জিরপ িরেপাট� পরার েকান সুেযাগ েপেয়েছন? Yes/No 2018, 2019, 2020 হ�াঁনা ২০১৮, ২০১৯, ২০২০ G.2 G.3 Do you believe the questions asked in the Annual Survey helped to measure the impact of the RDC on: 1. Producers 2. Value chain actors If not, what else should be measured? আপিন িক মেন কেরন বািষ �ক জিরেপ েয �� করা হয়, তা RDC েক িন�� িবষয়�িল পিরমােপ সাহায� কের 1. উৎপাদক 2. ভ�ালুেচইন এ�র যিদ এ�লা না হয় তাহেল অন� িক হেত পাের? Yes Somewhat No হ�াঁ িকছ� টা না G.4 If you were involved in the RDC Market Accelerator Program, what did you report? আপিন যিদ RDC মােক�ট এ��লােরটর ে�া�ােম যু� থাকেতন, তাহেল আপিন কী িরেপাট�করেতন? Client numbers, characteristics and locations Client gender Client age Sales by client Impact on end-user yields 111 Crop production areas Impact of improved farm practices on farmers’ income Impact of improved farm practices on sales Impact on your household income Impact on your business income Produce quality Your margins Training/promotion events Other None (did not report) �ােয়� ন�র, ৈবিশ�� এবং অব�ান �ােয়� িল� �ােয়� বয়স �ােয়� �ারা িব�য় েশষ ব�বহারকারীর ফলেনর উপর �ভাব শস� উৎপাদন ে�� কৃ ষেকর আেয়র উপর উ�ত খামার প�িতর �ভাব িব�েয়র উপর উ�ত খামার প�িত�িলর �ভাব আপনার পিরবােরর আেয়র উপর �ভাব আপনার ব�বসােয়র আেয়র উপর �ভাব �ণমান উৎপাদন আপনার মা�জ�ন �িশ�ণ / �চার ইেভ� অন�ান� িকছ� ই নয় (িরেপাট�কেরিন) G.5 Do you believe monitoring and reporting producer data can be useful/relevant to your business? If so, how? Yes No হ�াঁ 112 আপিন িক মেন কেরন েয উৎপাদেকর েডটা পয �েব�ণ এবং িরপরট করা আপনার ব�বসােয়র পে� দরকারী / �াসি�ক হেত পাের? যিদ হয়, িকভােব? না G.6 What additional incentives are needed for lead farmers and other value chain actors to report their activities relative to impacting the income, gender, and food security/nutrition of farmers with whom they are engaged in a business relationship? �থম সািরর কৃ ষক এবং অন�ান� ভ�ালুেচইন এ�র তােদর ব�বসািয়ক স�েক�র সােথ জিড়ত আয়, িল� এবং খাদ� সুর�া / কৃ ষকেদর পু�� �ভািবত করার ত� লনায় তােদর ��য়াকলােপর িরেপার�টং করার জন� কী কী �েণাদনার �েয়াজন? EQ7.2 What are some of the lessons learned and based on lessons learned, what are some scalable interventions/technologies? EQ7.2 পােঠর উপর িভি� কের আপিন িক িক িশেখেছন, িকছ�ে�লেযাগ� হ�ে�প / �যু�� কী কী? H.1 H.1.1 Have you developed any new business models due to the RDC/MAF involvement? If so, please specify/describe. Do any of these models have a high potential of scaling up/expansion? If so, please explain how. আপিন িক RDC/MAF সহেযািগতায় নত� ন ব�বসািয়ক মেডল ৈতির কেরেছন?যিদ কের থােকন তাহেল বণ �না ক�ণ। এই মেডল�িলর মেধ� এমন েকানও িক রেয়েছ যার ে�িলং / �সারেণর উ� স�াবনা রেয়েছ? যিদ থােক তেব দয়া কের কীভােব তা ব�াখ�া ক�ন H.2 Do you believe the new business model you participated in/developed will continue after the RDC Project’s end? আপিন িক িব�াস কেরন েয আপিন েয নত� ন ব�বসািয়ক মেডেল অংশ িনেয়েছন / ৈতির কেরেছন RDC �ক� েশষ হওয়ার পেরও েস�ট চলেব? 113 H.3 Please share any lessons learned from your newfound knowledge/participation in RDC/MAF that you have not yet shared about overall operations, data collection, business models, access to markets, reporting, gender and youth empowerment, grant scheme/MAF, other. দয়া কের আপিন RDC/MAF এ অংশ�হন করার মাধ�েম সামি�ক কাজ, তথ� সং�হ, ব�বসািয়ক মেডল, বাজাের অ�াে�স, িরেপা�ট�ং, িল� এবং যুব �মতায়ন, অনুদান �ক� / MAF, অন�ান� স�িক�ত যা িশেখেছন িক� েশয়ার কেরনিন তা বলুন। Thank you for your valued contribution to this evaluation. এই মূল�ায়েন আপনার মূল�বান অবদােনর জন� আপনােক ধন�বাদ। ফ�ািসিলেটটেরর �া�র ___________________________ তািরখ: _________________________ েরকড�র�েকর �া�র ___________________________ তািরখ: ________________________ 114 Final Performance Evaluation of Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC) Activity Primary Producers Survey Protocol, Guidelines and Questionnaire Target group: Beneficiary Producers �াথিমক উৎপাদক সমী�া ে�ােটাকল, গাইডলাইন এবং ��াবলী ল�� েগা��: সুিবধােভাগী উৎপাদক Date of the Survey: জিরেপর তািরখঃ 1. Survey Protocol and Guide জিরপ ে�ােটাকল এবং গাইড This Agricultural Producer Survey is conducted as part of the final performance evaluation of the Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC) project funded by U.S. Agency for International Aid (USAID). RDC is implemented by ACDI-VOCA in partnership with Bangladeshi agribusiness private companies and local agribusiness operators. The purpose of the RDC project is to increase incomes, leading to improved food security and nutrition of farmers in 22 southern Bangladeshi districts through systemic market changes that promote a diversified farming system based on intensified rice production and the introduction of higher-value, nutrient-rich crops. The objective of this evaluation is to measure the results and the effectiveness of the RDC project to inform future decisions and to identify as well as apply lessons learned from the evaluation to future programming in the region; even if the results were unintended or achieved without direct project involvement. এই কৃ িষ উৎপাদনকারী জিরপ�ট U.S. Agency for International Aid (USAID) এর অথ �ায়েন চাল ও িবিবধ ফসেলর (RDC) �কে�র চূড়া� কম ��মতা মূল�ায়েনর অংশ িহসােব পিরচািলত হয়। আরিডিস ACDI-VOCA কতৃ�ক বাংলােদিশ কৃ িষকাজ েবসরকারী সং�া�িল এবং �ানীয় কৃ িষকাজ অপােরটরেদর সােথ পাট�নারিশেপর মাধ�েম কাজ কের। RDC এর উে�শ� হে� িনিবড় ধােনর উৎপাদন এবং উ�মােনর, পু��কর সমৃ� ফসেলর �বত�েনর উপর িভি� কের প�িতগত বাজার পিরবত�েনর মাধ�েম বাংলােদেশর দি�েনর ২২ েজলার কৃ ষকেদর আয় বাড়ােনা, উ�ত খাদ� সুর�া এবং পু�� িন��ত করা। এই মূল�ায়েনর উে�শ��ট হে� ভিবষ�েতর িস�া��িল অবিহত করার জন� RDC �কে�র ফলাফল�িল এবং কায �কািরতা পিরমাপ করা এবং অ�ল�টেত ভিবষ�েতর ে�া�ািমংেয় মূল�ায়ন েথেক েশখা পাঠ�িল সনা�করেণর পাশাপািশ সনা�করণ; এমনিক যিদ ফলাফল িনধ �ািরত হয় বা সরাসির �কে� জিড়ত না হেয় অ�জ�ত হয়। Confidentiality and Consent This survey is independently conducted by BMEL, on behalf of USAID. You have been selected for participation in this survey as an agricultural producer operating in this area and we would appreciate your opinion on any changes in your operations in the last five-six years, irrespective of whether you were a direct participant in this project or not. েগাপনীয়তা এবং স�িত এই সমী�া�ট USAID -র প� েথেক িবএমইএল �াধীনভােব পিরচালনা কের। আপিন এই অ�েল পিরচািলত কৃ িষ উত্পাদক িহসােব এই সমী�ায় অংশ েনওয়ার জন� আপনােক িনব �ািচত করা হেয়েছ এবং আমরা এই �কে� �ত�� অংশ�হণকারী িছেলন বা না িছেলন আমরা গত পাঁচ-ছয় বছের আপনার কায ��েমর েয েকানও পিরবত�ন স�েক� আপনার মতামেতর �শংসা করব । 115 Scenario 1: Self-administered survey (answered by e-mail or fax) Your participation is voluntary. There are no right or wrong answers. Please express your frank opinion openly. All individual responses will be treated in total confidentiality. The results of this survey will be aggregated across all respondents. ধরন ১: �-�শািসত জিরপ (ইেমল বা ফ�া� �ারা উ�র) আপনার অংশ�হণ ে��ােসবী। এর েকােনা স�ঠক অথবা ভ�ল উ�র েনই. আপনার েখালােমলা মতামত �কােশ� �কাশ ক�ন। সম� ব���গত �িত��য়া স�ূণ �েগাপনীয়তার সােথ িবেবচনা করা হেব। সম� উ�রদাতােদর এক��ত উ�র �ারা এই জিরেপর ফলাফল�িল িনণ �য় করা হেব। If any of the survey question are irrelevant to your situation, please respond ‘not applicable’ and move on to the next question. In multiple-choice questions, please select all that are applicable to you. In case the entire crops/section are irrelevant to your production, simply skip and proceed with the relevant crop/section. If you have any questions, please contact ____ at ___ (phone, e-mail, app). Thank you in advance for your valued contributions to this survey. জিরেপর েকানও �� যিদ আপনার পিরি�িতর সােথ স�িক�ত না হয় তেব দয়া কের ‘�েযাজ� নয়’ সাড়া িদন এবং পরবত� �ে�র িদেক এিগেয় যান। একািধক-পছ�মূলক �ে�, আপনার জন� �েযাজ� সম� িনব �াচন ক�ন। যিদ পুেরা ফসল / িবভাগ আপনার উত্পাদেনর সােথ অ�াসি�ক হয় তেব েকবল এিড়েয় যান এবং �াসি�ক ফসল / িবভাগ�ট িনেয় এিগেয় যান। যিদ আপনার েকান �� থােক তাহেল _____ এর সােথ _______ না�াের েযাগােযাগ ক�ন। এই জিরেপ আপনার অবদােনর জন� অি�ম ধন�বাদ। Scenario 2. Surveys administered in person or by phone ধরন ২. সােভ��িল ব���গতভােব বা েফােন পিরচািলত This survey is independently conducted by BMEL, on behalf of USAID. You have been selected for participation in this survey as an agricultural producer operating in this area and we would appreciate your opinion on any changes in your operations in the last five-six years, irrespective of whether you were a direct participant in this project or not. এই সমী�া�ট USAID -র প� েথেক িবএমইএল �াধীনভােব পিরচালনা কের। আপিন এই অ�েল পিরচািলত কৃ িষ উত্পাদক িহসােব এই সমী�ায় অংশ েনওয়ার জন� আপনােক িনব �ািচত করা হেয়েছ এবং আমরা এই �কে� �ত�� অংশ�হণকারী িছেলন বা না িছেলন আমরা গত পাঁচ-ছয় বছের আপনার কায ��েমর েয েকানও পিরবত�ন স�েক� আপনার মতামেতর �শংসা করব । Your participation in this interview is voluntary. We encourage you to be as candid as possible. Your answers will be kept confidential; we will not use your name or title in our report. If there are any questions that you prefer not to answer just let us know and we will skip them. With your permission, we would like to audio record this discussion to ensure that we accurately reflect your responses. This recording will be kept confidential. Do we have your consent to record? Do you have any questions before we begin? It will take approximately 60 minutes to complete this meeting. If you agree, we can start the administration of the questionnaire? এই সা�াত্কাের আপনার অংশ�হণ ে��ােসবী। আমরা আপনােক যথাস�ব খাঁ�ট হেত উত্ সািহত কির। আপনার উ�র�িল েগাপন রাখা হেব; আমরা আমােদর �িতেবদেন আপনার নাম বা িশেরানাম ব�বহার করব না। যিদ এমন েকানও �� থােক যা আপিন উ�র িদেত পছ� কেরন না তেব েকবল আমােদর জানান এবং আমরা েস�িল এিড়েয় যাব। আপনার অনুমিত িনেয়, আমরা আপনার �িত��য়া�িল িনভ��লভােব �িতফিলত কির তা িন��ত করেত আমরা এই আেলাচনা�ট অিডও েরকড�করেত চাই। এই েরকিড�ং েগাপন রাখা হেব। আমােদর েরকড�করেত স�িত আেছ? 116 আমরা �� করার আেগ আপনার েকান �� আেছ? এই সভা�ট েশষ করেত �ায় 60 িমিনট সময় লাগেব। আপিন যিদ স�ত হন তেব আমরা ��াবলীর �শাসন �� করেত পাির? Thank you in advance for your valued contributions to this survey. ক�ন। এই জিরেপ আপনার অবদােনর জন� অি�ম ধন�বাদ। তািরখ: �ান উপেজলা েজলা অংশ�হণকারীর নাম (optional) িল� বয়স িশ�া Participant category অংশ�হণকারীর ধরন ১.কৃ ষক / উৎপাদক ২.অন�ান� (কৃ িষকাজ ছাড়াও অন� ব�বসায় জিড়ত থাকেল): ইনপুট সরবরাহকারী সম��িবদ ব�বসায়ী িমলার যাি�ক পিরেষবা সমূহ ঋণ সরবরাহকারী অন�ান� �া�র জিরপ পিরচালেকর নাম এবং পদবী (যিদ েফান �ারা বা ব���গতভােব পিরচািলত হয়) 2. General Information of the Respondent উ�রদাতােদর সাধারণ তথ� 1. নাম: 2. বয়স: 3. িল�: 4. িশ�াগত েযাগ�তা: �ধুসা�র করেত পাের / �াথিমক / মাধ�িমক / তৃতীয় পয �ােয়র িশ�া 5. পিরবােরর সদস� সংখ�া: 6. ফসল কাটা / কৃ িষকােজ আপনার ভূ িমকা: a) HH এর �ধান এবং মুল কৃ ষক b) HH এর �ধান নয় িক� মুল কৃ ষক c) মুল কৃ ষকেক সহায়তা দানকারী কৃ ষক 7. আপিন িক Rice and Diversified Crops (RDC)�কে�র কােজর সােথ পিরিচত? 117 a) না b) হ�াঁ 8. যিদ �েযাজ� হয়,আপিন আরিডিসর সােথ কীভােব পিরিচত তা িনিদ�� ক�ন? (�েযাজ� ে�ে� িনব �াচন ক�ন) Heard from friends, family, or neighbors. ব�ু, পিরবার বা �িতেবশীেদর কাছ েথেক �েনিছ Read in the news খবের পেড়িছ Received promotional information from RDC or its private partners RDC বা এর ব���গত পাট�নারেদর কাছ েথেক �চারমূলক তথ� েপেয়িছ Participated in the RDC-sponsored field day RDC ��র কেরেছ আমন িফ� েড েত অংশ�হন কেরিছ Participated as a respondent in the RDC Annual Survey RDC এর বািষ �ক জিরেপ উ�রদাতা িহেসেব অংশ�হন কেরিছ Participated in training provided by RDC or its private partners RDC বা এর ব���গত পাট�নারেদর ে�ইিনং এ অংশ�হন কেরিছ Learned about RDC through dealers িডলারেদর কাছ েথেক RDC �মে� েজেনিছ Learned about RDC through retailers িরেটইলারেদর কাছ েথেক RDC �মে� েজেনিছ Provided services/advice to other farmers and market actors within the RDC project, e.g., as a lead farmer or contractor. RDC �কে�র মেধ� অন�ান� কৃ ষকেদর এবং বাজােরর েলাকজনেক পিরেষবা / পরামশ ��দান কেরেছন। েযমন একজন �ধান কৃ ষক বা �ঠকাদার িহসােব Received direct support from the RDC Project (inputs, sales, advice, finance, other). RDC �কে�র সরাসির সমথ �ন েপেয়িছ (ইনপুট, িব�য়, পরামশ �, অথ �, অন�ান� ) অন�ান� (উে�খ ক�ন)_____________________________________________ 118 3. Core Survey Questions মুল জিরপ �� EQ1. To what extent has the Rice and Diversified Crops activity been successful in achieving its Intermediate Result 1: “Increased Farm Productivity”? EQ1. ধান এবং িবিবধ ফসেলর এি�িভ�ট তার মধ�বত� ফলাফল 1 " Increased Farm Productivity " অজ�েন কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? 