BURKINA FASO AMELIORATION ET SECURISATION DES TERRES VERS LA RESILIENCE (ASTER) Final report March 2022 Produced by Expertises, Conseils et Réalisations Sarl. 12 BP 416 Ouagadougou 12 Tel. : (226) 74 99 74 31/ 70 23 29 90 Email: ecor.sarl@gmail.com Burkina Faso MID-TERM EVALUATION OF FEED THE FUTURE BURKINA FASO-AMELIORATION ET SECURISATION DES TERRES VERS LA RESILIENCE (ASTER) 2 TABLE OF CONTENT TABLE OF CONTENT.................................................................................................................... 2 LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................... 4 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.............................................................................................................. 4 ABREVIATIONS............................................................................................................................ 5 SUMMARY TABLE ....................................................................................................................... 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... 8 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 11 2 AIMS OF THE MISSION ..................................................................................................... 11 2.1 Overall objective of the evaluation ........................................................................... 11 2.2 Specific objectives of the evaluation......................................................................... 11 2.3 Expected results of the evaluation............................................................................ 11 3 METHODICAL APPROACH................................................................................................. 12 3.1 Mission organization ................................................................................................. 12 3.2 Preparatory phase ..................................................................................................... 12 3.2.1 Writing the mission start-up report................................................................... 13 3.3 Investigation phase.................................................................................................... 13 3.3.1 Recruitment and training of interviewers.......................................................... 13 3.3.2 Stakeholder surveys........................................................................................... 13 3.3.3 Stakeholder interviews....................................................................................... 14 3.4 Data analysis, report writing and validation phase................................................... 14 4 SHORT PRESENTATION OF ASTER .................................................................................... 14 4.1 Background and rationale for ASTER......................................................................... 14 4.2 Objectives of ASTER................................................................................................... 15 4.3 Theory of change ....................................................................................................... 15 4.4 Technical and Financial Partners............................................................................... 15 4.5 Implementation device.............................................................................................. 15 4.6 Target public .............................................................................................................. 16 5 MAIN RESULTS OF THE EVALUATION............................................................................... 16 5.1 Project conception..................................................................................................... 16 3 5.2 Implementation of ASTER.......................................................................................... 17 5.3 Physical execution of ASTER...................................................................................... 20 5.3.1 Under the specific objectives............................................................................. 20 5.3.2 Achievement of targets...................................................................................... 28 5.3.3 Analysis of indicators and their target values.................................................... 32 5.4 Financial execution of ASTER..................................................................................... 33 5.5 Partnership ................................................................................................................ 34 5.6 Monitoring and evaluation system ........................................................................... 34 5.7 Difficulties encountered and solutions applied ........................................................ 35 6 RESULTS ACCORDING TO THE EVALUATION CRITERIA .................................................... 35 6.1 Relevance................................................................................................................... 35 6.2 Effectiveness.............................................................................................................. 37 6.3 Efficiency.................................................................................................................... 38 6.3.1 Budget execution ............................................................................................... 38 6.3.2 Human and material resources.......................................................................... 38 6.4 Effects and impacts.................................................................................................... 39 6.5 Sustainability ............................................................................................................. 40 6.6 Cross-cutting themes................................................................................................. 40 6.6.1 Communication strategy.................................................................................... 40 6.6.2 Environmental and social safeguards ................................................................ 41 6.6.3 Gender Consideration ........................................................................................ 41 7 VERIFICATION OF THE THEORY OF CHANGE.................................................................... 42 8 LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ASTER ......................................... 43 9 RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................................................... 43 CONCLUSION............................................................................................................................ 45 BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 46 APPENDICES.............................................................................................................................. 47 Appendices A : list of people we met................................................................................... 47 Appendix B: Data Collection Tools ....................................................................................... 56 Appendix C: ASTER Logical Framework ................................................................................ 65 4 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 : Samples of communes to visit by region............................................................................................ 13 Table 2 : areas of intervention of ASTER (FY 2020 and FY 2021)................................................................ 16 Table 3 : ASTER key actions table ............................................................................................................................ 17 Tableau 4 : progression de ASTER vers les valeurs cibles des indicateurs................................................. 29 Table 5 : budget consumption of ASTER in US dollars.................................................................................... 33 Table 6 : rate of achievement of ASTER specific objectives........................................................................... 37 Table 7 : recommendations of the evaluation team............................................................................................... 43 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1 : proportion of satisfaction with training and equipment................................................................ 21 Figure 2 : APFR requests and APFR delivered in the sample communes.................................................... 24 Figure 3 : types of recipients of APFRs delivered.............................................................................................. 24 Figure 4 : causes of the low delivery of APRFs according to local authorities (CFV, CCFV) ................ 25 Figure 5 : proportion of groups that have become cooperatives in the sampled communes................ 27 Figure 6 : levels of satisfaction of the populations with ASTER..................................................................... 36 5 ABREVIATIONS ACEP Credit Agency for Private Enterprise AN National Assembly APFR Rural Land Ownership Certificate ASTER Feed the Future Burkina Faso Amélioration et Sécurisation des Terres vers la Résilience BD Urban Commune Land Office CCFV Village Land conflicts Adjudication Committees CFV Village Land Management Committees COP Chef Of Party COPEC Savings and Credit Cooperative COVID 19 Corona Virus Disease 2019 CVD Village Development Council DCOP Deputy Chief Of Party DGFOMR General Directorate for Rural Areas Training and Structuring FAO Food and Agriculture Organization FTF Feed The Future IMF Microfinance institution LandPKS Land Potential Knowledge System MAST Mobile Application to Secure Tenure OG Global Objective OHADA Organization for the Harmonization of Corporate Law in Africa ONF-BF National Land Observatory of Burkina Faso OS Specific Objective PAM World Food Program PCATGF Chairman of Land Use and Management Commission PDI Internally Displaced People PNDES National Economic and Social Development Plan PNSFMR National Policy for Securing Land in Rural Areas RISE Resilience in the Sahel Enhanced SCC Sahel Collaboration and Communication SDEEVCC Departmental Service for Environment, Green Economy and Climate Change SFR Rural Land Office 6 SG Secretary General STD Decentralized Technical Service TEV TerresEauVie TGI Court of First Instance USAID United States Agency for International Development ViM Victoire sur la Malnutrition ZAT Technical Support Area for Agriculture ZATE Livestock Technical Support Zone 7 SUMMARY TABLE INTITULE FEED THE FUTURE BURKINA FASO - AMELIORATION ET SECURISATION DES TERRES VERS LA RESILIENCE (ASTER) Financing USAID Code Authorized geographic code: 937 Country and regions of implementation BURKINA FASO Centre-Nord, Est, Sahel Type of Contract Cooperation agreement n° 72068519CA00007 Start October 2019 Duration 36 months Completion October 2022 8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The National Land Observatory of Burkina Faso (ONF-BF) implements « The Feed the Future Burkina Faso Amélioration et Sécurisation des Terres vers la Résilience (ASTER) » Activity since October 2019 with the financial support of United States Agency for International Development (USAID) under the initiative of Feed the Future which is the United States' global program against hunger and for food security in the world. Its area of intervention are the regions of Centre-Nord, Est and Sahel. ASTER’s goal is to strengthen the resilience of vulnerable populations, particularly women and youth by securing their lands using the Mobile Application to Secure Tenure (MAST). The Activity is part of Resilience in the Sahel Enhanced (RISE II) integrated approach and contributes to the RISE II Result Framework Objective 1 and Intermediate Result 2 known as « Enhanced sustainable productive land use ». As ASTER has reached its mid-term, those in charge of its implementation have initiated this mid-term evaluation (in accordance with the requirements of the project document) in order to verify the achievement of the objectives and results, but also to draw lessons for the continuation of the achievements in its intervention zones. The mid-term evaluation consisted mainly of a review of the documentation relating to the design of the ASTER activity and its implementation, meetings with all the actors involved (ASTER team, partner implementation structures, beneficiary communes, deconcentrated technical services and local authorities) as well as visits to projects in a sample of communes. At the end of the mission, the main conclusions of the evaluation are presented below. Relevance The relevance of ASTER is verified on several counts. It is in line with the main strategic development documents of Burkina Faso, including the second National Economic and Social Development Plan (PNDES II) and the second National Rural Sector Program (PNSR II). Moreover, ASTER is in line with the National Policy for Securing Land in Rural Areas (PNSFMR) and Law n°034-2009/AN of June 16, 2009 on rural land tenure in Burkina Faso, whose implementation it contributes to. In addition, ASTER responds to the priority need of the target populations, which is land tenure security, from which stems the improvement of agro-sylvo-pastoral production and the generation of income. Effectiveness Despite a late start and the difficulties encountered, the ASTER Activity has been effective in the implementation of activities, the analysis of activity reports shows a good level of execution at mid￾term. Indeed, the ASTER team, although set up several months late and installed gradually, has taken advantage of the experience of the ONF-BF in implementing similar projects and the support of partner structures at the national, regional and communal levels. However, in terms of achieving its objectives, ASTER's level of effectiveness is generally low. With regard to specific objective 1, which aims to improve the capacities of local land governance structures so that they are able to play their role in issuing land security documents, ASTER has been effective with an achievement rate of 50.36%. With regard to specific objective 2, whose main goal is to issue land tenure security certificates to ASTER targets, ASTER's effectiveness has been very low, with an overall progress towards targets of only 4.32%. This observation is made despite a good level of implementation of planned activities, which is not sufficient to achieve the targets insofar as the requests and issuance of certificates are not the responsibility of ASTER. However, recent data collected from the ASTER team shows that the demands for APFRs are progressing rapidly in the communes of intervention with a total of 1,094 applications registered in the system, on the basis of which 254 certificates were finalized. 