1. What is your overall cropping area, in Hectares (Ha). Please include all area operated last year, owned or leased. Please express land unit as decimal to avoid confusion): _________Ha আপনার শস� েখেতর পিরমান কত েহ�র। িনেজর বা িলজ েনয়া সহ গত বছর েমাট কত িছল? (িব�াি� এড়ােত দশিমক সহ পিরমান িলখুন)___________ েহঃ 2. Of your total cropping area, you own ____________ Ha; you lease ______ Ha আপনার েমাট েখেতর মেধ� িনেজর জিমর পিরমান ________ েহঃ; িলজ িনেয়েছন _________ েহঃ 3. What crops have you produced in the last 5 years? (Specify all that apply) গত ৫ বছের আপিন িক িক শস� উৎপাদন কেরেছন? (�েযাজ� সমূহ উে�খ ক�ন) Name of the crops শেস�র নাম Area under the crop last year (% of operated land) গত বছের জিমর পিরমান ( েমাট জিমর কত শতাংশ) Why are you growing this crop? (e.g. traditional, inputs price, sales price, climate change, export potential, other) আপিন েকন শস� ফলান? (েযমন- �থাগত, ইনপুট মূল�, িব�য় মূল�, জলবায়ুপিরবত�ন, রফতািন স�াবনা, অন�ান�,) ধান 1. 2. গম 3. 4. ভ��া 5. 6. পাট 7. 8. ডাল 9. 10. েতলবীজ 11. 12. সবজী 13. 14. অন�ান� (উে�খ ক�ন): _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ 15. 16. 119 4. What are your annual cropping sequences? (Check off all that apply.) আপনার বািষ �ক �িপং �ম িক িক? (�েযাজ� সমূহ েচক ক�ন) �িমক খািরফ-১ (আউশ ধােনর েমৗসুেমর সমমান) খািরফ-২ (আমন ধান েরাপেনর েমৗসুেমর সমমান) রিব (েবােরা ধােনর েমৗসুেমর সমমান) গত বছেরর �মানুসাের অ�ল (পিরচািলত জিমর %) এই �ম�ট অনুসরণ করা হেয়েছ এমন বছেরর সংখ�া 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 5. Have you changed any cropping patterns in last 4 years (i.e., new types of crops or varieties)? আপিন িক গত ৪ বছের আপনার �িপং এর ধরন পিরবত�ন কেরেছন (েযমন- নত� ন েকান শস� বা ধরন)? 1. হ�াঁ 2. না 6. If yes, what type of new crops/varieties have you been cultivating (please specify): যিদ হ�াঁহয়, িক ধরেনর নত� ন শস� বা ধরন আপিন চাষ কেরেছন (উে�খ ক�ন)? শস�/ধরন-১ ________________________________________________________________ শস�/ধরন-২ ________________________________________________________________ শস�/ধরন-৩ ________________________________________________________________ শস�/ধরন-৪ ________________________________________________________________ 7. Have you introduced new crops/varieties directly due to RDC support or as a result of recommendations from input providers, consultants, or extension services? আপিন নত� ন শস� বা ধরন �� কেরেছন RDC সহায়তা করার জেন� অথবা ইনপুট সবরাহকারীেদর পরামেশ � নািক অন� েকান বিধ �ত েসবা? 1. Yes 2. No 8. If answer to the previous question is yes, please specify what crops/varieties you introduced due to the RDC Project or as a result of recommendations from input providers, consultants, or extension services? In addition, who provided recommendations leading to you producing new crops/varieties? যিদ পূব �বত� �ে�র উ�র হ�াঁহেয় থােক, দয়া কের িক ধরেনর শস�/ধরন িনেয় আপিন কাজ কেরেছন? সােথ আপিন েকাথা েথেক শস�/ধরন িনেয় কাজ করার পরামশ �েপেয়েছন? শস�/ধরন-১ ________________________________________________________________ শস�/ধরন-২ ________________________________________________________________ 120 শস�/ধরন-৩ ________________________________________________________________ শস�/ধরন-৪ ________________________________________________________________ The questions below are specific to the crops for which the respondent is targeted for survey. The crops of interest: Rice / Groundnut / Maize / Mung bean / Sesame / Sunflower. নীেচর ���িল িনিদ�� িকছ�ফসেলর জন� উ�রদাতােক সমী�ার জন� িনব �াচন করা হেয়েছ। আ�েহর ফসল: ধান / িচনাবাদাম / ভ��া / মুগিবন / িতল / সূয �মুখী। Skip the crops that are not relevant to the respondent. যিদ উ�রদাতার সােথ ফসল্গূেলার স�ৃ�তা না থােক তাহেল বাদ িদেয় যান 9. Please check off the crops you are currently/most recently involved growing and crops you grew five years ago. দয়া কের আপিন বত�মােন/খুব স�িত েয ধরেনর শস� উৎপাদন কেরন এবং ৫ বছর আেগ যা করেতন তা �টক িদন শস�/ শস� ধরন বত�মান/গত বছর পাঁচ বছর আেগ �ানীয় ধরেনর ধান HYV েমাটা ধান ভাল মােনর ধান সুগ�ী টাইপ ধান হাইি�ড ধান িচনাবাদাম ভ��া মুগ ডাল িতল সূয �মুখী 10. What are your most recent yields for these crops as compared to five years ago? If yields have changed, explain why. ________________________________________________________ পাঁচ বছর আেগর ত� লনায় এই ফসেলর জন� আপনার সা�িতক ফলন কী? যিদ ফলন পিরবত�ন হেয় থােক তাহেল ব�াখ�া ক�ন েকন?________________________________________________________ ধােনর ধরন / শস� ধরন বত�মান/গত বছর (েমঃটন/েহঃ) পাঁচ বছর আেগ (েমঃটন/েহঃ) �ানীয় ধরেনর ধান HYV েমাটা ধান 121 ভাল মােনর ধান সুগ�ী টাইপ ধান হাইি�ড ধান িচনাবাদাম ভ��া মুগ ডাল িতল সূয �মুখী 11. Have you recorded any changes in your margin and sales performance in the last five years, per crop/variety? (no change = 0; increase +%; decrease -%). If margins and/or sales performance has changed, explain why. _____________________________________________ আপিন গত পাঁচ বছের শস�/ধরেন আপনার মা�জ�ন এবং িব�েয়র েকানও পিরবত�ন েরকড�কেরেছন? (পিরবত�ন নাই = 0; বাড়েল +%; কমেল -%) যিদ মা�জ�ন বা িব�য় পিরবত�ন হেয় থােক তাহেল ব�াখ�া ক�ন েকন?_____________________ ধােনর ধরণ / শস� ধরণ বািষ �ক িব��, +/-% মা�জ�ন (লাভ), +/-% �ানীয় ধরেনর ধান HYV েমাটা ধান ভাল মােনর ধান সুগ�ী টাইপ ধান হাইি�ড ধান িচনাবাদাম ভ��া মুগ ডাল িতল সূয �মুখী 12. Has there been any change in the share of internal consumption of the crop/s produced by you? (No change = 0; increase +%; decrease -%). If so, explain why the change has occurred:_________________________________________________________________ 122 আপনার �ারা উৎপািদত ফসল (�িল)েত অভ��রীণ খরেচর েকানও পিরবত�ন হেয়েছ?? (পিরবত�ন নাই = 0; বাড়েল +%; কমেল -%). যিদ হেয় থােক ব�াখ�া ক�ন েকন? _________________________________________________________________ ধােনর ধরন / শস� ধরণ বত�মান /গত, +/-% পাঁচ বছর আেগ, +/-% �ানীয় ধরেনর ধান HYV েমাটা ধান ভাল মােনর ধান সুগ�ী টাইপ ধান হাইি�ড ধান িচনাবাদাম ভ��া মুগ ডাল িতল সূয �মুখী 13. Have you introduced or improved any crop management practices? (Specify for all that apply.) If so, please explain what led to the decision(s) to make changes. ____________________________. আপিন শস� পিরচালনায় নত� ন/উ�ত েকান িনয়ম িক চালুকেরেছন? (�েযাজ� সমূহ িলখুন)। যিদ হয়, দয়া কের িস�া� পিরবত�েন েকান ব�াপার�ট দায়ী িছল ব�াখ�া ক�ন. ____________________________ সাব-েস�র ম�ােনজেম� ইউিনট বত�মান পাঁচ বছর আেগ উ�ত বীজ কম �ে�ে�র কত % উ�ত ফসল সুর�া কম �ে�ে�র কত % গৃহীত যাি�কীকরণ কম �ে�ে�র কত % উ�ত ���য়াজাতকরণ উৎপাদেনর কত % ভাল িবপণন উৎপাদেনর কত % 14. What are the reasons for changes in your crop management practices, and have these changes produced the expected results in the last 5 years? (Check off all that apply.) আপনার শস� পিরচালনায় পিরবরতেনর কারন িক িছল এবং এই পিরবত�ন িক গত পাচ বছের আপনার উৎপাদেন আশানু�প পিরবত�ন এেনেছ? (�েযাজ� সমূহ িলখুন) 123 ফ�া�র কারণসমূহ ফলাফল অনুকূ ল জলবায়ু/ জলবায়ুপিরবত�ন ইনপুট ব�য় �াস সহজলভ� ইনপুট নত� ন পাট�নারিশপ উ�ত িবতরণ চ�ােনল ভাল মুল� অথ �সহজলভ�তা অন�ান� (উে�খ ক�ন) 15. From where have you acquired inputs for crop production for the last 5 years? (Check off all that apply.) গত পাঁচ বছের শস� উৎপাদেন কােদর কাছ েথেক ইনপুট উপকরন েপেয়েছন? (�েযাজ� সমূহ �টক িদন) উৎস ইনপুট অ�াে�স করা হেয়েছ বীজ সার কৃ িষ রাসায়িনক িনজ �িতেবশী ইনপুট িডলার চ���ব� সং�া (ঐ��ক: েকা�ািনর নাম) অন�ান� (উে�খ ক�ন) 16. What services have you received in the last 5 years? (Check off all that apply.) গত পাঁচ বছের িক ধরেনর েসবা আপিন েপেয়েছন? (�েযাজ� সমূহ �টক িদন) কৃ িষ অথ �নীিত উপেদ�া যাি�কীকরণ সম�� ���য়াজাতকরণ 124 বাজারজাতকরন/িব�� আিথ �ক আইিস�ট (উদাঃ েমাবাইল িব�য় / পরামশ �/ �চার পিরেষবািদ) অন�ান� (উে�খ ক�ন) ____________________________________________ 17. What are the sources of the services you have received in the last 5 years? (Select all that apply.) গত পাঁচ বছের �া� েসবা সমুেহর উৎস িক িছল? (�েযাজ� সমূহ বাছাই ক�ন) Your father or male relative আপনার বাবা বা পু�ষ আ�ীয় Your mother or female relative আপনার মা বা মিহলা আ�ীয় Your neighbor আপনার �িতেবশী Farmer group you belong to আপনার িনেজর পিরবােরর সদস� Input dealers ইনপুট িডলার Government agriculture officer (“Krishi officer”) সরকারী কৃ িষ অিফসার Company representatives you purchase products from েয েকা�ািন েথেক পন� িকেনেছন তার �িতিনিধ Millers/processors িমলার/ ���য়াকারী Buyers ে�তা Local service providers, e.g., mechanization �ানীয় েসবা সরবরাহকারী, েযমন-যাি�কীকরণ Bank agents or Micro-finance Institution (MFI) you receive loans from ব�াংক এেজ� বা মাইে�া িফনা� ইনি��টউশন (এমএফআই) েথেক আপিন ঋণ �হণ কেরেছন 125 You are a champion on your own and you do not need external advice আপিন িনেজই �য়ংস�ূণ �এবং বাইেরর কােরা িনেদ�শনা দরকার েনই Other (please specify) __________________________________________________ অন�ান� (উে�খ ক�ন) ____________________________________________ EQ 2. How successful has the activity been in collaborating with the CSISA-Mechanization activity to strengthen access to machinery and tools through expanded commercial outreach of machinery manufacturers, dealers, and local service providers? EQ 2.য�পািত িনম �াতারা, িডলার এবং �ানীয় পিরেষবা সরবরাহকারীেদর িবস্তৃত বািণ�জ�ক �চােরর মাধ�েম য�পািত ও সর�াম�িলেত অ�াে�স েজারদার করেত িসএসআইএসএ-েমকানাইেজশন এি�িভ�ট কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? 18. To what degree has your use of mechanized farming changed in the last five years? (Select all that apply.) গত পাঁচ বছের আপনার য� ব�বহােরর িক ধরেনর পিরবত�ন হেয়েছ? (�েযাজ� সমূহ িনব �াচন ক�ন) I have not used any machinery আিম েকান য� ব�বহার কিরিন Increased for part of operations/crops কাজ/ ফসেলর অংেশর জন� বৃ�� েপেয়েছ I have switched to fully mechanized operations আিম স�ূণ ��েপ যাি�ক ��য়াকলােপ চেল েগিছ I have bought my own harvester, transplanter, other farm machinery আিম আমার িনেজর ফসল কাটা, �া��া�ার, অন�ান� খামার য�পািত িকেনিছ I have been increasingly using services from local service providers আিম �ানীয় পিরেষবা সরবরাহকারীেদর েথেক পিরেষবা�িল �মবধ �মানভােব ব�বহার করিছ My use of local service providers has decreased আমার �ানীয় পিরেষবা সরবরাহকারীেদর ব�বহার �াস েপেয়েছ 19. If there has been a change in relation to mechanization of your operations, please indicate why. (Select all that apply.) যিদ আপনার কাজ যাি�কীকরেণর ে�ে� েকানও পিরবত�ন ঘেট থােক তেব দয়া কের েকন তা িনেদ�শ ক�ন (�েযাজ� সমূহ িনব �াচন ক�ন): I have had increased income and bought my own machinery. আিম আয় বৃ�� কেরিছ এবং আমার িনেজর য�পািত িকেনিছ 126 Increased for part of operations/crops. কাজ / ফসেলর অংেশর জন� বৃ�� েপেয়েছ I have switched to fully mechanized operations to increase yields, margins, and income. ফলন, মা�জ�ন এবং আয় বাড়ােনার জন� আিম স�ূণ ��েপ যাি�কীকরেণ চেল এেসিছ I have bought my own harvester, transplanter, and/or other farm machinery due to a loan. আিম ঋেণর িনেয় আমার িনেজর ফসল কাটা, �া��া�ার, অন�ান� খামার য�পািত িকেনিছ Local service providers have become more accessible and affordable. �ানীয় পিরেষবা সরবরাহকারীরা আরও সহজলভ� এবং সা�য়ী হেয় উেঠেছ Local service providers are scarce and expensive in my area. �ানীয় পিরেষবা সরবরাহকারীরা আমার অ�েল দুল �ভ এবং ব�য়ব�ল I have improved my mechanization skills/operations or access to mechanization services due to CSICA-Mechanization Project. CSICA- যাি�কীকরণ �কে�র কারেণ আিম আমার যাি�কীকরণ দ�তা / পিরচালনা বা যাি�কীকরণ পিরেষবািদেত উ�িত কেরিছ I have improved my mechanization skills/operations or access to mechanization services due to RDC Project. RDC �কে�র কারেণ আিম আমার যাি�কীকরণ দ�তা / পিরচালনা বা যাি�কীকরণ পিরেষবািদেত উ�িত কেরিছ EQ3. To what extent has the Rice and Diversified Crops activity been successful in achieving its Intermediate Result 2: “Increased Participation in Profitable Market Systems”? EQ3.ধান এবং িবিবধ ফসেলর ��য়াকলাপ “Increased Participation in Profitable Market Systems” এর মধ�বত� ফলাফল 2 অজ�েন কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? 20. Where did you sell most your products in the last season as compared to five years ago? (On a scale of 1 = the least volume sold to 5 = most volume sold). আপিন আপনার পন� পাঁচ বছর আেগর ত� লনায় েকাথায় েবিশরভাগ ে�ে� িব�� কেরন?( ১ েথেক ৫ এর মেধ� িদন। ১=সবেচেয় কম িব��, ৫=সবেচেয় েবিশ িব��) সা�িতক / গত বছর পাঁচ বচর আেগ পািরবািরক ব�বহােরর জন� ব�ব�ত পািরবািরক ব�বহােরর জন� ব�ব�ত �ানীয় বাজার �ানীয় বাজার েজলা পয �ােয়র বাজার েজলা পয �ােয়র বাজার জাতীয় পয �ােয়র বাজার জাতীয় পয �ােয়র বাজার 127 21. If there has been a change, please specify the reason(s) for the change. _____________. যিদ েকান পিরবত�ন হেয় থােক, তাহেল কারন উে�খ ক�ন_____________ 22. Who is your main customer now as compared to five years ago? (Select one.) পাঁচ বছর আেগর ত� লনায় েক আপনার মুল ে�তা? (১�ট িনব �াচন ক�ন) Now: 1. Paiker/local traders, 2. Retailers, 3. Aratder, 4. Processor, 5. Exporter, 6. Contractual buyer, 7. Farm center, 8. Other (specify)_____________ এখন: ১. পাইকার / �ানীয় ব�বসায়ী, ২. খুচরা িবে�তা, ৩. আড়তদার, ৪. �েসসর, ৫. রফতািনকারী, Contract. চ���িভি�ক ে�তা, ৭. খামার েক�, ৮. অন�ান� (উে�খ ক�ন) Five years ago: 1. Paiker/Local Traders, 2. Retailers, 3. Aratder, 4. Processor, 5. Exporter, 6. Contractual Buyer, 7. Farmers’ Center, 8. Other (specify) পাঁচ বছর আেগঃ ১. পাইকার / �ানীয় ব�বসায়ী, ২. খুচরা িবে�তা, ৩. আড়তদার, ৪. �েসসর, ৫. রফতািনকারী, Contract. চ���িভি�ক ে�তা, ৭. খামার েক�, ৮. অন�ান� (উে�খ ক�ন) 23. How do you get market information now? Five years ago? (Select all that apply.) আপিন এখন িকভােব মােক�ট এর তথ� পান? পাঁচ বছর আেগ িকভােব েপেতন? (�েযাজ� সমূহ িনব �াচন ক�ন) Now: 1. Mobile phone, 2. Traders, 3. Farmers’ Center, 4. Volunteer, 5. Youth Group, 6. Other (specify) এখন: ১. েমাবাইল েফান, ২. ব�বসায়ী, ৩. কৃ ষেকর েক�, ৪. ে��ােসবক, ৫. যুব �প, ৬. অন�ান� (উে�খ ক�ন) Five years ago: 1. Mobile phone, 2. Traders, 3. Farmers’ Center, 4. Volunteer, 5. Youth Group, 6. Other (specify) পাঁচ বছর আেগঃ ১. েমাবাইল েফান, ২. ব�বসায়ী, ৩. কৃ ষেকর েক�, ৪. ে��ােসবক, ৫. যুব �প, ৬. অন�ান� (উে�খ ক�ন) 24. Do you have a bank account? If yes, in which bank? আপনার িক ব�াংক একাউ� আেছ? যিদ থােক, েকান ব�াংকঃ 1. Bank Asia, 2. Sonali Bank, 3. BRAC Bank, 4. City Bank, 5. Other (specify) _______________________ ১. ব�াংক এিশয়া, ২.েসানালী ব�াংক, ৩. �াক ব�াংক, ৪. িস�ট ব�াংক ৫. অন�ান� (উে�খ ক�ন) _______________________ 25. Do you have a loan? If so, what is the source? (Select all that apply.) আপিন িক েকান ঋণ িনেয়েছন? িনেয় থাকেল েকাথা েথেক? (�েযাজ� সমূহ িনব �াচন ক�ন) 1. Bank Asia, 2. BRAC, 3. City Bank, 4, RDRS, 5. Cooperative, 6. MFI, 7. Relative, 8. Mahajan, 9. Neighbor, 10. Government Agency, 11. Other (specify)_________________________________ ১. ব�াংক এিশয়া, ২. �াক ব�াংক, ৩. িস�ট ব�াংক, ৪. আরিডআরএস, ৫. েকাঅপাের�টভ, ৬. এমএফআই, ৭. আ�ীয়, ৮. মহাজন, ৯. �িতেবশী, ১০. সরকারী এেজ��, ১১. অন�ান� (উে�খ ক�ন) ____________ EQ5. Nutrition. How successful has the activity been in identifying the determinants of positive or negative nutritional behaviors and determining the best entry points for integrating nutrition-sensitive activities? EQ5. পু��. ইিতবাচক বা েনিতবাচক পু�� আচরেণর িনণ �য়কারীেদর সনা�করণ এবং পু��-সংেবদনশীল কারযকলাপ�িলেক সংহত করার জন� েসরা �েবেশর পেয়��িল িনধ �ারেণ কায �কলাপ�ট কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? 128 26. Have you recorded any change in the food security and/or nutritional practices in your household in the last five years? If so, why has there been a change? Describe change(s). আপিন িক গত পাঁচ বছের আপনার পিরবােরর খাদ� সুর�া এবং / বা পু��র েকানও পিরবত�ন েরকড� কেরেছন? যিদ হেয় থােক, তাহেল েকন পিরবত�ন হেয়েছ? পিরবত�ন�েলা বণ �না ক�ন। 1. পিরি�িত এখন আরও খারাপ 2. েমােটও েকানও উ�িত হয়িন 3. সামান� উ�িত 4. উে�খেযাগ� অ�গিত EQ6. Gender. How successful has the Rice and Diversified Crops activity been in effectively integrating gender considerations and ensure equitable access for women, increase female engagement and empowerment, and promote women entrepreneurs? EQ6. িল�। ধান এবং িবিবধ ফসেলর ��য়াকলাপ কায �করভােব নারীেদর জন� ন�ায়স�ত অ�াে�স িন��ত করেত, নারীেদর জিড়ত করেত এবং �মতায়ন বৃ��েত এবং নারী উেদ�া�ােদর �চাের কতটা সফল হেয়েছ? 27. Have you recorded any change in women’s role in your family’s farm operations in the last five years? আপিন িক গত পাঁচ বছের আপনার পিরবােরর খামার পিরচালনায় মিহলােদর ভূ িমকায় েকানও পিরবত�ন েরকড�কেরেছন? 5. স�ৃ�তা কেমেছ 6. আেগর মত 7. িকছ�স�ৃ�তা েবেড়েছ 8. উে�খেযাগ� স�ৃ�তা েবেড়েছ 28. Have you participated in the following programs in the last five years? (Select all that apply.) আপিন িক গত পাঁচ বছের িন�িলিখত ে�া�াম�িলেত অংশ িনেয়েছন? (�েযাজ� সমূহ িনব �াচন ক�ন) ে�া�াম ে�া�াম ��র কেরেছ সরকার RDC �ক� অন�ান� �ক� (উে�খ ক�ন যিদ স�ব হয়) Food security খাদ� সুর�া Women Empowerment নারী �মতায়ন Youth empowerment ত�ন �মতায়ন 29. What kind of support would be most valuable for your farming operations in the future? 129 ভিবষ�েত আপনার কৃ িষকাজ পিরচালনার জন� েকান ধরেণর সহায়তা সবেচেয় েবিশ মুল�বান হেব? ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ _________________ Thank you for your valued contribution to this evaluation. এই মূল�ায়েন আপনার মূল�বান অবদােনর জন� আপনােক ধন�বাদ। উ�রদাতার �া�র ___________________________ তািরখ: _________________________ যিদ �েযাজ� হয়: ফ�ািসিলেটটেরর �া�র ___________________________ তািরখ: _________________________ েরকড�র�েকর �া�র ____________________________ তািরখ: ________________________ 130 ANNEX 5-A: BIBLIOGRAPHY No Full Title, Author, Date Published, Version (final, draft) Link (if available), Date Downloaded (if available) Date Received, Downloaded or Requested by Evaluation Team Received From Available on SharePoint S029 or BMEL-RDC Google Drive 1 Tasking Request (a lieu SOW and RFP) for BRDC, USAID, 11/22/2020 2/2/2021 ME&A Yes 2 Brief Proposal Tasking Request S029: Final Performance Evaluation of the Bangladesh Rice and Diversified Crops, ME&A, pdf file created 1/11/2021 2/2/2021 ME&A Yes 3 RDC Statement of Work/Project Description 4/13/2021 Yes 4 RDC USAID-ACDI-VOCA Cooperative Agreement AID-388-A-16-00002, Award Date 7/13/2016 Week 4/22/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 5 RDC USAID-ACDI-VOCA Cooperative Agreement AID-388-A-16-00003, Modification 1, 9/29/2016, Incremental Funding Week 4/22/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 6 RDC USAID-ACDI-VOCA Cooperative Agreement AID-388-A-16-00003, Modification 2, 4/3/2017, Incremental Funding; AOR appointment Week 4/22/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 7 RDC USAID-ACDI-VOCA Cooperative Agreement AID-388-A-16-00003, Modification 3, 7/16/2017, Incremental Funding; Update Mandatory Standard Provisions Week 4/22/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 8 RDC USAID-ACDI-VOCA Cooperative Agreement AID-388-A-16-00003, Modification 4, 2/12/2018, Incremental Funding Week 4/22/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 9 RDC USAID-ACDI-VOCA Cooperative Agreement AID-388-A-16-00003, Modification 5, 9/2/2018, Incremental Funding Week 4/22/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 10 RDC USAID-ACDI-VOCA Cooperative Agreement AID-388-A-16-00003, Modification 6, 4/23/2019, Incremental Funding Week 4/22/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 11 RDC USAID-ACDI-VOCA Cooperative Agreement AID-388-A-16-00003, Modification 7, 7/15/2020, Incremental Funding and Procurement of Covered Material Week 4/22/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 12 RDC USAID-ACDI-VOCA Cooperative Agreement AID-388-A-16-00003, Modification 8, 2/9/2021, AOR and Sustantial Involvement Sections Revision Week 4/22/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 131 No Full Title, Author, Date Published, Version (final, draft) Link (if available), Date Downloaded (if available) Date Received, Downloaded or Requested by Evaluation Team Received From Available on SharePoint S029 or BMEL-RDC Google Drive 13 RDC USAID-ACDI-VOCA Cooperative Agreement AID-388-A-16-00003, Modification 9, No-Cost-Extension till 12/12/2021 and Revised Budget 4/20/2021 RDC Yes 14 RDC FY2016 Quarter 4 Report, Jul-Sep 2016, ACDI-VOCA, 10/2016 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 15 RDC FY2017 Quarter 1 Report, Oct-Dec 2016, ACDI-VOCA, 1/30/2017 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 16 RDC FY2017 Quarter 2 Report, Jan-Mar 2017, ACDI-VOCA, 4/30/2017 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 17 RDC FY2017 Quarter 3 Report, Apr-Jun 2017, ACDI-VOCA, 7/31/2017 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 18 RDC FY2018 Quarter 1 Report, Oct-Dec 2017, ACDI-VOCA, 1/15/2018 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 19 RDC FY2018 Quarter 2 Report, Jan-Mar 2018, ACDI-VOCA, no date 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 20 RDC FY2018 Quarter 3 Report, Apr-Jun 2018, ACDI-VOCA, no date 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 21 RDC FY2019 Quarter 1 Report, Oct-Dec 2018, ACDI-VOCA, 1/30/2019 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 22 RDC FY2019 Quarter 2 Report, Jan-Mar 2019, ACDI-VOCA, 4/2019 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 23 RDC FY2019 Quarter 3 Report, Apr-Jun 2019, ACDI-VOCA, no date 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 24 RDC FY2020 Quarter 1 Report, Oct-Dec 2020, ACDI-VOCA, 1/30/2020 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 25 RDC FY2020 Quarter 2 Report, Jan-Mar 2020, ACDI-VOCA, 4/30/2020 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 26 RDC FY2020 Quarter 3 Report, Apr-June 2020, ACDI-VOCA, 7/30/2020 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 27 RDC FY2021 Quarter 1 Report, Oct-Dec 2020, ACDI-VOCA, 1/15/2021 4/20/2021 RDC Yes 28 RDC FY2021 Quarter 2 Report, Jan-Mar 202, ACDI-VOCA, 4/15/2021 4/21/2021 RDC Yes 29 RDC Activity Presentation, ACDI-VOCA, 4/22/2021 4/22/2021 RDC Yes 30 RDC FY2017 Annual Report, Oct 2016-Sep 2017, ACDI-VOCA, 10/2017 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 31 RDC FY2018 Annual Report, Oct 2017-Sep 2018,ACDI-VOCA, no date 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 32 RDC FY2019 Annual Report, Oct 2018-Sep 2019, ACDI-VOCA, no date 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 