9 As for specific objective 3, devoted to the development of partnerships in order to create synergies of action with RISE partners and other key actors in the field of rural land tenure, ASTER's effectiveness in reaching its targets was low with only 27.83% at mid-term. Moreover, the weakness of ASTER's progress towards the targets is also reflected in the consideration of disadvantaged people such as women, young people, people living with disabilities and internally displaced persons, with very weak overall results obtained in their favors. Effects and impacts The general result of the analyses in this area is that at this stage it is too early to draw conclusions about the effects and impacts of ASTER. This is because changes in land tenure take a long time to manifest themselves. However, some initial effects have been felt by beneficiaries who have provided testimonials. First of all, the training and coaching activities for actors and partners have helped them to better understand their roles, responsibilities and missions and to be able to carry them out effectively. On the other hand, several testimonies state that the sensitization and training activities are beginning to have an impact on the management and reduction of land conflicts and social cohesion in the affected villages. Efficiency The budget execution rate as of September 30, 2021 is 66.23%, with a level of execution per line that is in line with the estimated budget. In addition, the analysis of unit costs shows that purchases are made in accordance with the standards in force in development projects and programs in Burkina Faso, which attests to the efficient use of the financial resources allocated. In terms of human resources, despite the late and gradual implementation of the ASTER team, the planned positions are now occupied. The location of part of the technical team and the land tenure officers is an efficiency factor, as it allows for the rapid deployment of agents to the target audience at a lower cost. The ASTER team itself conducts capacity building sessions for actors and partners, as it has the necessary skills within its ranks, which is also a determining factor in efficiency. However, the evaluation mission considers that with an average of four (4) communes covered by each land agent, the workload of these agents is too high, which does not allow for quality work in the villages due to the lack of available time. Despite the above, a major element of efficiency, which is the correlation between budget consumption and the achievement of project objectives, is not observed at the level of ASTER because of the significant imbalance between the satisfactory financial execution rate and the low efficiency in achieving targets. Sustainability In general, several elements of sustainability were noted in the implementation of ASTER. First, the involvement and empowerment of beneficiary communities and commune leaders (traditional leaders, CVDs, communal women's coordinators) allows them to take ownership of the activities carried out and to continue them even in the absence of the project. In addition, the participation of several partners, particularly permanent structures in the implementation of ASTER, also favors the sustainability of the achievements. Indeed, the central and deconcentrated technical services of the State, local authorities, prefectures, and professional organizations are all permanent actors capable of continuing the actions initiated by the ASTER activity. Also, the strategy emphasizing capacity building of actors and partners and their coaching is a factor of sustainability. Main recommendations Given the slow progress towards ASTER's targets, the mid-term evaluation team made recommendations to improve results in this final year of project implementation. The main recommendations are as follows. 10 • Recruit additional land agents to achieve an average ratio of 2 or 3 communes per land agent cluster; • Increase efforts in the effective consideration of gender in the implementation of ASTER; • Organize training sessions on the concept of "gender and development" and on ASTER's gender strategy for land authorities such as Rural Land Services (SFR), Land Offices (BD), Village Land Commissions (CFV), Village Land Conciliation Commissions (CCFV) (SFR/BD, CFV, CCFV) and partners; • Speed up accompaniment of IDPs to secure their access to agricultural land (formal land loans); • Review ASTER indicators and indicators targets. 11 1 INTRODUCTION The Feed the Future Burkina Faso Amélioration et Sécurisation des Terres vers la Résilience (ASTER) is executed since October 2019 with the financial support of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). It is implemented in Centre-Nord, Est and Sahel regions by the National Land Observatory of Burkina Faso (ONF-BF) to respond to the need to strengthen the resilience of vulnerable populations, particularly youth and women, by securing their land through the Mobile Application to Secure Tenure (MAST) technology. The context of ASTER's implementation is marked by insecurity, particularly in its three regions of intervention, where some localities are inaccessible. It is also marked by the COVID-19 disease which has important impacts on health, but also economically. The execution of the ASTER activity is also taking place in a national context of land reforms in Burkina Faso with the adoption of the National Policy for Securing Land in Rural Areas (PNSFMR) in 2007 and the law n°034-2009/AN of June 16, 2009 on rural land tenure in Burkina Faso. Having reached the halfway point, the ONF-BF has commissioned, in accordance with the provisional timetable, this evaluation mission in order to measure the progress made in the implementation of the ASTER Activity in its intervention zones and to make relevant recommendations for the achievement of its results and objectives. 2 AIMS OF THE MISSION 2.1 Overall objective of the evaluation The overall objective of this mission is to conduct a mid-term evaluation of the results achieved by ASTER in the Centre-Nord, Est and Sahel regions of Burkina Faso and to assess the way in which ASTER has been implemented in order to propose clear recommendations for improving its management. 2.2 Specific objectives of the evaluation The specific objectives of the study are as follows. • Assess the coherence of ASTER in relation to the national context, national priorities and the specific needs of the beneficiaries (SFR, CFV, CCFV, communes); • Assess the implementation strategy adopted; • Assess the degree of implementation of the Activity, its effectiveness and efficiency of its implementation as well as the quality of the results obtained; • Assess the impact of the Activity on the populations, taking into account gender; • Propose recommendations for future programming. 2.3 Expected results of the evaluation In terms of outcomes, it is expected that the report will highlight: • the logic and coherence of ASTER; • the efficiency of the activity (cost/result); • stakeholders' perception of the adequacy of the solutions provided by the activity; • analysis of compliance with the schedule or delays in the implementation of activities since the implementation of ASTER; • the evolution of ASTER results and impact indicators; • the coherence and effectiveness of the intervention of the different actors; 12 • the sustainability (viability) of the activity, in order to understand whether the positive changes (effects and impacts) brought about by ASTER will continue after the end of the U.S. government's assistance through USAID; • the major achievements of ASTER; • the results of the activity on the different target social groups; • the strengths and weaknesses of the organizational set-up; • problems/difficulties encountered in the implementation of the Activity; • recommended short-term solutions to better achieve the objectives; • the possible readjustment of the initial indicators of the Activity in terms of results and impacts. 3 METHODICAL APPROACH 3.1 Mission organization The mission was conducted by two senior consultants, one of whom was the mission leader and the other an associate consultant. The two consultants were supported by seven (7) investigators in charge of collecting data from beneficiaries and partners in the field in the intervention zones. The sequencing of the methodology included three main phases: i) a preparatory phase, ii) an investigation phase and iii) a phase of drafting and validation of the mid-term evaluation report. 3.2 Preparatory phase It included the activities and tasks that prepared the following two phases. Scoping meeting: it was held on August 27, 2021 and allowed to: • discuss the terms of reference for the study; • harmonize the consultant's and the client's understanding of the details of the expectations of the service; • amend and validate the proposed methodology; • specify and validate the detailed timeline of the mission; • specify the terms and conditions for the follow-up of the mission by the client; • address other miscellaneous issues including consideration of security risk management. Documentary analysis: it focused on the analysis of the following documents: • Project document; • Annual programs and budgets; • Periodic activity reports; • financial reports; • reports of specific studies concerning ASTER. Development of data collection tools: Two types of tools were developed: interview guides and questionnaires. • Interview guides. For each of the actors and groups of actors to be met, a specific semi￾structured interview guide was developed; • Questionnaires. These were designed and addressed to the project's target groups. They were used to collect data on the effects of the project in terms of the changes achieved. These tools also made it possible to collect the feelings of the target groups regarding the successes and weaknesses of the project. 13 Drawing of the target group sample A sample of the intervention communes to be visited was drawn for the field investigations. Stratified sampling was used to ensure statistical representation of each of ASTER's intervention regions. The strata are made up of the intervention regions. The reason for considering strata is the need to visit a representative sample of communes in each of ASTER's intervention regions. Since the coefficient of variation is unknown, the sample size took into account the need to reach at least one-third of the population to be studied, i.e., all 19 communes in which ASTER is active. In each stratum, random sampling was preferred because the random sample has the characteristics that are statistically closest to those of the populations whose coefficients of variation with respect to the parameters studied are unknown. The following table presents the sample of communes drawn. Table 1 : Samples of communes to visit by region Regions Sample of communes Centre-Nord • Kaya • Yalgo • Kongoussi Est • Coalla • Piéla Sahel • Seytenga • Sampelga 3.2.1 Writing the mission start-up report At the end of the preparatory phase, an inception report was written. 3.3 Investigation phase It consisted of data collection from the targeted structures and actors using the tools prepared for this purpose. 3.3.1 Recruitment and training of interviewers In each of ASTER's three intervention regions (Est, Centre-Nord and Sahel), one interviewer was recruited per sample commune, for a total of seven (7) people. The interviewers recruited were trained to understand the questionnaires and to fill out the questionnaires using a tablet or smartphone. The training also included a simulation of filling out each of the questionnaires. 3.3.2 Stakeholder surveys The surveys were conducted using smartphones using the "Kobotoolbox" platform and the ODK Collect app. For data collection purposes, the interviewers met with the following ASTER beneficiaries. • Village Land conflicts Adjudication Committees (CCFV); • Village Land Management Committees (CFV); • Beneficiaries of Rural Land Ownership Certificate (APFR); • Village Development Council (CVD); • Groups of women and young people who have received support from ASTER; • Rural Land Office (SFR); • Urban Commune Land Office (BD); • Internally Displaced People (PDI). 