132 No Full Title, Author, Date Published, Version (final, draft) Link (if available), Date Downloaded (if available) Date Received, Downloaded or Requested by Evaluation Team Received From Available on SharePoint S029 or BMEL-RDC Google Drive 33 RDC FY2020 Annual Report, Oct 2019-Sep 2020, ACDI-VOCA, file created 11/13/2020 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 34 RDC FY2017-2018 Work Plan #1, Jan-Sep 2017, ACDI-VOCA, 2017 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 35 RDC FY2017 Work Plan, May-Sep 2017, ACDI-VOCA, 2017 3/9/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 36 RDC FY2018-2019 Work Plan, Jan-Sep 2018, ACDI-VOCA, 10/2018 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 37 RDC FY2018 Work Plan, Apr-Jun 2018, ACDI-VOCA, 2018 3/9/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 38 RDC FY2019 Work Plan, Jan-Mar 2019, ACDI-VOCA, 2019 3/9/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 39 RDC FY2019 Work Plan, Apr-Jun 2019, ACDI-VOCA, 2019 3/9/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 40 RDC FY2019 Work Plan, Jul-Sep 2019, ACDI-VOCA, 8/2019 3/9/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 41 RDC FY2019–2020 Work Plan, Oct– Sep 2020, ACDI-VOCA, 9/2019 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 42 RDC FY2020 Work Plan, Jan-Mar 2020, ACDI-VOCA, 2020 3/9/2021 ME&A BMEL-RDC Google Drive 43 RDC FY2020 Work Plan, Apr-Jun 2020, ACDI-VOCA, 2020 3/9/2021 ME&A BMEL-RDC Google Drive 44 RDC FY2020 Work Plan, Jul-Sep 2020, ACDI-VOCA, 2020 3/9/2021 ME&A BMEL-RDC Google Drive 45 RDC FY2020-2021 Work Plan, Oct 2020 – Jul 2021, ACDI-VOCA, 9/2020 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 46 RDC FY2020-2021 Work Plan, Jan-Mar 2021, ACDI-VOCA, 2021 4/20/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 47 RDC FY2020-2021 Work Plan, Apr-Jun 2021, ACDI-VOCA, 2021 4/20/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 48 RDC FY2021 Work Plan, Apr 2020– Dec 2021, No-Cost Extension, with Irs, Draft 2, ACDI-VOCA, 4/2021 4/20/2021 RDC Yes 49 RDC FY2018 Annual Performance and Baseline Report 2017-2018, ACDI￾VOCA-Data Management Aid, 4/2019 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 50 RDC FY2019 Annual Performance Study Report 2018-2019, ACDI-VOCA￾Consiglieri, 11/2019 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 133 No Full Title, Author, Date Published, Version (final, draft) Link (if available), Date Downloaded (if available) Date Received, Downloaded or Requested by Evaluation Team Received From Available on SharePoint S029 or BMEL-RDC Google Drive 51 RDC FY2020 Annual Performance Study Report 2019-2020, ACDI-VOCA, file created 12/20/2020 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 52 RDC FY2020 Annual Survey, a set of 100 KII reports from 16 districts 6/3/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 53 RDC Annual Survey 2018–2020, a set of 10 producer and market actor questionnaires 6/3/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 54 RDC Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) Plan, ACDI-VOCA, 12/15/2016 Week after 4/22/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 55 RDC MEL Plan, ACDI-VOCA, Revision 2, 2/2018 4/13/2021 USAID Yes 56 RDC MEL Plan, ACDI-VOCA, Revision 3, 12/15/2016 5/3/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 57 RDC MEL Plan, ACDI-VOCA, Revision 4, 4/10/2019 3/9/2021 ME&A Yes 58 RDC MEL Operational Guide, 4/20/2021 5/3/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 59 RDC MEL Systems Presentation, ACDI-VOCA, 4/13/2021 4/21/2021 RDC Yes 60 RDC Collaboration. Learning and Adaptation Plan. ACDI-VOCA, 12/15/2016, revised version 7/30/2017 Feb-Mar 2021 DEC Yes 61 RDC FY2017-2018 Preliminary Gender Analysis Report, Oct-Dec 2017, ACDI￾VOCA, 2/2018 Feb-Mar 2022 DEC Yes 62 RDC Market Actor Partnership Agreement - Gender Review Checklist, ACDI￾VOC, file created 1/2021 Feb-Mar 2023 DEC Yes 63 RDC Engaging Women in Agricultural Market Systems, Business Case Study, 2/2019 Week 4/22/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 64 2017 Invitation for Applications, 3-2017, 8/2017 Week 4/22/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 65 2018 Request for Applications, 4-2018, Lentil Disease Control, 9/1/2018 Week 4/22/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 66 2018 Request for Applications, 5-2018, Mustard and Lentil Disease Control, 9/1/2018 Week 4/22/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 134 No Full Title, Author, Date Published, Version (final, draft) Link (if available), Date Downloaded (if available) Date Received, Downloaded or Requested by Evaluation Team Received From Available on SharePoint S029 or BMEL-RDC Google Drive 67 2018 Request for Applications, 6-2018, Procurement Models, 9/1/2018 Week 4/22/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 68 2018 Request for Applications, 7-2018, Nutrition, 9/10/2018 Week 4/22/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 69 2018 Request for Applications, 8-2018, Financial Sector Innovation, 9/23/2018 Week 4/22/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 70 2018 Request for Applications, 9-2018, Maize Production, 10/8/2018 Week 4/22/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 71 2018 Request for Applications, 10-2018, Rice Procurement and Sales, 10/8/2018 Week 4/22/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 72 2018 Request for Applications, 11-2018, Mung bean Production, 10/18/2018 Week 4/22/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 73 2018 Request for Applications, 12-2018, Dealer Performance Management Systems, 11/28/2018 Week 4/22/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 74 2019 Annual Program Statement, 13-2019, 4/1/2019 Week 4/22/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 75 2019 RDC Annual Program Statement (APS) – Invitation for Grant Applications, ACDI-VOCA, 14-2019, 4/1/2019 Feb-Mar 2024 DEC Yes 76 2020 Request for Applications, 15-2020, 4/20/2020 Week 4/22/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 77 2020 Request for Applications, 16-2020, 7/14/2020 Week 4/22/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 78 2021 Annual Program Statement, 17-2021, 4/15/2021 Week 4/22/2021 BMEL-RDC Google Drive 79 RDC FTF Subaward Database Example, ACDI-VOCA, 4/10/2021 4/21/2021 RDC Yes 80 RDC Solicitations. ACDI-VOCA, 4/21/2021 4/21/2021 RDC Yes 81 RDC Fixed-Amount Subaward Agreement Template, 4/2021 4/22/2021 RDC Yes RDC 81 Fixed-Amount Subaward (FAS) Agreements Requested 4/16/2021 83 RDC MOUs, seven documents received 6/3/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive RDC FAS Applications and Progress Reports Requested 4/16/2021 84 RDC FAS Closing Summaries, 33 reports received 6/3/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive RDC MEL Database of beneficiaries, partners, and FAS grantees Requested 4/16/2022 135 No Full Title, Author, Date Published, Version (final, draft) Link (if available), Date Downloaded (if available) Date Received, Downloaded or Requested by Evaluation Team Received From Available on SharePoint S029 or BMEL-RDC Google Drive 85 RDC ID-coded Beneficiary Data, 8111 beneficiaries 5/4/2021 USAID 86 RDC contact disclosed beneficiary list of 767 producers and 248 VCAs 6/16/2021 USAID 87 RDC Output Markets Assessments: Diversified Crops, ACDI-VOCA, 12/1/2016 Feb-Mar 2025 DEC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 88 RDC Mechanization, Planting and Harvesting Survey and Report, 10/2019 Week 4/22/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 89 RDC Crop Protection Study Report, 3/2019 Week 4/22/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 90 RDC Survey of Soybean, Sesame and Sunflower Markets, 9/2019 Week 4/22/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 91 RDC Aromatic and Fine Grain Rice Current Status in South Bangladesh, 5/2019 Week 4/22/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 92 RDC Hybrid Maize Seed Market In Jashore, Kushtia, Magura, Rajbari an Faridpur Districts, 2/2021 Week 4/22/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 93 RDC Opportunities For Input and Equipment Supply Companies To Manage Performance Of Dealers In Their Distribution Networks and Adopt Pos Technologies, 1/2018 5/11/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 94 RDC Procurement Models Report, 1/19//2018 5/112021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 95 Developing a Competitive Global Value Chain for Bangladesh - Opportunities in End Markets, 3/2/2021 5/11/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 96 RDC Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan, 7/2017 Feb-Mar 2021 DEC Yes 97 RDC Implementing Mechanism (IM) Narrative Report 2017, no date Week 4/22/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 98 RDC Implementing Mechanism (IM) Narrative Report 2018 Week 4/22/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 99 RDC Implementing Mechanism (IM) Narrative Report 2019 Week 4/22/2021 RDC BMEL-RDC Google Drive 100 Bangladesh Country Development Cooperation Strategy FY2011- FY2019, USAID, September 2011 Feb-Mar 2021 DEC Yes 101 Bangladesh Country Profile, USAID, 4/2019 Feb-Mar 2021 DEC Yes 136 No Full Title, Author, Date Published, Version (final, draft) Link (if available), Date Downloaded (if available) Date Received, Downloaded or Requested by Evaluation Team Received From Available on SharePoint S029 or BMEL-RDC Google Drive 102 Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey 2014, USAID-GOB, 3/2016 Feb-Mar 2021 DEC Yes 103 Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey 2017-2018, Key Indicators, USAID-GOB, 11/2019 Feb-Mar 2021 DEC Yes 104 The Status of Food Security in the Feed the Future Zone and Other Regions of Bangladesh: Results from the 2011–2012 Bangladesh Integrated Household Survey, USAID/IFPRI, April 2013 Feb-Mar 2021 DEC Yes 105 FTF Bangladesh Zone of Influence Interim Assessment Report, USAID-IFPRI, 6/2018 4/3/2021 DEC Yes 106 USAID DO2 Gender Analysis FTF Bangladesh, ACME, 1/22/2019 Feb-Mar 2021 DEC Yes 107 USAID FTF Bangladesh Women Empowerment Activity FY2016, Winrock, 1/19/2017 4/32021 DEC Yes 108 USAID Local Systems Practice, User's Guide, file created 4/29/2019 Feb-Mar 2021 DEC Yes 109 USAID Multi-sectoral Nutrition Strategy 2014-2025, 5/2014 Feb-Mar 2021 DEC Yes 110 USAID Bangladesh Nutrition Profile, 2/2018 Feb-Mar 2021 DEC Yes 111 Evaluation of the Improving Nutrition Through Community Approaches (INCA) Project, USAID, Data for Impact, 10/2020 Feb-Mar 2021 DEC Yes 112 Final Evaluation Report USAID/Bangladesh Policy Research And Strategy Support Program (PRSPP) Final Performance Evaluation, 12/9/2020 Feb-Mar 2021 DEC Yes 113 USAID/Bangladeh CSISA-MI Phase 1 Activity Final Evaluation, USAID, 12/21/2020 Feb-Mar 2021 DEC Yes 114 FTF Global Performance Evaluation, USAID, Dexis, 12/2016 Feb-Mar 2021 DEC Yes 115 SPACES-MERL Bangladesh Network Analysis, 11/22/2017 Feb-Mar 2021 DEC Yes 137 No Full Title, Author, Date Published, Version (final, draft) Link (if available), Date Downloaded (if available) Date Received, Downloaded or Requested by Evaluation Team Received From Available on SharePoint S029 or BMEL-RDC Google Drive 116 USAID/BANGLADESH COVID-19: An Aanalysis of the Changing Development Needs and Priority Actions - Final Report, ME&A, 11/11/2020 Feb-Mar 2021 DEC Yes 117 USAID Evaluation Policy, 2011, updated in 2016 Download 4/8/2021 DEC Yes 118 USAID DO2: Food Security Improved Performance Management Plan, 6/2012 Download 4/8/2021 DEC Yes 119 BBS 2014. Yearbook of Agricultural Statistics – 2012. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS), Statistics and Informatics Division (SID), Ministry of Planning Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh (www.bbs.gov.bd) 4/12/2021 ET Team www.bbs.gov.bd 120 BBS 2015. Yearbook of Agricultural Statistics – 2013. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS), Statistics and Informatics Division (SID), Ministry of Planning Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh (www.bbs.gov.bd) 4/12/2021 ET Team www.bbs.gov.bd 121 BBS 2016a. Yearbook of Agricultural Statistics – 2014. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS), Statistics and Informatics Division (SID), Ministry of Planning Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh (www.bbs.gov.bd) 4/12/2021 ET Team www.bbs.gov.bd 122 BBS 2016b. Yearbook of Agricultural Statistics – 2015. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS), Statistics and Informatics Division (SID), Ministry of Planning Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh (www.bbs.gov.bd). 4/12/2021 ET Team www.bbs.gov.bd 123 BBS 2017. Yearbook of Agricultural Statistics – 2016. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS), Statistics and Informatics Division (SID), Ministry of Planning Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh (www.bbs.gov.bd) 4/12/2021 ET Team www.bbs.gov.bd 124 BBS 2018. Yearbook of Agricultural Statistics – 2017. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS), Statistics and Informatics Division (SID), Ministry of Planning Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh (www.bbs.gov.bd). 4/12/2021 ET Team www.bbs.gov.bd 138 No Full Title, Author, Date Published, Version (final, draft) Link (if available), Date Downloaded (if available) Date Received, Downloaded or Requested by Evaluation Team Received From Available on SharePoint S029 or BMEL-RDC Google Drive 125 BBS 2019. Yearbook of Agricultural Statistics – 2018. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS), Statistics and Informatics Division (SID), Ministry of Planning Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh (www.bbs.gov.bd). 4/12/2021 ET Team www.bbs.gov.bd 126 BBS 2020. Yearbook of Agricultural Statistics – 2019. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS), Statistics and Informatics Division (SID), Ministry of Planning Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh (www.bbs.gov.bd). 4/12/2021 ET Team www.bbs.gov.bd 127 Nasim, M., S.H. Shahidullah, A. Shaha, M.A. Muttaleb, T.L. Aditya, M.A. Ali and M.S. Kabir. 2017. Distribution of crops and cropping patterns in Bangladesh. Bangladesh Rice Journal, 21(2): 1-55 4/12/2021 ET Team Yes 128 Gender-Focused Market Systems Assessment, Feed the Future Bangladesh, FINAL REPORT Prepared for USAID/Bangladesh Economic Growth Office Dhaka, Bangladesh, ACME, 2/27/2019 6/11/2021 ET Team 129 RDC Final Performance Report, 12/2021 1/28/2022 USAID DEC 130 RDC Outcome Harvesting Report, 12/20221 1/29/2022 Internet search 131 Agent Banks Advance Community Resiliency during COVID-19 in Bangladesh, RDC, 2021 1/31/2022 Internet search Recommendations - RDC Agent Banking Report (acdivoca.org) 139 ANNEX 5-B: LIST OF NATIONAL AND REGIONAL FIRMS (MAF/FAS GRANTEES) TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO NEW TECHNOLOGIES AND IMPROVED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR SMALLHOLDER PRODUCERS Sl. No Private Sector Partner USAID Facilitation Start date End date Location/ Working Areas/Place of Performance (District/ Upazila) FAS number 1 Just Farming Bangladesh Procurement through collection points of 600 MT of Bari mung6 mung bean for sale to dal processors. Crop to be produced by 1,000 farmers in 40 groups in Patuakhali District trained in mung bean production by JF 01 Oct 2017 30 Sep 2018 Barishal 1-2-2017-A2F 2 Northern Consumer Products Ltd. Procurement of 500 MT sunflower from 1,500 farmers in Barguna & Patuakhali districts. Farmers organized into groups, with collection points and trained in sunflower production by NCPL 01 Oct 2017 31 Oct 2018 Barishal 1-2-2017-A3F 3 Bayer Crop Science Limited Provision of farmer advisory services through company managed crop clinics 10 Dec 2017 09 Dec 2018 Jashore 1-1-2017-A4F 4 Krishibid Farm Machinery & Automobiles Ltd. Spreading machanized farming to FTF zons' farmers 15 Oct 2017 31 Jul 2018 Jashore, Barishal 1-1-2017-A5F 5 PCF Feed Industries Sourcing quality maize from the southern region through inclusive procurement models 15 Nov 2017 14 Oct 2018 Jashore 1-2-2017-A6F 6 SACO Enterprise Process, promote and market mung dal by sourcing quality mung bean through a contract farming system 15 Nov 2017 14 Oct 2018 Barishal 1-2-2017-A7F 7 Ispahani Agro Ltd. Establishing "One stop agriculture service centre" in FTF Zone 01 Feb 2018 31 Jan 2019 Jashore, Barishal 1-1-2018-A8F 8 Petrochem Bangladesh Limited (PCL) Using farmer training in rice production and facilitating market access for farmers to rice mill managed markets as an innovative approach to fine grain hybrid rice seed marketing 01 Mar 2018 28 Feb 2019 Barishal 1-1-2018-A9F 9 JADID Grain Industries Ltd (JGIL) Production and marketing of Black Sesame by contract growers for an export market. 01 Apr 2018 30 Jun 2019 Barishal 2-2-2018- A10F 10 Petrochem Bangladesh Limited (PCL) Promoting maize cultivation in the southern region through an inclusive customer focused business model 15 Apr 2018 14 Jul 2019 Jashore, Barishal 1-2-2018- A11F 11 Partex Agro Limited Integrated marketing strategies to support hybrid rice production 01 Jun 2018 31 Jan 2019 Jashore, Barishal 2-1-2018- A12F 12 Bombay Sweets & Co.; Limited Contract grower scheme for aromatic rice and mustard production. 01 Nov 2018 31 Jan 2020 Jashore 2-1-2018- A13F 13 Konika Seed Company (KSC) Using incentives to secure farmer loyalty in a contract grower scheme. 11 Oct 2018 11 Aug 2019 Jashore 1-1-2018- A14F 140 Sl. No Private Sector Partner USAID Facilitation Start date End date Location/ Working Areas/Place of Performance (District/ Upazila) FAS number 14 MRT Agro Products BD Limited Procuring quality sunflower through a sub contract system in Khulna Division 01 Nov 2018 31 Oct 2019 Khulna 2-2-2018- A15F 15 The Metal (Pvt.) Limited Mechanized rice production using a rebate incentive system 01 Nov 2018 15 Feb 2020 Jashore 1-1-2018- A16F 16 NAAFCO (PVT.) Limited Promoting maize production in the Southern region through an alliance between input and feed companies 15 Nov 2018 15 Aug 2019 Rajbari, Faridpur, Bhola, Patuakhali, Barishal and Jhenaidah 2-2-2018- A17F 17 SACO Enterprise Processing, Promote and Market Mung Dal by Sourcing Quality Mung beans through Contract Farming System 25 Nov 2018 25 Oct 2019 Barguna District 2-2-2018- A18F 18 Supreme Seed Company Limited Promoting Sunflower cultivation in Southern Part of Bangladesh 25 Nov 2018 25 Oct 2019 Southern part of Bangladesh 2-2-2018- A19F 19 Northern Consumer Products Ltd. Strengthening sunflower growers to ensure quality grain for sustainable processing, branding and marketing of edible sunflower oil 01 Dec 2018 30 Nov 2019 Barguna, Patuakhali, Pirojpur 2-2-2018- A20F 20 Prantojon Agro Enterprise Introduce formal contract farming to produce quality mung bean and processing & marketing of mung dal 23 Dec 2018 23 Sep 2019 Nalchity, Barishal Sadar and Bakergonj 2-2-2018- A21F 21 Advanced Chemical Industries Ltd. (ACI Limited) Improving access to healthy rice seedlings through the development of seedling grower businesses 01 Feb 2019 01 Jan 2020 FTF zone 2-1-2019- A22F 22 Mediasoft Data Systems Ltd. Piloting Mediasoft Point of Sales (POS) Technology Solutions with 4 Jashore-based Dealers 15 Feb 2019 14 Feb 2020 Jashore 2-1-2019- A23F 23 Unisoft Systems Limited Piloting Unisoft Point of Sales (POS) Technology Solutions for 3 Jashore-based Dealers 15 Feb 2019 14 Feb 2020 Jashore 2-1-2019- A24F 24 Bank Asia Limited Digital Financial Inclusion for Smallholder Farmers 01 Mar 2019 30 Nov 2019 Southern region of Bangladesh 2-2-2019- A25F 25 Agro-input retailers' network (AIRN) Digital Financial Inclusion for Smallholder Farmers 01 Mar 2019 30 Nov 2019 Southern region of Bangladesh 2-2-2019- A26F 26 Link-Up Technology Ltd. Piloting Link-Up Point of Sales (POS) Technology Solutions with 3 Jashore-based Dealers 01 Mar 2019 28 Feb 2020 Jashore 2-1-2019- A27F 27 Bombay Sweets & Co.; Limited Production and procurement of groundnut from char island farmers through intermediary led procurement business model. 01 Mar 2019 30 Sep 2020 Bhola District 6-1-2019- A28F 28 I Soft Piloting I Soft Point of Sales (POS) Technology Solutions with 4 Jashore-based Dealers 1-Mar-19 28-Feb-20 Jashore 2-1-2019- A29F 141 Sl. No Private Sector Partner USAID Facilitation Start date End date Location/ Working Areas/Place of Performance (District/ Upazila) FAS number 29 Advanced Chemical Industries Ltd. (ACI Limited) Reaching Quality Agri-inputs to untapped Farmers through Infopreneurs 1-Apr-19 30-Sep-20 FTF zone 12-1-2019- A30F 30 Auto Crop Care Limited Piloting advisory services and professional application of crop protection products to better serve farmers 1-May-19 30-Sep-20 Chuadanga, Jhenaidah, Jashore 12-1-2019- A31F 31 Supreme Seed Company Limited Piloting face-to-face advisory services to better serve farmers 01 May 2019 31 Oct 2020 FTF zone 12-1-2019- A32F 32 The Metal (Pvt.) Ltd. 33rd Annual Georgia peanut tour, USA 15 Sep 2019 14 Nov 2019 FTF zone ST-01-2019- A33F 33 Naafco (Pvt.) Ltd 33rd Annual Georgia peanut tour, USA 15 Sep 2019 14 Nov 2019 FTF zone ST-01-2019- A34F 34 Partex Agro. Ltd 33rd Annual Georgia peanut tour, USA 15 Sep 2019 14 Nov 2019 FTF zone ST-01-2019- A35F 35 Lal Teer Seed Ltd. 33rd Annual Georgia peanut tour, USA 15 Sep 2019 14 Nov 2019 FTF zone ST-01-2019- A36F 36 PRAN GROUP Expansion of Krishi Hub and digital platform for selling inputs and procuring farmers goods from the FTF zone 01 Oct 2019 31 May 2021 Chudanga, Jhinaidha, Borguna, Potuakhali 13-2019-37F 37 Partex Agro Ltd. Test and promote varietal performance of new high-yielding USA variety groundnut seed and strengthen a robust customer-oriented distribution channel for existing variety groundnut seed and inputs 01 Nov 2019 18 Feb 2021 Faridpur, Jashore, Barisal 13-2019-38F 38 Advanced Chemical Industries Limited Promote inoculants as part of nutrient management for the higher profitability of pulses and oilseeds farmers 01 Oct 2019 30 Sep 2020 Jhenaidah, Magura, Jashore, Kushtia, Norail, Meherpur, Barisal, Potuakhali, Barguna, Bhola, and Faridpur 13-2019-39F 39 Petrochem Bangladesh Limited Promote improved varieties of CORTEVA maize seed and strengthen a robust customer￾oriented distribution channel for higher production of maize 01 Oct 2019 31 Mar 2021 Jhenaidah, Chuadanga, Kushtia, Meherpur, Pirojpur, Bhola, Faridpur, and Rajbari 13-2019-40F 40 Xplore Business Limited Promote inoculants as part of nutrient management for the