14 3.3.3 Stakeholder interviews The semi-structured interviews were conducted by the consultants in the structures and with the actors involved in ASTER. The following actors were interviewed. • ASTER team; • Land Agents (CF); • Responsible for Observatoire National du Foncier au Burkina Faso (ONF-BF); • United States Agency for International Development (USAID); • TerresEauVie (TEV); • Sahel Collaboration and Communication (SCC); • General Directorate for Rural Areas Training and Structuring (DGFOMR); • Decentralized Technical Services (STD) of agriculture, livestock and the environment at the departmental level; • Urban Commune Land Office (BD); • Rural Land Office (SFR); • Leaders of ASTER's intervention communes (mayors, SG, deputy mayors, etc.); • Regional offices of Taxes and Cadasters; • Local administrative authorities (Prefects). 3.4 Data analysis, report writing and validation phase At the end of the investigation phase, the consultants produced a PowerPoint presentation that was used to facilitate a debriefing meeting with the ASTER team. This debriefing focused on the initial results of the mid-term evaluation and the first recommendations. Next, the qualitative and quantitative data generated by the surveys were processed and analyzed. These data, supplemented by data from interviews, field observations and the document review, were used to draft the mid-term evaluation report. The provisional report was presented at the validation meeting on December 14, 2021 and was validated subject to taking into account the amendments and observations of the participants. These amendments and comments were taken into account for the production of the final version. 4 SHORT PRESENTATION OF ASTER 4.1 Background and rationale for ASTER In Burkina Faso, rural development is considered by the authorities as the main basis for sustainable economic development. Agriculture and livestock, but also forestry, hunting and fishing are activities with high economic potential for rural populations. The full realization of all these rural productive activities requires the effective mobilization and development of rural land, water resources, forests, wildlife and fisheries resources. In addition to economic development issues per se, the rapidly increasing population requires a lot of agricultural products for food. However, land tenure patterns are traditionally dominated and do not facilitate either access to land or the security of investments made. It is in this context that the State and its technical and financial partners continue to multiply their efforts to provide solutions to the problems looming on the horizon. The advent of the National Council of the Revolution (CNR) made it possible to reach a milestone through its "Land and Agrarian Reorganization Law (RAF) in Burkina Faso". In 2007, BURKINA FASO adopted a land policy. In 2009, the law n°034-2009/AN on land tenure in rural areas was adopted. This law made it possible to define the legal and institutional framework for the management of and access to land in rural communes and villages attached to urban communes. 15 After a few years of gradual implementation of the law, a National Land Observatory in Burkina Faso (ONF-BF) was created, responding to the need for a critical look at land governance in the country. The ONF-BF, whose mission is to contribute to the improvement of land governance through the production and dissemination of land information in order to make land a factor of sustainable development, also meets an expectation of the Burkinabe government, which is committed to improving transparency in land transactions. It is within this evolving land context that USAID is committed to playing a leading role in addressing worsening food and economic insecurity in the Sahel region. The USAID/Senegal Regional Office for the Sahel is mandated to develop and deploy the new resilience initiative that addresses some of the root causes of this insecurity through the Feed the Future Burkina Faso Land Improvement and Security for Resilience (ASTER) activity, which aims to contribute to building the resilience of vulnerable populations by securing their land. 4.2 Objectives of ASTER The ASTER Activity aims to contribute to the achievement of RISE II outcome IR I.2 (Improved sustainable and productive use of land resources) in the Centre-Nord, Sahel and Est regions through the use of MAST (Mobile Application for Land Tenure Security) technology. Its overall objective is: "to strengthen the resilience of vulnerable populations, particularly women and youth, by securing their land through the mobile application for land tenure security (MAST)". This global objective is broken down into three (3) specific objectives. • Specific objective 1: Strengthen the land tenure system through technical support to the Government of Burkina Faso (GoBF) to establish, staff and effectively operate rural land service offices (SFR) in the communes of the RISE zone; • Specific objective 2: Improve arbitration and mitigation of conflicts arising from agriculture, pastoralism, mining and other land-related issues; • Specific objective 3: Improve the sustainable management of land resources through technical assistance provided to other RISE/ RISE II partners and the communes. 4.3 Theory of change ASTER has established its theory of change as follows: IF the land management institutions and organizations located at the commune and community levels in the RISE zone have a better knowledge of land laws and land tenure; IF these institutions and organizations are better equipped and appropriate the MAST and LandPKS (Land Potential Knowledge System) tools for sustainable management of land resources; IF best practices in land governance are applied for the benefit of vulnerable people, namely women and youth; If best practices in land governance are applied for the benefit of vulnerable people, namely women and youth; then vulnerable people in the RISE zone will have secure access to productive land resources; land use conflicts will be mitigated and better managed; and people will be able to invest sustainably in their land. The realization of this theory of change is conditioned by the assumptions made in the logical framework of the project. 4.4 Technical and Financial Partners Funding for ASTER is provided by USAID. ASTER's technical partners are those belonging to RISE II and the key land governance structures in the regions and communes of intervention. 4.5 Implementation device ASTER is implemented by a team composed of key personnel and additional personnel. The six (6) key personnel are as follows 16 : • the Chief Of Party (COP); • the Deputy Chief Of Project (DCOP); • the Administrative and Financial Manager; • the Communication, Knowledge Management and Learning Officer; • the Monitoring and Evaluation Officer; • the Gender Officer. The additional staff is composed as follows: • one (1) MAST Coordinator/Geographic Information System (GIS) Specialist; • one (1) Procurement Specialist; • one (1) Bilingual Executive Assistant; • one (1) Accounting Assistant; • one (1) Computer Specialist; • five (5) Land Agents; • two (2) Drivers/Liaison Officers. 4.6 Target public ASTER's target audience is the entire population of the communes concerned, both individually and in the form of formalized cooperatives. Women and youth are particularly concerned. It also includes the Rural Land Services (SFR) and the Land Offices (BD) of the intervention communes. ASTER should eventually cover twenty-seven (27) rural and urban communes in the Centre-Nord, Est and Sahel regions. At mid-term, the communes affected are presented in the table below. Table 2 : areas of intervention of ASTER (FY 2020 and FY 2021) Regions Provinces Communes Centre Nord Sanmatenga Kaya, Pissila, Barsalogho Namentenga Tougouri, Bouroum, Yalgo, Nagbingou Bam Rollo, Kongoussi Sahel Séno Seytenga, Dori, Bani, Sampelga Est Komondjari Gayéri, Bartiébougou Gnagna Mani, Piéla, Thion, Coalla, Source: ASTER activity reports 5 MAIN RESULTS OF THE EVALUATION 5.1 Project conception Since ASTER is not considered a project but an activity, its project document is the RISE II Project document to which it belongs. However, more specifically, for the monitoring of its implementation, the document "Notice of Funding Opportunity (NFO) No. 72068518RFA00006 Cooperative Agreement Award" and the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan document are used. An analysis of these documents shows that ASTER is well formulated in a comprehensive manner. The key elements of strategic and operational planning appear in these documents. These are mainly: 17 • a logical framework summarizing the strategic aspects of ASTER; • a results framework detailing the targets for each year of ASTER implementation; • an indicator monitoring plan describing each of the ASTER indicators and how they will be tracked; • a composition of the ASTER implementation team, including key personnel and complementary team members, and the chain of responsibility of each member; • an operational planning table for activities. In addition, the analysis of the project's strategic and operational documents shows that the intervention logic is coherent and respected. In other words, the activities effectively lead to the results, the results to the specific objectives and the specific objectives to the overall objective. However, we found that the logical framework diagram does not take into account all the elements that should be included in this tool. In fact, this diagram does include the indicators, but it does not contain the sources of verification of these indicators or the assumptions relating to the achievement of the results and objectives. The mission believes that this shortcoming is related to the presentation of the logical framework, which was not presented in the form of a table with four columns and four rows, which would have made it possible to include all the missing elements (see logical framework in Appendix C). The monitoring and evaluation (M&E) plan does present the assumptions that need to be tested in order to achieve the objectives and results. As mentioned above, the assumptions are not addressed in relation to the results and objectives, which makes it impossible to link them. In addition, there is an important assumption missing for the achievement of the results concerning the Rural Land Ownership Certificates (APFR). This is the effective adherence of the target rural populations and the actors in the land tenure security chain to ASTER's actions. This hypothesis is extremely important in the context of ASTER and the field of the project, which deals with land tenure in rural areas, but also insofar as ASTER itself does not issue these land tenure security titles, but works to put the actors concerned in a position to do so. The sources of information for the indicators are also presented outside the logical framework, which, as with the assumptions, are not addressed in relation to the indicators this time. In this way, it is not possible to verify that all indicators have at least one source of verification. 5.2 Implementation of ASTER The following table presents the main actions of ASTER since the beginning. Table 3 : ASTER key actions table Year Period Action 2019-2020 1st quarter Recruitment of key ASTER personnel (Monitoring and Evaluation Manager) (October 2019) Choice of the first 9 communes of intervention: Kaya, Tougouri, Pissila, Barsalogho, Bouroum, Seytenga, Gayéri and Mani 2nd quarter Several joint planning and coordination meetings of RISE II partners: ViM Plus, TEV (January, February 2020) Development and implementation of ASTER communication plan Holding of the launching ceremony of the ASTER activity in Kaya (February 27, 2020) Recruitment of key ASTER personnel (COP, DCOP, Accounting and Financial Manager, Communication Manager, Administrative and Logistics Assistant, Purchasing Manager, 2 Land Managers) Support for the establishment of Rural Land Services (RLS) and training of RLS agents in the communes of Pissila and Tougouri in the PNSFMR and law 034/2009 (from 24 to 26 February 2020) Drafting of the monitoring, evaluation and learning plan for ASTER activities ASTER staff training on the MAST tool (March 2020) 18 Year Period Action Evaluation of the land situation in the communes of Bouroum, Barsalogho, Gayéri, Mani and Seytenga (March 2020) 3rd quarter Installation of the ASTER technical team in the city of Kaya (April 2020) Development of ASTER's environmental mitigation and monitoring plan Production and broadcasting of radio spots on law N°034-2009 in French, Moré, Fulfulde and Gulmacema in the communes of Barsalogho, Pissila, Tougouri, Gayéri, Manni, Kaya, Seytenga, Bouroum and Rollo. Implementation of the communication plan through the elaboration of several communication supports (spots, Newsflash...) and their diffusion through several channels (radio, distribution) Training in the MAST tool for SFR and STD agents in the communes of Barsalogho, Pissila, Tougouri, Gayéri, Manni, Kaya, Seytenga, Bouroum and Rollo (April and May 2020) Training on Law N°034-2009 for agents of the SFR/BD, SG, ZAT, ZATE, SDEEVCC of the communes of Kaya, Pissila and Tougouri (25 to 30 May 2020) Support to the state agents of the communes of Kaya and Tougouri for their swearing in Support for the establishment of CFV and CCFV in the communes of Kaya and Tougouri Continued recruitment of key ASTER personnel (Gender Officer) (June 2020) Support for the improvement of the operationality of the SFR/BD in the first nine communes of intervention Training in the process of delimiting commonly used natural resources using the LandPKS tool for the benefit of STD agents and state agents in ASTER's intervention communes (June 2020) Support in computer equipment for the SFR/BD of the nine intervention communes. Each commune received: a GPS, a smartphone with the MAST and LandPKS application installed, a printer, a laptop and a router (June 2020) Coaching of the SFR/BD agents of the intervention communes in the use of the MAST and LandPKS tools (June 2020) Holding of partnership meetings with RISE II partners in order to secure land for partners' investments. 