higher profitability of pulses and oilseeds farmers 01 Nov 2019 31 Oct 2020 Chuadanga, Jhenaidah, Jashore 13-2019-41F 142 Sl. No Private Sector Partner USAID Facilitation Start date End date Location/ Working Areas/Place of Performance (District/ Upazila) FAS number 41 Petrochem Bangladesh Limited Collaborative works lead by input company increase farmer access to quality hybrids for getting better yield and guaranty of marketing in the FTF zone 01 Nov 2019 31 May 2021 Jashor, Norial, Magura, Bagerhat, Gopalganj, Borisal, Kustia, Rajbari, Madaripur 13-2019-42F 42 Bayer CropScience Ltd. Making digital shift in agronomic advisory services to meet the needs of farmers and connecting distribution channels for ensuring quality inputs (hybrid rice and maize seed and crop protection) in FTF zone. 01 Dec 2019 31 May 2021 Barishal and Khulna region 13-2019-43F 43 Advanced Chemical Industries Limited Promotion of two new high-yielding rice varieties 01 Jan 2020 31 May 2021 Jashore and Jhenaidha 13-2019-44F 44 Advanced Chemical Industries Limited Establish inclusive inputs distribution and marketing channel of Sunflower, Rice and Maize crop in Southern Delta 01 Dec 2019 31 Jul 2019 Barishal, Barguna, Potuakhali, Faridpur, Khulna, Bagerhat 13-2019-45F 45 Ali Seed Farm Ideal value chain of high-yielding varieties BRRI Dhan72 and BRRI Dhan74 zinc rice seed and grain 15 Dec 2019 31 May 2021 FfF Zone 13-2019- 46F/07-2019- 46F 46 JADID Corporation To expand sesame exports further and aims to reach a volume of 2000 MT in the coming season 01 Jan 2020 31 May 2021 Rajbari, Faridpur and Kushtia 13-2019-47F 47 Naafco (Pvt.) Ltd To develop a robust and effective distribution channel for agricultural inputs integrating smallholder farmers in the FTF Zone 01 Dec 2019 31 May 2021 Barguna, Potuakhali, Bhola, Barisal, Gopalgonj, Bagerhat, Jheinadah, Khulna, Faridpur. 13-2019-48F 48 Konika Seed Company (KSC) Increase farmers’ access to new agri￾machineries, premium crop varieties and technologies 01 Dec 2019 31 May 2021 Chuadanga, Meherpur, Jhenaidah, Kushtia, Jashore, Magura, Narail, Faridpur and Rajbari districts 13-2019-49F 143 Sl. No Private Sector Partner USAID Facilitation Start date End date Location/ Working Areas/Place of Performance (District/ Upazila) FAS number 49 Robi Axita Limited To instigate Bangladeshi farming community in utilizing digital communication to improve agricultural outcomes by bringing the farmers community closer together through Robi’s specially designed social media platform titled “Krishi Bhai” 10 Mar 2020 31 May 2021 Entire FTF Zone (Southwestern Bangladesh) 13-2019-50F 50 Sukumar Vendor SUKUMAR VANDER plans to focus on the 15 most potential Haat Bazars around their processing mill in Faridpur and potential bazars of FTF to expand their sesame procurement, processing and marketing business and aims to reach a volume of 2500 MT in the coming season 01 Jan 2020 31 May 2021 Faridpur, Rajbari, Jhinaidha, Magura, Kustia 13-2019-51F 51 Ujirpur Organic Multipurpose Cooperative Society Limited (UOMCSL) Supply Chain Development for Quality Seed and Grain of Premium Rice Varieties 01 Jan 2020 31 May 2021 Narail, Jashore, Magura, Faridpur, Rajbari and Gopalganj district. 13-2019-52F 52 Dynamic Agro Science Promotion and marketing of quality sesame seed, Short duration T. Aman seed by introducing a comprehensive Sesame Advisory Service (SAS) for sesame farmers in FTF zone 01 Feb 2020 31 May 2021 Faridpur, Rajbari, Kushtia, Jhenaidah, Magura and Khulna 13-2019-53F 53 Bombay Sweets Co; Ltd Study tour of US peanut processing equipment manufacturer and supplier 01 Apr 2019 31 Jan 2020 FTF zone ST-05-2019- 54F 54 Natural Agro Process Centre Increase farmers' awareness on quality sesame production and procurement. 01 Jan 2020 31 May 2021 Khulna, Satkhira, Jashore, Narail, Chuadanga, Jhenaidah, Magura, Narail, and Rajbari 13-2019-55F 55 Metal Agro Ltd Promotion and marketing of quality sesame seed, by introducing a comprehensive Sesame Advisory Service (SAS) for sesame farmers in FTF zone. 01 Feb 2020 31 May 2021 Rajbari, Kushtia , Khulna, Madaripur, Faridpur , Magura, Jhinaidoho, Jessore 13-2019-56F 144 Sl. No Private Sector Partner USAID Facilitation Start date End date Location/ Working Areas/Place of Performance (District/ Upazila) FAS number 56 Petrochem Bangladesh Limited Promote improved varieties of CORTEVA maize and rice seed and expansion of the market of those for higher profitability of farmers in FTF zone. 01 May 2020 31 May 2021 Hybrid Rice: Khulna, Shatkhira, Chuadanga, Meherpur, Pirojpur Hybrid Maize: Jhenaidah, Chuadanga, Meherpur, Kushtia 13-2019-57F 57 Ispahani Agro Ltd. Ispahani Agro Ltd.’s ultimate approach to the farmers is ‘Total Crop Management’ (TCM). 01 Apr 2020 30 May 2021 Whole FTF area 13-2019-58F 58 Chaldal Limited To instigate Feed the Future agribusinesses in adopting e-commerce digital platform to market, advertise regional procured rice & diversified crops to the lucrative urban customers of the greater Dhaka region. Leveraging ICT technologies to improve quality, efficiency, and growth of inclusive business models. 10 May 2020 31 May 2021 Entire Feed The Future Zone (Southwestern Bangladesh) 13-2019-59F 59 Auto Crop Care Limited COVID-19 Response 01 Aug 2020 31 Jan 2021 Chuadanga, Jhinaidha, Jashor, Magura, Meherpur, Kustia, Rajbari, Khulna, Bagerhat, Satkhira, Faridpur, Gopalganj 15-2020-60F 60 Bombay Sweets & Co. Ltd. (BSCL) COVID-19 Response 01 Jun 2020 30 Sep 2020 Bhola distict 15-2020-61F 61 Bayer CropScience Ltd. COVID-19 Response 01 Jun 2020 31 Dec 2020 Barishal and Khulna region 15-2020-62F 62 Konika Seed Company (KSC) COVID-19 Response 01 Jan 2020 30 Nov 2020 Chuadanga, Meherpur, Jhenaidah, Kushtia, Jashore, Magura, Narail, Faridpur and Rajbari districts 15-2020-63F 63 Ali Seed Farm COVID-19 Response 01 Jun 2020 30 Sep 2020 FTF zone 15-2020-64F 145 Sl. No Private Sector Partner USAID Facilitation Start date End date Location/ Working Areas/Place of Performance (District/ Upazila) FAS number 64 Chaldal Limited COVID-19 Response 01 Jun 2020 31 Jan 2021 Entire Feed The Future Zone (Southwestern Bangladesh) 15-2020-65F 65 Bank Asia Limited COVID-19 Response 01 Jun 2020 31 Jan 2021 Entire Feed The Future Zone (Southwestern Bangladesh) 15-2020-66F 66 Ujirpur Organic Multipurpose Cooperative Society Limited (UOMCSL) COVID-19 Response 01 Jun 2020 31 Dec 2020 Narai, Jashore, Magura, Faridpur, Rajbari and Gopalgonj Districts 15-2020-67F 67 Name of Grantee: Natural Agro Process Centre COVID-19 Response 01 Jun 2020 31 Dec 2020 Khulna, Satkhira, Jashore, Narail, Chuadanga, Jhenaidah, Magura, Narail, and Rajbari 15-2020-68F 68 Xplore Business Limited COVID-19 Response 05 Jun 2020 31 Dec 2020 Chuadanga, Jhenaidah and Jashore 15-2020-69F 69 Advanced Chemical Industries Limited (ACI Limited). COVID-19 Response 01 Jun 2020 31 Dec 2020 Barishal, Faridpur, Gopalganj, Khulna, Bagerhat, Jessore, Magura, Jhenaidah, Chuadanga, Meherpur and Kustia 15-2020-70F 70 BRAC Bank Limited COVID-19 Response 15 Aug 2020 14 Mar 2021 Entire Feed The Future Zone (Southwestern Bangladesh) 15-2020-71F 71 Lal Teer Seed Limited COVID-19 Response 01 Sep 2020 31 Mar 2021 Barishal, Khulna, Jashore region 15-2020-72F 146 Sl. No Private Sector Partner USAID Facilitation Start date End date Location/ Working Areas/Place of Performance (District/ Upazila) FAS number 72 Advanced Chemical Industries Limited COVID-19 Response 01 Sep 2020 28 Feb 2021 Chuadanga, Jhenaidah, Jashore, Magura, Meherpur, Barishal, Bhola, Patuakhali, Bargu 15-2020-73F 73 Haychem (Bangladesh) Limited (HBL) Promote the use of quality inputs including micronutrients, Bio-stimulant and Trichoderma in the FTF zone. 01 Sep 2020 31 May 2021 Chuadanga, Jhenaidah, Kushtia, Meherpur, Narail, Magura, Satkhira, Khulna, Bagerhat, Faridpur, Rajbari, Barishal, Bhola, Barguna, Patuakhali, Shariatpur, Madaripur, Gopalganj and Jashore 14-2020-74F 74 Dynamic Agro Science COVID-19 Response 15 Sep 2020 15 Mar 2021 Chuadanga, Jhenaidah, Jashore, Magura, Meherpur, Barishal, Bhola, Patuakhali, Barguna 15-2020-75F 75 ACI Motors Limited Promotion and awareness creating of Combine Harvester and rice transplanter in the FTF zone. 01 Oct 2021 31 May 2021 Whole FTF area 2-2020-76F 76 The Metal (Pvt.) Ltd. Promotion of Metal’s Mechanized Agro Solutions Through Franchise Model. 01 Oct 2021 31 May 2021 Whole FTF area 14-2020-77F 77 The City Bank Ltd. To enhance credit offering to micro, small and medium (MSME) enterprises and develop and promote financial products for agricultural equipment. Riding on the distribution channels of financial institutions, a strong supply chain financing footprint can be leveraged to catalyze the adoption of Asset Based Financing Instruments (ABF) in the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Feed the Future (FTF) zone 15 Nov 2020 31 May 2021 Entire Feed The Future Zone (Southwestern Bangladesh) 14-2020-78F 147 Sl. No Private Sector Partner USAID Facilitation Start date End date Location/ Working Areas/Place of Performance (District/ Upazila) FAS number 78 Abedin Equipment Limited Promotion of Agri Machineries in the FTF Zone. 01 Dec 2020 31 May 2021 Whole FTF area 14-2020-79F 79 Alim Industries Ltd.Promotion of Agri Machineries in the FTF Zone. 01 Dec 2020 31 May 2021 Whole FTF area 13-2020-80F 80 Prantojon Agro Enterprise Mitigating quality mung bean seed shortage and low productivity through enhancing branding and marketing of improved quality mung bean seed and inoculant combo offer in Char/Remote areas of FTF zone. 01 Dec 2020 31 May 2021 Barishal, Jhalokathi, Patuakhali, Barguna and Bhola 14-2020-81F 81 Advanced Chemical Industries Limited Promote inoculants as part of nutrient management for the higher profitability of pulses and oilseeds farmers. 01 Dec 2020 31 May 2021 Jhenaidah, Magura, Jashore, Kushtia, Norail, Meherpur, Barisal, Potuakhali, Barguna, Bhola, and Faridpur 14-2020-82F 148 ANNEX 6: PRODUCER SURVEY AND INTERVIEW DATA ANALYSIS HIGHLIGHTS Crop Productivity and Diversification in the RDC Operations Area Based on the Producer Survey and VCA interviews, crop diversification has been taking place in the target districts of the FTF zone in the last five years. In addition to Hybrid-rice, current adoption of maize, mung bean, sesame and sunflower crops is evident. According to VCAs, their clients, almost entirely, are the “new adopters” of those commodities. However, producers survey reveals about a half of them had been growing those commodities before the intervention of the RDC project, indicating those crops/varieties are not unfamiliar in the target districts of the FTF zone. Familiar or not, there is indication that during the RDC project intervention phase, expansion of adoption of diverse commodities has occurred. More importantly, VCAs succeeded attracting clients towards accepting new crops / varieties. We note that the importance of inbred rice, compared to hybrid rice, cannot be undermined. Table1: Status of Crop Diversification in the RDC Project Area – Current Scenario Versus Five Years Ago Crop (Species/Variety) Response of interviewees (%) Adoption - Current Adoption – Five years ago Client of VCAs Producer Client of VCAs Producer Rice-Hybrid 81 35 1 22 Rice-Inbred 72 72 31 83 Groundnut 1 6 0 6 Maize 18 16 0 16 Mung bean 17 14 0 7 Sesame 18 12 1 9 Sunflower 18 11 0 6 The productivity of the crops / varieties has increased during the RDC intervention phase, compared to five years ago, in the target districts of the FTF zone. All the VCA respondents (100 percent) expressed that their clients (farmer/customers) were able to increase yield (as a measure of productivity) as compared to five years ago. The quantitative analysis from producer survey shows that this increase occurred in the range of 10 percent (hybrid rice) to 38 percent (Groundnut). Besides hybrid rice, yield increase was smaller for sesame (14 percent), mung bean (17 percent) and fine-quality rice (19 percent). Table 2: Yield Status of Crops/Varieties in the RDC Project Area – Current Versus Five Years Ago Crop (Species/Variety) Yield – Current (t ha-1) Yield – Five Years Ago (t ha-1) Current Yield Gain Over Five Years Ago (%) Rice-Local 3.83 2.96 29 Rice-HYV (Bold) 5.18 4.14 25 Rice-Fine quality 3.15 2.65 19 Rice-Hybrid 5.45 4.95 10 Groundnut 2.33 1.69 38 Maize 6.19 4.88 27 Mung bean 0.67 0.57 17 Sesame 1.27 1.11 14 Sunflower 0.62 0.50 25 In addition to increased productivity of the crops/varieties, the sale and margin also increased during the RDC intervention phase, compared to five years ago, in the target districts of the FTF zone. All the VCA respondents (100 percent) expressed that their clients (farmer/customers) were able to increase margin as compared to 5 years ago. The producer survey highlights the sale increased between 17 and 63 percent, and that the margin between 13 and 68 percent, depending on the crop species/variety. 149 Table 3: Current Status of Sale and Margin of Crops/Varieties in the RDC Project Area Compared to Five Years Ago Crop (Species / Variety) Increase (%) Compared to Five Years Ago Sale Margin Rice-Local 18 13 Rice-HYV (Bold) 29 27 Rice-Fine quality 25 21 Rice-Hybrid 27 22 Groundnut 61 68 Maize 63 29 Mung bean 18 24 Sesame 40 51 Sunflower 17 23 Productivity Drivers Five drivers, according to producer survey, contributed to crop productivity, sale and margin. They are improved seed, improved marketing, better crop protection, better processing and increasing adoption of farm mechanization. Utilization of those drivers have increased to 29 percent in the current scenario compared to five years ago. Notably, only few (5 percent) surveyed producers used mechanization five years ago, which jumped to 30 percent in the current scenario. Table 4: Drivers of Productivity, Sale, and Margin of Crops/Varieties in the RDC Project Area – Current Versus Five Years Ago Driver Utilization by the Producers (% Respondents) Change Between Periods (%) Utilization – Current Utilization – Five years ago Seed 50 21 29 Marketing 49 25 24 Crop protection 38 18 20 Processing 35 15 20 Mechanization 30 5 25 Increased utilization of the aforesaid drivers had been possible, according to producer survey, due to better access to inputs (94 percent), receiving better price (74 percent), improved access to finance (33 percent), improved deliver channels (25 percent) and new partnerships in few instances (2 percent). Increased utilization of the drivers resulted in driver-specific benefits, such as cost reduction, timely crop management and better yield (response of driver “input access”), increased profit and sustained production (response of driver “price”), access to better service and investment opportunity (response of driver “access to finance”), increased profit, increased sale and better processing (response of driver “improved delivery channels”), and better processing (response of driver “new partnership”). 150 Figure 1: Cause-Effect Links to Increased Productivity 151 The VCAs attribute sale price (75 percent) as the major driver of crop diversity, productivity, sale volume increase and profitability. The other factors include improved seed (38 percent), crop/variety information (37 percent) and not to ignore the new buyer (34 percent). Market information (20 percent), government support (17 percent), RDC support (13 percent) and non-RDC projects support (5 percent) were also highlighted by the VCAs as contributors to cropping systems change. The VCAs, however, considered that input price (10 percent) has not been playing a big role here. The VCAs had been adjusting marketing strategies in line with their views. Input Sources All producers, as revealed from producer survey, accessed fertilizers and agrochemicals from input dealers. Seed was also accessed predominantly from input dealers (83 percent); however, 45 percent of respondent producers had their own preserved seed for cropping. Table 5: Inputs Sources for Producers in the RDC Project Area Type of Input Source Respondent (%) Seeds Own 45 Neighbor 7 Input dealer 83 Contracted company 6 Fertilizers Input dealer 100 Agro-chemicals Input dealer 100 Given the overwhelming producer-demand of company inputs (seeds, fertilizers, and agro-chemicals), the VCAs source those products from their preferred companies; they access only few supplies of seed (3- 4 percent) from ambassador producers and government. Only few VCAs (2 percent) mentioned that they accessed Trichoderma (a biofungicide) and inoculant (bacteria that cause legumes to form the nitrogen fixing nodules) from companies. Most of the VCAs (88 percent) changed input sources in the last five years. The change of sourcing they made mainly due to the change of crop / market (63 percent), followed by finding better / new distribution channels (35 percent). Table 6: Reasons of Changes in Input Sources by the VCA Within the Last 5 Years in the RDC Project Area Reasons of Change Response (% Respondents) Change of crop/market 63 Better/new distribution channels 35 Support from input producer 28 Better price 26 New information on the product/trial results 26 Training/demonstrations 18 Better product 12 Non-RDC projects support 11 Franchise 9 RDC support 9 Government support 8 Services and Sources Almost 50 percent of the producers, sourced from producer survey, received services on general advisory, processing and mechanization; whereas, about a third on marketing their commodities and agronomic (crop management) issues. A small number of producers (6-9 percent) had an opportunity to receive services on aggregation, , and financial matters. 152 Table 7: Producers Received Services in the RDC Project Area Type of Service Recipient (% Respondents) Advisory 49 Processing 48 Mechanization 48 Marketing (Sale) 32 Agronomic 28 Aggregation 9 ICT 7 Financial 6 Producers (according to producer survey) used as many as 11 sources to receive services. To be noted, nobody mentioned receiving any services from concerned government officials. Input dealers had been the predominant source of services (69 percent), followed by a father or male relative (45 percent) and neighbor (36 percent). Producers attempt more than one source for information gathering. Table 8: Sources of Services Producers Receive in the RDC Project Area Source of Services Preferential Source (% Respondent) Primary Secondary Tertiary Quaternary Total Input dealer 38 10 20 1 69 Father or male relative 25 7 13 45 Company (purchase product linked) 9 1 6 16 Neighbor 6 22 8 36 Farmer group (belong to) 3 14 4 21 Didn’t require external advice 1 1 Bank agent or MFI 2 2 Buyer 5 5 Field day/Demonstration plot 22 22 Government agriculture officer Local service provider 6 10 6 22 Miller or processor 5 7 12 Mother or female relative 9 8 17 All 82 81 76 29 Incentives to Producers The VCAs, as preferred by the producers, provide incentives /services to their clients in the form of advisory and conducting demonstration field trials (42 percent) and arranging field days (38 percent). Some VCAs provide monetary benefits such as product promotion prices (39 percent) and volume discounts (29 percent). Table 9: The Best Incentives to Inspire Producers to Test New Crops and Products Incentive for Producers Response (% Respondents) Built-in product use information/Advisory services 42 Field trials 42 Product promotion prices 39 Field Days 38 Volume discounts 29 153 The interviewed VCAs were linked to 18 companies for their business—who, in fact, were the grantees of the RDC project. However, only 37 percent of the interviewed VCAs were aware of the linkage of their companies to RDC project. Interestingly, some of the grantees disclosed an RDC linkage to some of their clients (VCAs), but not all. Figure 2: Familiarity of VCAs Whether Their Parent/Partner Companies Were the Grantees and Linked to the RDC Project Only 8 percent of the interviewed VCAs were aware of incentives funded by RDC via partners intended to inspire producers to test new crops or products. Those who were aware of, utilized the incentives by passing on to their clients through product promotion prices. Gender A big proportion of interviewed VCAs (70 percent) find women (including youth) clients in their business and increased change in those client category (71 percent), and a potential for their business to improve due to an increase in women involvement (69 percent). Table 10: Women in the Eyes of VCAs in the RDC Project Area Type of Issue Response (% respondents) Yes No VCAs having any women and youth clients 70 30 VCAs experienced change in the number of women and youth clients in the last five years 71 29 VCAs experienced any potential of business improvement due to an increase in women’s involvement 69 31 VCAs participated in women’s empowerment programs as part of the RDC activity 0 100 VCAs expected the RDC activity to succeed in women’s empowerment and improving women’s roles and access to markets 4 96 More than half of the respondent producers report that women achieved some increased involvement in farming, while 12 percent think that women’s involvement has significantly increased. 154 Table 11: Women's Status as Viewed by the Respondent Producers in the RDC Project Area Women’s Status Response (% Respondents) Decreased involvement 15 Stayed the same 23 Some increased involvement 49 Significantly increased involvement 12 Training and Gender Involvement Training has an important role in the perception and attitude of agribusiness community and/or producers as a whole on increasing women’s involvement in rural employment and/or farming activities. This evaluation reveals that VCAs participated in women empowerment programs as part of the RDC project; the project virtually failed to succeed in empowering women and improving their roles and access to markets (96 percent). The same was reflected in the producer survey. Table 12: Formal Training by the Respondent Producers in the RDC Project Area Training Topic Response (% Respondents) Food security Government program 18 Non-government program 19 RDC program 0 Women empowerment Government program 0 Non-government program 5 RDC program 0 Youth empowerment Government program 0 Non-government program 0 RDC program 0 Trends in Women Involvement About engaging women in VCA’s horizon, about a third of the interviewed VCAs view women as their clients or are not interested in any sort of business with women. Table 11: Views of VCAs on Engaging Women in VCA Business Engaging Women in VCA Business Response (% Respondents) As clients 37 As clients and workers 18 Don’t know 11 Not interested 34 About 26 percent of the businesses of VCAs are currently employing at least one woman; this figure has significantly increased compared to five years ago, when only 3 percent of the VCA businesses employed at least one woman. It is worth noting that few businesses are currently engaging 10 or more women as employees. 