4th quarter Recruitment of ASTER staff (2 drivers) Adoption of a health and safety protocol for field activities and ceremonies (July 2020) Continued coaching of SFR/BD agents in the intervention communes in the use of the MAST and LandPKS tools Development of a strategy to take into account IDPs in accessing secure agricultural land in the communes of Kaya and Kongoussi 2020-2021 1st quarter Identification of ten new intervention communes bringing the total to 19 communes in the three regions. The new communes are: Dori, Yalgo, Sampelga, Nagbingou, Piéla, Coalla, Kongoussi, Bani, Thion and Bartiébougou (October 2020) Recruitment of three (3) new land managers (December 2020) Training of new land managers on the PNSFMR and Law 034-2009/AN Training workshop on the roles and responsibilities of municipalities in local land and natural resource management (PNSFMR, law 034-2009/AN) for 19 mayors of the intervention communes (November 2020) Elaboration of several communication supports (spots, banners, information sheets, posters) and distribution through several channels (radio, distribution, posters) Continued coaching for SFR/BD agents throughout the quarter Partnership meetings with RISE II partners (TEV, SCC, ViM Plus) Deployment of MAST and LandPSK tools in the SFR/BD of the new communes and equipment with GPS and Android phones 2n d qu art er Continued capacity building of SFR/BDs, CFVs and CCFVs on the PNSFMR and Law 034-2009/AN during the quarter 19 Year Period Action Holding information and knowledge building sessions on land tenure security techniques for women and youth groups Strengthening the capacities of the CVDs in order to conduct the renewal process of the CFVs and CCFVs (communes of Rollo, Bouroum, Seytenga and Mani) Accompanying the land agent of the commune of Yalgo for his swearing in at the High Court of Kaya (March 2021) Implementation of the communication plan through the production and dissemination of several communication materials in the intervention areas: posters, billboards, spots, etc. Training of land managers on the MAST tool Training of some CFV members on the MAST tool in the communes of Seytenga, Kongoussi and Rollo Preparation of several APFRs in several communes at the request of the population (Pissila, Kaya, Barsalgho, Seytenga, Rollo, Kongoussi, Tougouri, Bouroum) Issuance of APFR in the communes of Kongoussi, Seytenga and the organization of a symbolic handing over ceremony of four (4) APFR to applicants in the commune of Kaya Continued partnership meetings with RISE II partners (TEV, SCC, ViM Plus) Beginning of collaboration between ASTER and the DGFOMR on the basis of a collaboration protocol Validation of the strategy for taking into account IDPs' access to secure agricultural land in the communes of Kaya and Kongoussi in partnership with humanitarian organizations (Coordination HDP Nexus, UNDP, NRC, FAO, WFP, and UN￾Habitat) 3rd quarter Renewal of part of the ASTER staff (DCOP, Monitoring and Evaluation Manager) Realization of 4 radio round tables on "secure access to land for women and youth". Continued implementation and renewal of the CFV and CCFV in the villages of the intervention communes Accompaniment of the state agents of the communes of Sampelga and Nagbingou for their swearing in before the TGI Advocacy and coaching of the communal authorities of Kaya and Tougouri for the cottage and the initialing of their land registers by the TGI of Kaya Equipping the rural land services of the communes of Sampelga, Bani, Yalgo and Nagbingou with land registers Provide the CFVs and CCFVs of the communes of Kongoussi, Rollo, Nagbingou, Yalgo, Bouroum, Sampelga, Bani and Seytenga with work kits consisting of canteens, pens and notebooks Adoption of a contingency plan for ASTER (May 2021) Training of the state agents of the communes on the costs of the acts of land security and the maintenance of the rural land registers (May and June 2021) Continuation of the training of the DVCs for the renewal of the VFCs and VFCCs in their villages Continued training on the MAST tool for the benefit of the SFR/BD and CFV in the communes, followed by their equipment with GPS and Android phones for the use of the CFVs trained in the MAST tool Continued production of APFRs in SFRs and municipal databases Continued support to IDPs by ASTER in the communes of Kaya and Kongoussi in collaboration with the NGO NRC on the basis of a collaboration protocol Continued support to women's and youth groups for their compliance with the OHADA uniform act and their access to APFRs Implementation of ASTER's communication plan: radio broadcasts, production and distribution of posters... Held collaborative meetings with RISE II and other partners 20 A notable fact in the progress of ASTER is that it started late, with its official launch in late February 2020 and the recruitment of the majority of the implementation team members starting in February 2020. For a project of only 36 months, a delay in start-up of about six months is a major inconvenience at the outset. 5.3 Physical execution of ASTER The implementation of ASTER's activities is grouped in its three specific objectives, but also through transversal themes. 5.3.1 Under the specific objectives 5.3.1.1 Specific objective 1 The first specific objective of ASTER is entitled: "Enhance land security system through technical support to the Government of Burkina Faso (GoBF) to establish, drive staffing and efficiently operate the Rural Commune Land Office (SFR) in the communes where USAID’s RISE project has activities". Under this specific objective, ASTER has carried out the following activities: • Capacity building of actors and authorities of the land tenure chain, namely SFR/BD, CFV, CCFV, Prefects, Mayors, Secretaries General (SG) of the town halls, Presidents of Land Use and Management Commissions (PCATGF), customary authorities, Village Development Councils (CVD), Decentralized Technical Services (STD) of the rural sector as well as some partners of ASTER. The training themes developed are: o the PNSFMR and Law 034-2009/AN of June 16, 2009 on rural land tenure; o the use of the MAST and LandPKS (Land Potential Knowledge System) tools o conflict management; o innovative techniques for delimiting land for agricultural and pastoral production and forestry; • facilitation/support for the establishment of land tenure chain bodies such as the SFR, CFV and CCFV; • facilitation/support for the renewal of the CFV and CCFV; • equipping the SFRs with GPS, smartphones with the MAST and LandPKS applications installed, printers, laptops and routers; • equipping the communes with local land registers: five (5) local land registers per commune; • equipping the CFV and CCFV with canteens, pens and notebooks; • coaching of the SFR/BD, STD and CFV; • raising awareness among the population through various channels (radio, posters, etc.) about land tenure security in French, Moré, Fulfulde and Gulmancema; • accompanying IDPs in the acquisition of secure agricultural land; • accompanying the SFRs in the swearing in of their agents before the territorially competent Tribunal de Grande Instance (TGI); • sensitization/information of women's and youth groups on securing land and complying with the OHADA law on cooperative societies; • lobbying the communes for the fixing of fees for the delivery of local land documents such as the APFR, rural land loan titles, temporary authorizations for the development of rural land (AMVT), etc.; • lobbying communes to file their registers with the TGI in order to have them quoted and initialed; • support to the SFR and STD for the delimitation of commonly used natural resources in order to promote sustainable natural resource management (community forests, water bodies, grazing areas, livestock tracks, etc.); 21 The main goal of the activities carried out under this specific objective was to enable all the actors involved in the land tenure chain to play their roles effectively in increasing land security in the communes in ASTER's intervention zone. Following the analysis of the data, the mid-term evaluation mission considers that, overall, these activities have indeed led to a substantial improvement in the capacity of actors to play their role in the implementation of the land tenure security acts under their jurisdiction. In fact, the initial situation in the intervention communes shows two scenarios, similar to what is observed throughout the country concerning the implementation of the PNSFMR and Law 034-2009 of June 16, 2009 on rural land tenure. • Communes where the local authorities and structures of the land tenure chain such as the SFR/BD, the CFV and CCVF do not exist and must be created so that the delivery of land tenure certificates can be possible; • Communes where local authorities and land tenure structures are in place, but have neither the knowledge nor the necessary means to play their role. The activities of Specific Objective 1 have made it possible to remove these two types of constraints and to allow these communes to be operational today in terms of the effective implementation of the PNSFMR and Law 034-2009/ of June 16, 2009 on rural land tenure in Burkina Faso. The training of actors was the basis of the activities carried out by ASTER under this specific objective. During the data collection phase, 100% of the local authorities and land tenure structures (SFR, CFV, CCFV) interviewed confirmed that they had participated in capacity building sessions on various topics. The same is true for the other actors involved in the implementation of ASTER (prefects, mayors, SGs, CVDs, etc.). The following figure shows the proportions of the SFRs and the CFVs and CCFVs who benefited from the training and equipment and who believe that this support was beneficial to them in the implementation of their activities. Figure 1 : proportion of satisfaction with training and equipment The illustration shows that 100% of the SFR/BDs interviewed believe that the support they received from ASTER in terms of training and equipment had beneficial effects on their performance in carrying out their mission. The beneficial effects cited are listed below. • The integration of the information in the database has really helped us in our work; • The recording of data has become easier; • The training and delimitations allow us to work efficiently in the delimitation of land; • The support has helped us a lot in securing land; • I am now very efficient in the field thanks to the use of GPS which is very practical. • The equipment received has made my work much easier. Before receiving the computer, I used to enter the data by hand; • Now we follow the normal procedure for issuing APFRs; • The department is now able to issue APFRs more easily; 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% SFR/BD CFV/CCFV 22 • I now have a good understanding of my mission and the role of the other actors (CCF and CCFV); • Improved working conditions; • More efficiency in the work. In particular, the introduction of the MAST tool in the intervention zones through training and coaching of actors is an important positive element and even a major innovation to ASTER's credit. Indeed, at the national level, although other tools have already been used in the area of land tenure security, this is the first time this application has been used. As for the local authorities (CFV, CCFV) we met, the majority of them (77.78%) believe that the support they received in terms of training and equipment has improved their ability to play their role. The representatives of these bodies interviewed expressed the effects of this training and equipment on the improvement of their work in the following terms. • Good understanding of field boundaries; • Good understanding of land management; • Better understanding of land demarcation methods and techniques; • Understanding of methods to fight land conflicts; • Understanding of the missions and roles of each of the actors in land tenure security; • Ability to draw up land tenure documents for any person wishing to do so; • Mastery of the sensitization of producers in order to leave passage corridors for animals in agricultural areas; • The trust we give to landowners who are happy with our work; • Thanks to the trainings, our structure works better and we are better organized; • The members have become more aware and involved in the work; • Effective reduction of land conflicts. However, 22.22% of the local authorities (CFV, CCFV) interviewed believe that ASTER's support has not really improved their capacity to carry out their mission. They consider this support insufficient in relation to their expectations. Some say that ASTER has not yet begun its activities in their village; the agents have only come to present ASTER and must return to carry out actions related to land security. The above clearly corroborates that the activities carried out have indeed had positive effects and have made it possible to have local authorities and land tenure security structures in the communes of intervention capable of playing their roles for the most part. In terms of functionality, 100% of the SFR/BDs, CFVs and CCFVs considered themselves to be functional. In addition to the authorities and structures, the other actors who benefited from the training courses, i.e., the mayors, the secretaries general of the mayors' offices, the prefects, the deconcentrated technical services for agriculture, livestock and the environment, and the VDCs, who were interviewed, appreciated them positively. They believe that the topics covered have enabled them to understand and play their role in supporting the population and local authorities. An important fact is that the capacity building sessions on national laws and regulations regarding land tenure security in rural areas are conducted by ASTER's internal human resources, which is an undeniable advantage. The same is true for the training sessions on the MAST and LandPKS tools. The mission considers that this state of affairs allows for a significant saving of time and financial resources favorable to the advancement of activities. Contracting with external resources would have required both time and additional resources that would have had to be multiplied by each training session. In the implementation of this specific objective, the accompaniment of internally displaced persons (IDPs) due to the security situation in the country was another innovation of ASTER. This support aims to help these people gain access to secure agro-sylvo-pastoral land through formal loans. The other component of the support also concerns the securing of host families to obtain APFRs for their land. The activity, which is carried out only in the urban communes of Kaya and Kongoussi, was the 23 subject of a strategy developed by ASTER. Because of its innovative nature, several partners working in the field of Humanitarian-Development-Peace (HDP) showed interest and were involved. However, at the halfway point, the IDP strategy has not yet resulted in any land security titles for the IDPs supported. The IDPs we met who benefit from ASTER's support are very appreciative of this initiative and all hope that it will quickly lead to secure access to land for their agricultural production activities. However, all the IDPs we met wish to return to their localities of origin. 5.3.1.2 Specific objective 2 Specific objective 2 of ASTER is as follows: " Improve arbitration and mitigation of conflicts resulting from agriculture, pastoralism, mining and other land related issues " Under this specific objective, ASTER has carried out the following activities from its inception to date. • Improvement of the old version of the MAST application by the ASTER team with the addition of new features; • Training on the MAST application for ASTER technical staff; • Partnership with the Cadaster of Burkina Faso for the division of communes into different zones for production, habitat, conservation, etc.; • Operationalization of the MAST tool allowing the division of communes and the downloading of subdivision data, giving these communities the possibility of issuing land documents and deeds with land registry numbers; • Sensitization of the population through radio spots in order to boost applications for APFR; • Training of ASTER land agents in the MAST tool; • Adoption of a new MAST approach allowing the use of the tool by certain CFVs in addition to SFRs and BDs; • Monitoring of the MAST platform and coaching of SFR/BD and CFV agents; • Monitoring of land conflicts in the ASTER intervention zone; • Monitoring of land demarcations for the benefit of individuals, groups, host populations and IDPs; • Monitoring of the issuance of APFRs by the communes. The activities carried out under this objective were intended to obtain from the actors in the land tenure chain in the intervention communes, the issuance of APFRs with a high proportion benefiting women and young people. However, the mid-term evaluation mission found that the results obtained in terms of the issuance of these land tenure security documents are very low and fall short of expectations. The efforts made in the implementation of the activities have indeed led to requests for APFR in some communes, which have been taken into account by the local authorities and the authorized structures, namely the CFVs, the SFRs and the BDs. These requests are already far from expectations, as they have only been registered in eight (8) of the nineteen (19) communes in which ASTER is currently active, which represents a rate of only 42%. The eight communes concerned by these requests are Pissila, Kaya, Barsalogho, Seytenga, Rollo, Kongoussi, Tougouri, Bouroum. The RFPA applications registered in the commune of Seytenga alone represent more than 50% of all RFPA applications registered in the eight (8) communes. In the seven (7) sample communes visited during the data collection phase, the situation regarding applications and deliveries of APFRs is presented in the following figure 2. 24 Figure 2 : APFR requests and APFR delivered in the sample communes In total, 385 applications for APFR were registered by the SFRs and BDs in the sample communes. Thus, of this total, only 19.74% of the APFR were issued. Figure 3 below presents the distribution of the APFRs delivered by type of beneficiary. Figure 3 : types of recipients of APFRs delivered Figure 3 shows that 98.68 percent of the APFRs were issued to individual beneficiaries and only 1.32 percent to structures. In addition, the individual APFRs have been issued entirely to men, as no women in these sample communes have benefited from these land tenure documents to date. Of the 19 communes currently covered by ASTER, by the end of the second quarter of the year 2020- 2021, only seven (7) had received applications for APFRs from the population, a rate of only 36.84%. The remaining 63.16% had not yet received any requests for APFRs despite the actions of training actors, equipping bodies and sensitizing the population to land tenure security. Among these 12 communes that had not yet registered any APFRs, two have been covered since the first year of ASTER's intervention. These are the communes of Gayéri and Mani. Only the commune of Seytenga was in a relatively better situation in terms of progress towards achieving the targets for the delivery of LCFAs. Indeed, this commune had received 256 applications for APFRs by the same date out of a total of 344 for all 19 communes in the intervention zone, which represents 74.42%. This significant advance by the commune of Seytenga in the issuance of APFRs can be explained in part by the valorization of the achievements of previous interventions by other partners in the area of land tenure security. Indeed, before ASTER's intervention, Seytenga benefited from the support of the REGIS-ER project, which enabled the establishment and training of the SFR, but also of the CFV and CCFV in all villages of the commune since 2017. It should be noted, however, that according to recent data collected from the ASTER team, the situation of the APFRs registered in the system is progressing with a total of 1,094 applications at the 385 76 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 APFR requests APFR delivered 1,32% 98,68% 100,00% 0,00% 0,00% 20,00% 40,00% 60,00% 80,00% 100,00% 120,00% Collective APRF individual APFR APFR for men APFR for women 25 end of September 2021, of which 254 have already been finalized. Even if this shows that there is still a delay with one year to go, this progress is very encouraging and allows us to hope for a good level of achievement of this target by October 2022. According to the CFVs and CCFVs we met, there are several reasons for the low delivery of LCFAs in ASTER's communes of intervention. Figure 4 below presents the reasons for this low result according to these structures. Figure 4 : causes of the low delivery of APRFs according to local authorities (CFV, CCFV) Figure 4 shows that, according to these local authorities, financial difficulties1 are the main reason (42.86%) for the low number of APFRs issued. Then, 32.14% of the VFCs and CCFVs interviewed link this low number of APFRs issued to the lack of interest of the populations in APFRs. According to some explanations, rural populations are not as interested in land tenure security documents as urban populations. The other reasons for the low issuance of APFRs, according to local authorities, are that in some cases the application files are not complete (10.71%), disputes over land boundaries (7.14%), and the slowness of administrative procedures for the establishment and issuance of the document. In addition, the evaluation mission found that communes are not rushing to issue APFRs to applicants. There are several indications that this is the case, including land deeds that the communes could themselves perform in order to put themselves in a position to issue the APFRs that they are waiting for ASTER to push them to do. The first is the swearing-in of state agents, which required support from ASTER to be carried out in several communes. The other indicator is the quotation and initialing of registers. ASTER has provided the communes with registers that must be rated and initialed by the territorially competent TGI. To do this, the communes simply had to bring these registers to the TGI, which some communes did not do despite repeated reminders from ASTER agents. In addition, the issuance of APFRs does not appear to be a priority for some SFRs or BDs. The example of the land office in the commune of Kaya is sufficiently revealing. In fact, in this commune, several dozen APFRs (88 to be precise) have been finalized for several weeks, but have not been issued. It is clear from the explanations of the land agent that the MAST application is experiencing difficulties with dates. In fact, according to the explanation, when the APFRs come out of the system, there is an inconsistency in the dates. Indeed, on the documents presented, we could see that the date of signature by the mayor is prior to the date of the APFR request. The MAST agent we contacted confirmed that there was a problem with the application and added that it is in the process of being resolved. While waiting for a solution to be found to this situation, the Agent explains that he could manually affix the correct dates with a date stamp and deliver the APFRs to their applicants. But this is not done and when we visited the applicants had still not been informed in order to prepare themselves to pay the delivery fees. 1 Weak financial resources for the payment of RFPA set-up fees 0,00% 5,00% 10,00% 15,00% 20,00% 25,00% 30,00% 35,00% 40,00% 45,00% Financial difficulties Boundary disputes Low interest from the population Incomplete files Slow administrative procedures 26 The other reason for the low delivery of APFRs is at the level of the local land security authorities in the communes, i.e., the CFV and CCFV. It emerged from discussions with the actors we met that some of these structures are not functional and therefore struggle to play their role in initiating the process of issuing APFRs. A failure of these bodies is absolutely prohibitive, as it prevents any application for a certificate from passing through the system. In addition, operational problems are also mentioned in some communes, such as Dori, where the land agent is contested by the communal executive, which blocks any progress in the delivery of certificates. Among the CFVs we met, some interviewed said that the reason for the low number of land certificates issued was that they were only at the beginning of their activities, because they had just been set up and had not yet had time to move forward in the process of drawing up land certificates. Another explanation that concerns all the communes in the intervention zone, but which is expressed more acutely in some of them than in others, is insecurity. Some villages are inaccessible because of the security situation, which prevents the activities of ASTER's land agents. In some cases, difficulties have been reported in setting up or renewing VFCs and CCFVs due to the same situation. In view of all the information collected on the issue of APFRs and the great delay in their issuance by the communes supported by ASTER in relation to the expected target, the evaluation mission considers that the strategy of gradually covering the 27 communes expected to be affected was not the right one. In fact, when analyzing the data collected, it is clear that the time factor is a crucial element in the issuance of LCPAs. The first communes to receive applications for certificates were all in the first wave of the nine initially selected in the intervention zone. Moreover, it took more than a year of support before they began issuing their first APFRs for the most successful ones. The ten communes in the second wave have not yet begun the process of issuing APFRs, which means that at the end of ASTER (in one year), the eight (8) communes in the