155 Table 12: Comparing Women Employees Engaged in VCA Busing in the RDC Project Area – Current and Five Years Ago Number of Women Employees Response (% Respondents) Current Five Years Ago 0 74 97 1 13 0 2 3 1 3 0 1 4 0 1 5 1 0 6 1 0 7 1 0 10 1 0 25 1 0 50 1 0 88 1 0 100 2 0 200 1 0 From the employer point of view, women are facing several obstacles in entering and fitting into employment in rural businesses—notably, social (cultural/traditional) and family obligations. In parallel, business skills and education are also hindrances. Table 13: Obstacles to Increased Involvement of Women in VCA Operations Obstacle Response (% Respondents) Cultural/traditional 52 Family obligations 40 Business/negotiation skills 35 Education 25 Physical disadvantage (cannot perform hard work) 13 Attribution to RDC In the RDC project intervention districts of the FTF zone, crop diversification is evident—incorporating rice, both inbred and hybrid, and non-rice crops such as maize, mung bean, sesame, and sunflower. The yield, selling, and margin of all crops increased during the RDC intervention period. However, attribution of the RDC project on the evident crop diversification, productivity, and profitability has been difficult and almost impossible to measure. There was contradiction in the claims from two sides—producers and VCAs. About half of the interviewed producers claimed that they were already growing those crops / varieties before the RDC activities. On the other hand, the VCAs had the opinion that their clients, in general, were the “new adopters” of those commodities. Having said that, almost two-thirds of the VCAs were unaware of the engagement of their partner or parent companies with RDC activities. It is, then, not conclusive if the evident crop diversity, productivity, and profitability stem from RDC channel (through grantees) or other channels of VCAs. The other channels include the promotion of products from non-grantee companies and non-RDC activities in the project area. Not only the RDC project has been working in the FTF zone; many other USAID and non-USAID funded projects have been working there before and during the RDC project (e.g., AESA, AIP, LPIN, CSISA). Only one of the interviewed VCAs participated in the RDC Annual Agricultural Survey. Also, the client base of the VCAs is not available, and it is difficult to judge whether producers were the sole beneficiaries of the VCAs rather than simultaneous beneficiaries of more than one project in the study area. What we can confirm is that 84 percent of the interviewed producers are either landless or smallholders. 156 Land Ownership The end users of the RDC intervention, as revealed in the producer survey, were essentially smallholders (74 percent, owning 0.02 – 1.01 ha) and landless (10 percent, owning <0.02 ha). The mediumholders (owning >1.01 to <=3.04 ha) and largeholders (>3.04 ha) accounted for 14 percent and 2 percent, respectively. Figure 3: Land Ownership MAF/FAS Partners’ Perspective (KIIs) Table 14: What is the Title of Your Project and the Period of Your Company’s Cooperation With RDC? Core Business Area with Number of Grantees Months Average of Months Agro-machinery Supplier (4) 31 7.8 Financier (3) 30 10.0 ICT Service (5) 82 16.4 Large-Scale Food Grain Processor and Marketer (1) 20 20.0 Large-Scale Seed & Fertilizer Supplier (6) 132 22.0 Poultry, Cattle and Fish Feed Supplier (1) 12 12.0 Retailer (1) 21 21.0 Small-Scale Food Grain Processor and Marketer (7) 104 14.9 Small-Scale Seed & Fertilizer Supplier (4) 69 17.3 Small-Scale Seed Supplier (6) 89 14.8 Value Chain Linkage Developer (1) 9 9.0 Total 599 15.4 On average, MAF-FAS intervention lasted for 15 months. 157 Table 15: What Were the Key Objectives of Your Company’s Cooperation with the RDC Activity? Core Business Area with Number of Grantees Increase sales Raise funding for existing products/services Explore/establish new distribution channels Develop new product/service Improve the company capacity Improve staff project management skills Facilitate Government support Develop new marketing tools Increase end-user awareness of products. Provide COVID￾19 related support Total Agro-machinery Supplier (4) 3 2 3 3 2 1 2 3 19 Financier (3) 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 10 ICT Service (5) 4 2 3 2 1 1 1 1 2 17 Large-Scale Food Grain Processor & Marketer (1) 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 Large-Scale Seed & Fertilizer Supplier (6) 5 2 5 5 3 4 4 5 1 34 Poultry, Cattle and Fish Feed Supplier (1) 1 1 1 1 1 5 Retailer (1) 1 1 1 3 Small-Scale Food Grain Processor and Marketer (7) 6 2 6 4 4 2 1 3 2 30 Small-Scale Seed & Fertilizer Supplier (4) 4 3 4 3 3 3 1 3 3 2 29 Small-Scale Seed Supplier (6) 5 5 4 3 5 5 3 2 2 34 Value Chain Linkage Developer (1) 1 1 2 Grand Total 31 18 28 25 20 18 2 17 22 8 189 Percentage 16.4% 9.5% 14.8% 13.2% 10.6% 9.5% 1.1% 9.0% 11.6% 4.2% 100.0% Most MAF/FAS private partners had business-related objectives versus net fundraising. Table 16: Has the Cooperation with RDC Met or Is Expected to Meet Your Company’s Expectations for Each of the Selected Objectives Above? Core Business Area with Number of Grantees Fully Met Not Met Partially Met Total Agro-machinery Supplier (4) 4 4 Financier (3) 2 2 ICT Service (5) 4 1 5 Large-Scale Food Grain Processor and Marketer (1) 1 1 Large-Scale Seed & Fertilizer Supplier (6) 6 6 Poultry, Cattle and Fish Feed Supplier (1) 1 1 Retailer (1) 1 1 Small-Scale Food Grain Processor and Marketer (7) 4 1 2 7 Small-Scale Seed & Fertilizer Supplier (4) 3 1 4 Small-Scale Seed Supplier (6) 6 6 Value Chain Linkage Developer (1) 1 1 Grand Total 32 1 5 38 Percentage 84.2% 2.6% 13.2% 100.0% 158 Nearly every MAF/FAS Partner stated that their objectives of cooperation with RDC have been either fully (84.2 percent) or partially met (13.2 percent). Table 17: What Types of RDC Project Support Have Proved Most Useful for Your Company? List the Top Three. Core Business Area with Number of Grantees Staff Capacity Building Fundraising Market Promotional Support Management/ Distribution/ Collaboration/Partners hip Total Agro-machinery Supplier (4) 1 1 2 3 7 Financier (3) 3 2 1 3 9 ICT Service (5) 3 1 3 4 11 Large-Scale Food Grain Processor and Marketer (1) 1 1 2 Large-Scale Seed & Fertilizer Supplier (6) 5 4 3 12 Poultry, Cattle and Fish Feed Supplier (1) 1 1 2 Retailer (1) 1 1 2 Small-Scale Food Grain Processor and Marketer (7) 5 1 2 5 13 Small-Scale Seed & Fertilizer Supplier (4) 3 1 3 1 8 Small-Scale Seed Supplier (6) 5 2 4 4 15 Value Chain Linkage Developer (1) 1 1 2 Grand Total 25 10 21 27 83 Percentage 30.12% 12.05% 25.30% 32.53% 100.00% Business development support has proved to be most useful for MAF/FAS partners (grantees). Table 18: Did You Face Any Challenges in Proving the Match Funding Required for the RDC Cooperation Project? Core Business Area with Number of Grantees Faced No Challenge Challenge Faced Agro-machinery Supplier (4) 3 1 Financier (3) 3 ICT Service (5) 5 Large-Scale Food Grain Processor and Marketer (1) 1 Large-Scale Seed & Fertilizer Supplier (6) 6 Poultry, Cattle and Fish Feed Supplier (1) 1 Retailer (1) 1 Small-Scale Food Grain Processor and Marketer (7) 6 1 Small-Scale Seed & Fertilizer Supplier (4) 4 Small-Scale Seed Supplier (6) 6 Value Chain Linkage Developer (1) 1 Grand Total 37 2 Percentage 94.9% 5.1% The MAF/FAS match-funding requirement did not present any challenge for nearly 95 percent of its partners. 159 Table 19: Do You Think the RDC Invitation for Applications/Request for Proposals Process Is Clear and Transparent? Core Business Area with Number of Grantees Application Process Was Clear and Transparent Application Process Was Not Clear and Transparent Other/Remarks Agro-machinery Supplier (4) 3 1 Financier (3) 3 ICT Service (5) 5 Large-Scale Food Grain Processor and Marketer (1) 1 Large-Scale Seed & Fertilizer Supplier (6) 6 Poultry, Cattle and Fish Feed Supplier (1) 1 Retailer (1) 1 Small-Scale Food Grain Processor and Marketer (7) 7 Small-Scale Seed & Fertilizer Supplier (4) 4 Small-Scale Seed Supplier (6) 5 1 Value Chain Linkage Developer (1) 1 Grand Total 37 0 2 Percentage 94.9% 0.0% 5.1% Nearly 95 percent of MAF/FAS partners believe the fund’s RFP process was clear and transparent. Table 20: Have the Grant/Project Reporting Requirements Been (Select All Answer Options That Apply): Core Business Area With Number of Grantees Reasonable Easy to Follow Difficult to Follow Excessive Useful for Core Business Agro-machinery Supplier (4) 3 2 2 Financier (3) 3 2 ICT Service (5) 5 2 2 Large-Scale Food Grain Processor and Marketer (1) 1 Large-Scale Seed & Fertilizer Supplier (6) 6 3 1 1 1 Poultry, Cattle and Fish Feed Supplier (1) 1 1 Retailer (1) 1 Small-Scale Food Grain Processor and Marketer (7) 4 4 3 2 4 Small-Scale Seed & Fertilizer Supplier (4) 3 1 1 Small-Scale Seed Supplier (6) 6 4 1 4 Value Chain Linkage Developer (1) 1 1 Grand Total 33 19 7 4 13 Percentage 43.4% 25.0% 9.2% 5.3% 17.1% Project reporting requirements were challenging for nearly 15 percent of the MAF/FAS partners. 160 Table 21: Have You Received Any Training from RDC Partners? Core Business Area With Number of Grantees Received Training Did Not Receive Training Agro-machinery Supplier (4) 3 1 Financier (3) 2 1 ICT Service (5) 3 2 Large-Scale Food Grain Processor and Marketer (1) 1 Large-Scale Seed & Fertilizer Supplier (6) 6 Poultry, Cattle and Fish Feed Supplier (1) 1 Retailer (1) 1 Small-Scale Food Grain Processor and Marketer (7) 5 2 Small-Scale Seed & Fertilizer Supplier (4) 4 Small-Scale Seed Supplier (6) 6 Value Chain Linkage Developer (1) 1 Grand Total 32 7 Percentage 82.1% 17.9% Over 80 percent of MAF/FAS partners received training from RDC. 161 Table 22: Has Your Company’s Distribution Network Increased in the Period of Your Project With RDC? Core Business Area with the Number of Grantees Count of Distribution Network Increased Count of Distribution Network Not Increased 2 Count of N/A Sum of Local Market Actors at the Beginning Count of Not Applicable for the Grantees Count of Not Reported/ Remarks Sum of Local Market Actors at the Beginning Sum of Local Market Actors at the End Agro-machinery Supplier (4) 4 3 1 3,053 3,622 Financier (3) 1 2 1 2 31,000 37,200 ICT Service (5) 2 1 2 2 2 1 400 725 Large-Scale Food Grain Processor and Marketer (1) 1 1 135 200 Large-Scale Seed & Fertilizer Supplier (6) 5 1 5 1 400 577 Poultry, Cattle and Fish Feed Supplier (1) 1 1 110 150 Retailer (1) 1 1 Small-Scale Food Grain Processor and Marketer (7) 5 1 1 2 5 70 545 Small-Scale Seed & Fertilizer Supplier (4) 4 4 1,388 1,866 Small-Scale Seed Supplier (6) 3 1 2 3 3 215 398 Value Chain Linkage Developer (1) 1 1 Grand Total 26 4 9 22 6 11 36,771 45,283 Percentage 66.7% 10.3% 23.1% 56.4% 15.4% 28.2% 23.15% According to MAF/FAS grantees, their distribution networks expanded by over 20 percent during the period of their partner projects with RDC.