last wave will most likely be in the same situation. The mission believes that given the short duration of ASTER's intervention (only three years), it would have been more appropriate to retain all 27 intervention communes from the first year, which would have given each of them more time to reach the targets set. This is all the more important since land issues in rural areas evolve slowly and require a change in people's mentality, which takes time. 5.3.1.3 Specific objective 3 The third Specific Objective 3 is entitled as follows: "Improve sustainable management of land resources through a technical assistance provided to other RISE partners and to communities". Under OS 3, ASTER has carried out the following actions. • Diagnosis of the state of land tenure security of ViM and ViM Plus investments with a roadmap for securing investments; • Establishment of a coordination secretariat to better support RISE/RISE II partners in securing land tenure for their investments through APFRs and; • Training of actors in the identification of community resources and good practices for the sustainable management of natural resources: forests, grazing areas, cattle tracks, water bodies, etc.; • Accompanying women's associations and putting them in contact with microfinance institutions (MFIs) in order to give them access to credit through their APFR: ECOBANK, ACEP-BF, COPEC-Galor, Caisse Populaire, etc. During the first year of ASTER's implementation, three (3) women's associations, including one youth association, were put in contact with the MFIs. During the second year, a total of thirteen (13) associations, including 11 women's associations, were put in contact with the MFIs. Among these 13 associations, 2 were youth structures; • Accompanying women's and youth groups in securing their land through "formal loan" documents and farm leases. In addition, these OPAs have been supported to comply with the provisions of the OHADA uniform act on the rights of cooperative societies; • Presentation of the MAST and LandPKS tools to RISE II partners: ViM Plus, TEV, World Food Program (WFP) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). 27 The activities of this specific objective aimed at securing community resources vital to the agroforestry activities of the communities through their delimitation and the promotion of good practices of sustainable management. They resulted in the delimitation of 572 hectares of natural resources for common use in the communes of Kaya, Bouroum, Barsalogho, Seytenga, Pissila and Tougouri. This specific objective also aims at securing land tenure investments made by other RISE II projects, namely WFP, FAO, and ViM Plus. For this purpose, ASTER has shared with these structures the MAST and LandPKS tools that can contribute to this security. Apart from these upstream actions, the mission notes that these partnership actions have not yet resulted in the issuance of documents securing these investments. However, several of them have submitted requests to the land security authorities and structures in order to obtain the documents. Following these requests, the process has been launched in their favor and several plots of land have already been delimited. In the sample communes, out of the 770 requests recorded by the SFR/BD, 132 were collective, i.e. 17.14% of the total. Another central line of this SO has been the accompaniment of associations with APFRs and their connection to MFIs in order to facilitate their access to financing to carry out their activities. Here again, these actions have not really resulted in obtaining credit. In the same vein, women's and youth groups were supported by ASTER to encourage them to secure their land, but also to help them comply with the OHADA act on cooperative societies. In the communes of intervention, 640 of these organizations have been supported and several of them have complied with the OHADA law. In the communes visited during this mission, sixty-four (64) women's and youth groups were met, including: • thirty-three (33) women's groups; • fourteen (14) youth groups; • seventeen (17) mixed groups. Of these structures, twenty-nine (29) have so far complied with the OHADA law, a rate of 45.31%. The mission considers this progress to be relatively interesting in view of the support limited to raising awareness and persuading the actors concerned. Figure 5 shows the proportion of groups that have become cooperatives in relation to the total number of groups encountered during the field surveys in the sample communes. Figure 5 : proportion of groups that have become cooperatives in the sampled communes. Figure 5 shows the best rates in the communes of Seytenga, Kaya, Yalgo and Piéla and the lowest rates in Kongoussi, Coalla and Sampelga. We note that the communes with the best rates of compliance with the OHADA act are those in which other partners have provided the most support in this area before ASTER's intervention. 80,00% 0,00% 0,00% 55,56% 18,18% 100,00% 63,64% 0,00% 20,00% 40,00% 60,00% 80,00% 100,00% 120,00% Kaya Coalla Kongoussi Piéla Samplega Seytenga Yalgo 28 5.3.2 Achievement of targets In the activity progress reports, ASTER provided information on progress toward the indicator targets set in the results framework. The following table 4 presents the level of achievement of these targets at the end of June 2021. 29 Table 4 : ASTER's progress towards the target values of the indicators Specific objective Indicator Target at the end of ASTER Values achieved Target achievement rate N° Title Value achieved in 2020 Value achieved in 20212 Total value Specific objective 1: Strengthen the land tenure system through technical support to the Government of Burkina Faso (GoBF) to establish, staff and effectively operate rural land service offices (SFR) in the municipalities of the RISE zone EG.3-2 Number of individuals participating in USG food security programs 24 470 3 637 960 4 597 18,79% EG.10.4-1 Number of specific pieces of land tenure and property rights legislation or implementing regulations proposed, adopted, and/or implemented positively affecting property rights of the urban and/or rural poor as a result of USG assistance 2 540 336 214 550 21,65% EG.10.4-2 Percent of individuals trained in land tenure and property rights as a result of USG assistance who correctly identify key learning objectives of the training 30 days after the training 81 50 67 67 67,00% EG.10.4-4 Percent of people with access to a land administration or service entity, office, or other related facility that the project technically or physically establishes or upgrades who report awareness and understanding of the services offered 96 0 74 74 74,00% Number of communes where sensitization campaigns occurred 27 9 19 19 70,37% 2 During the first 3 quarters of the year 2021 30 Specific objective Indicator Target at the end of ASTER Values achieved Target achievement rate N° Title Value achieved in 2020 Value achieved in 20212 Total value Specific objective 2: Improve arbitration and mitigation of conflicts arising from agriculture, pastoralism, mining and other land￾related issues EG.10.4-3 Number of disputed land and property rights cases resolved by local authorities, contractors, mediators, or courts as a result of USG assistance 846 0 14 14 1,65% EG.10.4 - 5 Number of parcels with relevant parcel information corrected or incorporated into an official land administration system (whether a system for the property registry, cadaster, or an integrated system) as a result of USG assistance 2 700 0 254 254 9,41% EG.10.4 - 7 Number of adults provided with legally recognized and documented tenure rights to land or marine areas, as a result of USG assistance 135 000 0 2 570 2 570 1,90% EG.10.4 - 8 Number of adults who perceive their tenure rights to land or marine areas as secure with USG assistance 135 000 0 254 254 0,19%3 Specific objective 3: Improve the sustainable management of CBLD-9 Percent of USG-assisted organizations with improved performance 100 100 100 100 100,00% GNDR -2 Percentage of female participants in USG-assisted programs designed to increase access to productive 50 22 31 31 62,00% 3 Surveys of 254 APFR recipients indicate that 100% of them perceive their land or marine rights as secure. 31 Specific objective Indicator Target at the end of ASTER Values achieved Target achievement rate N° Title Value achieved in 2020 Value achieved in 20212 Total value land resources through technical assistance provided to other RISE/ RISE II partners and the communes economic resources (assets, credit, income or employment) YOUTH-3 Percentage of participants who are youth (15-29) in USG-assisted programs designed to increase access to productive economic resources (assets, credit, income or employment) 20 0 5 5 25,00% EG.3.2-27 Value of agriculture-related financing accessed as a result of USG assistance 229 091 0 0 0 0,00% Acreage of commonly used natural resources demarcated 1 850 572 0 572 30,92% Number of internally displaced people (IDP) with access to productive resources protected by land documents 50 0 0 0 0,00% Sources: ASTER activity reports 32 The rates of achievement of the targets for the indicators reflecting the level of progress of the ASTER activity are low for the most part. Indeed, only five (5) indicators out of the 15 that ASTER has (i.e., only 33% of them) have achievement rates of their target values above 60%. The level of attainment of these indicators corresponds to normal or even higher for some of them, considering the time consumed and the time remaining to implement the activities. The mission also notes that six (6) indicators, i.e., 40.00%, have very low rates of achievement of their target values, below 10%. The remaining four (4) indicators have a low rate of achievement of their target values, i.e., 27% with rates varying between 18.79% and 30.92%. In order to estimate the physical implementation rate of the ASTER Activity at mid-term, we have weighted the indicators by assigning a weighting coefficient to each one, which allows us to evaluate the efforts made by the actors to achieve the objectives. In principle, achieving the target values for each indicator requires the execution of several activities that are not necessarily of the same complexity, do not require the same level of effort, and require different resources for their implementation. For the purposes of determining the project's physical implementation rate, which is the average of the achievement rates of its indicators, we have assigned the same coefficient to each of them. On this basis, the overall physical implementation rate of the ASTER Activity at mid-term is 34.48%. This is indeed a low rate, as indicated by previous analyses. 5.3.3 Analysis of indicators and their target values As mentioned earlier, ASTER is a part of the RISE II project. A total of twelve of its indicators come from the RISE II document. In Table 4, these are the indicators for which a number is given in column 2. The other three indicators that do not have an identification number in Table 4 were formulated specifically for ASTER. The mission finds that, overall, the fifteen ASTER indicators are well formulated. However, they are not easy to identify insofar as they are very general and go beyond the context of Burkina Faso. Indeed, several of them refer to "marine areas" which does not correspond to the realities of the country. The mission believes that even though these indicators should remain linked to those of the RISE II project, they should have been adapted to the specific context of ASTER. With regard to the targets at the end of ASTER, the mission considers that they are realistic for the indicators of specific objectives 1 and 3. In view of the area concerned (land in rural areas) and the duration of implementation, we find that these targets have been set in a manner that is consistent, in other words, they are neither too low nor too high. On the other hand, concerning specific objective 2, the mission has the following opinions: • EG.10.4-3: "Number of disputed land and property rights cases resolved by local authorities, contractors, mediators, or courts as a result of USG assistance". Since ASTER's activities (training, information, awareness-raising, land tenure security, etc.) contribute to reducing tensions in land management, the indicator should have been formulated in terms of a reduction in the number of land conflicts and the target set as a percentage. For example, it would have been more appropriate to set it in terms of a 50% reduction in land conflicts in the communes where ASTER intervenes at the end of three years. In other words, 846 conflicts resolved in the intervention zone does not provide much information on the effects of ASTER in its intervention zone in this area; • EG.10.4 – 5: "Number of parcels with relevant parcel information corrected or incorporated into an official land administration system (whether a system for the property registry, cadaster, or an integrated system) as a result of USG assistance". Here the target of 2,700, corresponding to 100 per intervention commune, is fairly realistic. However, as previously mentioned, it takes time to prepare the actors in the land tenure chain and local authorities so that they are in a position to issue land tenure titles. It would therefore have been necessary for ASTER to intervene from the first year in all of its 27 target communes. In the current situation, the last communes 33 selected will not have enough time to be prepared and to issue APFRs in one year. In addition, the 2,700 titles are primarily targeted at women's and youth organizations. This last aspect makes this target out of reach as shown by the figures in the sample communes with 1.32% collective APFRs delivered against 98.68% individual ones. • EG.10.4 – 7: "Number of adults provided with legally recognized and documented tenure rights to land or marine areas, as a result of USG assistance". The target of 135,000 adults is considered too ambitious by the mission. The information on this target indicates that the 2,700 expected APFRs were to benefit mainly women's and youth organizations, which would allow the target to be reached on the basis of an average of 50 members per organization. However, in the context of rural Burkina Faso, producer organizations do not own land in their own name. When they do own land, it is most often a loan from a landowner to the organization to carry out its activities. And generally, when we start talking about a title to secure land, the landowner retracts and withdraws his land. If the APFRs issued are mainly issued to individuals (as the current trend shows), this target of 135,000 adults is unrealistic. • EG.10.4 – 8: "Number of adults who perceive their tenure rights to land or marine areas as secure with USG assistance". Again, the indicator should not have been formulated in terms of "number" but rather in terms of proportion and the target in percent. 5.4 Financial execution of ASTER ASTER's financial execution is handled by the accounting department. Following the approval of the annual budget, the budget consumption system is based on advances that are justified to the financial partner, USAID, before the next budgetary supply. As soon as 75% of the allocated budget is consumed, the accounting department initiates the call for funds by justifying the amounts consumed. The information collected shows that the financial partner has always responded promptly to the various calls for funds, thus ensuring that sufficient funds are available to carry out the activities. As far as the use of funds is concerned, expenditures are made on the budget lines in accordance with the forecasts without major variations (neither major overruns nor major under-spending), which is a sign of good programming. However, in terms of budget monitoring, it appears that the financial department encountered major difficulties that led to a total lack of funds during the first quarter of 2021, which led to the execution of activities being blocked for a certain period of time. In accordance with USAID requirements, financial reports are produced and transmitted monthly and quarterly to report on budget execution and consumption. An annual report on ASTER's financial performance has also been prepared. Difficulties in complying with the funding partner's requirements as well as errors in the periodic progress reports at the beginning of ASTER led to several shuttles between USAID and ASTER for corrections. However, as ASTER progressed, the writing of these reports gradually improved. With regard to budget consumption, the following table 5 presents the situation of forecasts and executions. Table 5 : budget consumption of ASTER in US dollars Fiscal year Preview Consumption Consumption rate 2019-2020 629 158,00 557 197,00 88,56% 2020-2021 685 218,19 701 156,00 102,33% 2019-2022 1 899 914,51 1 258 353,00 66,23% Sources: ASTER financial department Table 5 shows that at mid-term (after two-thirds of the implementation time has been consumed) the financial execution rate of ASTER is normal. ASTER is neither under- nor over-spent. The mission 34 considers that these data show that the financial execution of ASTER is in line with the forecasts, which is an important positive aspect. 5.5 Partnership As ASTER has chosen the participatory and inclusive approach for its implementation, it has established partnerships with different structures. The partner structures are of two kinds, namely i) those belonging to the RISE II project and ii) other partners involved because of their link with rural land tenure. The three (3) main partners of the RISE II project with which ASTER has collaborated the most since its launch are: • TerresEauVie (TEV); • Sahel Collaboration and Communication (SCC); • Victoire sur la Malnutrition Plus (VIM plus); • Catalyze. The main goals of the collaboration with the RISE partners are to develop a synergy of actions in the field in order to pool their strengths for greater results for each of them. However, the information available on this partnership shows that apart from some training activities4, this partnership has generated only mixed results. ASTER's partnership with actors related to rural land tenure has mainly involved collaboration with: • rural and urban communes; • prefectures • General Directorate for Training in Rural Areas (DGFOMR); • Departmental services of the rural sector (environment, agriculture, and livestock) of the intervention zones; • Village Development Councils (VDCs) in the villages of the intervention communes. These partnerships have been positive and have contributed to the implementation of ASTER. They have also allowed for capacity building of these partner structures and their effective involvement in the establishment and renewal of local land. 5.6 Monitoring and evaluation system For the purposes of monitoring and evaluation of ASTER, a mechanism has been put in place and a manager from the Coordination Unit is responsible for it. This system is based mainly on the ASTER technical document and the monitoring, evaluation and learning plan for ASTER activities. The system is fed with information by the ASTER team members through the reports of the activities carried out by each one. Information on activities carried out at the communal level and in the villages, as well as on indicator targets, is provided by the people in charge of land tenure in relation to their cluster. These actors, who act as the interface between ASTER, the target groups (town halls, deconcentrated technical services, CFV, CCFV, etc.) and the beneficiaries (women's groups, youth groups, landowners, internally displaced persons, etc.), have the prerogative to report continuously on the progress of activities. In order to simplify this reporting in real time, the Kobotoolbox platform was recently adopted to take advantage of the facilities it offers in this sense. The MAST manager is also another key player in this system thanks to the information provided by the intervention municipalities on the real-time evolution of the process of establishing RFPAs and the related indicators that are centralized in the platform thanks to the synchronized data. 4 including sharing of information and modules on the MAST tool, the policy and the law on land tenure security in rural areas 35 Based on the the information collected, the monitoring and evaluation system produces technical reports on the progress of ASTER on a monthly, quarterly and annual basis. Overall, the reporting periods were generally respected and the content of the reports reflects the progress of ASTER and the difficulties encountered. However, it emerged from the discussions that at the beginning of ASTER the quality of the reports was not up to USAID's requirements, which led to several back-and-forth corrections for validation. However, this difficulty was gradually resolved so that the quality of periodic reports improved over time. In the opinion of the mid-term evaluation team, this monitoring and evaluation system is effective and participatory and has made it possible to report on the progress of the project. However, we deplore the absence of a database in this M&E system. This makes it difficult to access detailed information on the activities carried out, the achievements made and the beneficiaries by type of activity. The existence of such a database would have made it possible to properly organize the data produced by ASTER and to make updated information available to ASTER team members on progress toward indicator targets. In addition, a good database is an important decision-making tool and significantly facilitates the writing of periodic numerical reports such as quarterly and annual reports and internal and external evaluations. With the adoption of the Kobotoolbox platform, the implementation of such a database could be facilitated on the MS Excel software. 5.7 Difficulties encountered and solutions applied The main difficulties encountered by ASTER in its implementation are mainly the security situation in the country and the situation related to the Corona virus (COVID-19). The impact of the security situation on the implementation of ASTER is due to the fact that several villages in the intervention communes are inaccessible. ASTER agents, and more specifically land agents, cannot go there to conduct sensitizations. As for COVID-19, its advent coincided with the effective start of ASTER's activities. Because of the measures taken by the government to deal with it, which consisted of bans on gatherings, quarantine of affected localities, etc., ASTER's activities were greatly slowed down. Faced with these constraints, ASTER has developed measures to adapt and allow the continuity of activities as best it can. Thus, a health and safety protocol for field activities and ceremonies and a contingency plan were adopted in order to provide agents with guidelines for the execution of activities. The late start of ASTER's activities, with a six-month delay out of a total duration of only 36 months, was also a hindrance that had to be addressed over time. In addition, the departure of some key project staff (notably the deputy project manager and the person in charge of monitoring and evaluation) and their replacement by new human resources were also difficulties that ASTER had to face. Indeed, this type of change necessarily entails loss of time due to the period required for the adaptation of the new agents. Even if this cannot be quantified in terms of impact on the achievement of targets, the mission notes that all these difficulties have had repercussions on the progress of ASTER. 6 RESULTS ACCORDING TO THE EVALUATION CRITERIA 6.1 Relevance The ASTER activity is relevant because it responds to very real problems facing the country: difficulties related to land security in rural areas. With regard to its overall objective and its specific objectives, and given its relevance to the needs of the target populations and the local communities in which its intervention areas are located, ASTER's rationale is fully justified. 36 More specifically, ASTER responds to the priority needs of improving land tenure security in rural areas and building resilience, which go hand in hand with increased investment in the agricultural, forestry and pastoral sectors. ASTER is perfectly in line with the National Policy on Land Tenure Security in Rural Areas (PNSFMR) and more specifically with its first three specific objectives, which aim to i) guarantee the legitimate right of access of all rural actors to land, in a dynamic of sustainable rural development, poverty alleviation and promotion of equity and legality, ii) to contribute to the improvement of the prevention and resolution of land conflicts and the management of natural resources and iii) to contribute to the creation of the basis for the viability and development of local authorities by providing them with their own land resources and effective management tools. ASTER is also in line with the law n°034-2009/AN of June 16, 2009 on rural land tenure in Burkina Faso and contributes to its implementation. In addition to these two national texts, ASTER is also in line with the National Economic and Social Development Plan 2021-2025 (PNDES-II), in particular its strategic axes 1 and 4 which are entitled Axis 1: Consolidate resilience, security, social cohesion and peace and Axis 4: Boost sectors that are conducive to the economy and jobs. On the other hand, ASTER is consistent with the National Rural Sector Program (PNSR II), particularly in its Axis 5 relating to "securing land and strengthening human capital in the rural sector" and more specifically its sub-program (i): "Securing land, agricultural vocational training and organization of the rural world". In the eyes of the final beneficiaries, i.e., the populations represented by the CFVs, CCFVs and CVDs, ASTER is relevant. This can be seen in the expression of their satisfaction with its activities as shown in figure 6 below. Figure 6 : levels of satisfaction of the populations with ASTER Figure 6 shows that the vast majority of the population is satisfied with the implementation of ASTER. In fact, the general satisfaction rate was 88.89%, with 33.33% being very satisfied and 55.56% being satisfied. The most important reasons given for this satisfaction are: • Improvement of the living conditions of the populations; • We now know that we can lend a piece of land according to the land law; • ASTER works for social cohesion and peace in our community; • ASTER's activities have reduced conflicts; • Reduction of land conflicts; • ASTER activities help reconciliation and social cohesion in the village; 29,66% 56,78% 13,56% 0,00% 0,00% 10,00% 20,00% 30,00% 40,00% 50,00% 60,00% Very satisfied Satisfied Not satisfied Not at all satisfied 37 • ASTER eases tensions between the inhabitants; • ASTER has brought us together as a cooperative; • ASTER makes us aware of the importance of living together; • ASTER helps us to have a land and to develop it. For the dissatisfactions, the people we met gave the following main explanations: • ASTER's actions are limited to land; • ASTER is slow in its work; • Training is insufficient; • ASTER is behind in their activities; • ASTER has not worked for the moment in our country; • The youth is not much involved. Ultimately, the mission believes that the ASTER activity is relevant to both the country and the grassroots population. Its objectives at the time of formulation therefore remain in line with the concerns despite the evolution of the national context. 6.2 Effectiveness ASTER's effectiveness is measured primarily through its progress in achieving results as measured by the indicators. Table 6 in the "Level of Achievement of Targets" section provides the status, the titles of the indicators by objective, and ASTER's progress toward the targets set in the results framework. The analysis of the reports shows that despite the difficulties encountered, the planned activities were carried out at a good level. Despite a late start and the fact that the ASTER team was set up several months late and installed gradually, the staff took advantage of ONF-BF's experience in implementing similar projects and the support of partner structures at the national, regional and communal levels to obtain good results in carrying out the activities. The mission considers that ASTER has been effective in the implementation of activities. However, this is a necessary but not sufficient condition for achieving results. The achievement of results and objectives also depends on other factors that ASTER does not necessarily control and that must be formulated in the logical framework as assumptions. As noted earlier, the log frame does not include assumptions. They are formulated separately so that they are not linked to the objectives and outcomes as they should be in the log frame. Table 6 shows the level of achievement of ASTER's objectives based on progress toward their indicator targets. Table 6 : rate of achievement of ASTER specific objectives Specific objective Rate of achievement Specific objective 1: Strengthen the land tenure system through technical support to the Government of Burkina Faso (GoBF) to establish, staff and effectively operate rural land service offices (SFR) in the municipalities of the RISE zone 50,36% Specific objective 2: Improve arbitration and mitigation of conflicts arising from agriculture, pastoralism, mining and other land-related issues 4,32% Specific objective 3: Improve the sustainable management of land resources through technical assistance provided to other RISE/ RISE II partners and the communes 36,32% Level of achievement of specific objective 1 38 Table 6 shows that the overall level of achievement of the first specific objective is 50.36% at mid-term. Taking into account the actual time taken to reach this level, the mission considers this progress towards achieving the objective to be satisfactory. In fact, due to the delay of at least six months in the effective start-up of activities, the ASTER team took about a year to achieve this progress. Of the five (5) indicators for this specific objective, three have a very good level of achievement (varying between 67 and 74%) at mid-term. The other two indicators have a low level of achievement of their respective target values (varying between 19 and 22%). In short, the evaluation team considers ASTER's progress towards achieving its first specific objective, which aims to put the actors concerned in a position to play their roles in taking action to secure land tenure in their localities, to be effective. Level of achievement of specific objective 2 The main goal of specific objective 2 is to issue land tenure security certificates to ASTER targets. The summary table shows that it is at a very low level of achievement with an overall rate of only 4.32% at mid-term. All four indicators of this objective are at a rate of less than 10% of their target value at the end of the project. This is corroborated by the weakness of the delivery of the APFR to the populations of the intervention communes. In short, ASTER has not been effective in achieving its second specific objective. Level of achievement of specific objective 3 This objective is mainly devoted to partnership development in order to create synergies of action with RISE partners and other key actors in the field of rural land. The table shows a progress rate of 36.32% towards the achievement of this specific objective, which is low at the mid-term of the project. For the six indicators of the objective, the rate of progress towards the target values is very disparate, ranging from 0% for two of them to a very good rate of 100% for the first. The other three indicators are respectively at a good (62%) to poor (25.00% and 30.92%) rate of achievement. The mission considers that ASTER has not been effective in achieving its third specific objective. In conclusion, overall, ASTER has not been effective in its progress towards its specific objectives. 6.3 Efficiency In this point, the mission assesses whether optimal use has been made of the resources made available to ASTER to carry out the activities envisaged in the planning document and within the time frame set. In other words, it is a measure of the project's progress in relation to its inputs, i.e., material, financial and human resources. 6.3.1 Budget execution ASTER's initial budget of US$1,899,914.51 has not been revised. At the halfway point (actually after two years) of the project's implementation, the budget execution rate is 66.23% as of September 30, 2021. This rate shows a very good budget consumption capacity in the implementation of ASTER, which is an important indicator of the project's success. A more detailed analysis of the budgetary situation shows that the annual consumptions have not been made with significant differences from the forecasts. In addition, the analysis of unit costs shows that purchases are made in accordance with the standards in force in development projects and programs in Burkina Faso, which shows an efficient use of the financial resources allocated. 6.3.2 Human and material resources The mission found that the ASTER implementation team is effectively in place and all the planned positions are filled, which allows the project to be fully operational. However, as already noted, the team was put in place six months late, which did not allow activities to begin on time. The data collected on the functioning of this team shows that it is used efficiently to achieve ASTER's objectives. The elements that explain this efficient use of human resources are the following. 39 • The location of land agents within their assigned communes. This location near the target actors (SFR/BD, CFV, CCFV, populations, etc.) allows for a reduction in travel time and means and a more rapid intervention; • The location of ASTER's technical team in Kaya, which allows for closer supervision of the actors in all the intervention communes, which are thus closer together than in Ouagadougou; • The facilitation of training sessions for actors by ASTER's human resources. Indeed, the team has the skills to provide such training, which is a significant advantage. This saves time and financial resources in the organization of these training sessions, especially when there are many of them, as in the case of ASTER. As for the land agents, we believe that their workload is too heavy, with five people covering 19 communes, an average of four (4) communes per agent at present. In addition, the coverage of eight (8) new communes will further increase this workload, which according to the evaluation mission does not allow for quality work to be done in the villages due to lack of time. With regard to the material resources used to achieve the results, the mission considers that the staff is sufficiently equipped to carry out quality professional work. However, in terms of logistics, the land agents lack certain important equipment for their safety when they travel by motorcycle. These include safety shoes, boots, gloves, lumbar belts, raincoats and helmets. Ultimately, the mission found several elements of efficiency in the use of resources for the implementation of the project. However, a key efficiency element, which is the correlation between budget consumption and the achievement of project objectives, is not observed at ASTER. In other words, budget consumption at mid-term is normal while the level of progress towards objectives is low. This observation allows the mission to conclude that, overall, the implementation of the ASTER activity does not meet the criterion for assessing mid-term efficiency. 6.4 Effects and impacts The goals of ASTER are to reduce land conflicts between actors and to provide secure access for the population to agroforestry production land, which improves the income of beneficiaries. The analyses here seek to determine the changes induced and/or triggered by ASTER in the direction of achieving these goals, which constitute the ultimate objectives sought by the ASTER activity. The general observation made by the mid-term evaluation mission and shared by the actors interviewed is that at this stage, it is too early to draw conclusions on the effects and impacts of ASTER. This is because the changes in the land situation take a long time to manifest themselves. In addition, almost all of the activities are recent, with the older ones being about a year old. In addition, as mentioned above, very few land tenure security certificates have been issued to the target groups to date. However, although the extent of ASTER's impacts will only be revealed in a few years, some effects have been felt by the beneficiaries. Indeed, some beneficiaries of the actions have testified to these effects, which we report here. The first effects are those related to the spin-offs of the training and coaching activities of the actors. The beneficiaries, both in the communes and in the villages, recognize that this support has enabled them to better master their roles and missions and to be able to carry them out effectively. The same is true for the equipment received by the SFR/BDs as well as the CFVs and CCFVs which are now operational. In addition, awareness-raising and training activities in the affected communes are beginning to have an impact. Several testimonies collected in the affected villages undeniably mention a reduction in cases of land conflicts in their localities. Among the visible effects of the training and support actions for women's and youth groups in the communes, we have the creation of cooperative societies in increasing numbers in the communes where ASTER intervenes. 40 6.5 Sustainability In general, the evaluation mission considers that ASTER is being implemented with a view to the sustainability of achievements. This opinion is based on the elements presented in the following paragraphs. The involvement and empowerment of beneficiary communities and community leaders (traditional leaders, CVDs, etc.) allows them to take ownership of the activities carried out and to continue them even in the absence of the project. This ownership is a factor of good management and replicability, which are elements of sustainability. In addition, the dynamic of securing land in rural areas supported by the ASTER activity is one of the prerogatives of the State and its branches, as well as that of the local authorities. This support, comparable to the priming of a pump, which helps all actors to play their role, is also a sustainable element. The involvement of several partners, particularly the permanent structures in the implementation of ASTER, also favors the sustainability of the achievements. The involvement of central and deconcentrated technical services of the State, local authorities, general administration authorities, and professional organizations is a factor of sustainability, because they all have a long-term vocation, unlike the project, which is by definition limited in time. The involvement and empowerment of these actors makes it possible to capitalize on experiences and help beneficiaries to continue the activities carried out without the project's support. One of the important strategies in achieving its objectives and results is the emphasis placed on capacity building of the actors involved. Several actors have been trained and coached to ensure their mastery of the themes developed. It is indeed obvious that the mastery by local actors of the activities carried out is a necessary condition for their reproduction, especially in the absence of the project. It is also positive to note that some of the training given to the populations was provided by local actors, namely agents of the deconcentrated technical services of the rural sector (agriculture, environment and livestock), which further reinforces its sustainability. The mission was able to confirm from various sources that ASTER has indeed emphasized this aspect by organizing technical and organizational training for the population and partners. During interviews with beneficiaries, they acknowledged that their knowledge has increased thanks to these capacity building activities. We also find that the training of the DVCs and their empowerment in the renewal of the VFCs and CCFVs is an important factor of sustainability. These actions could easily be replicated in the same localities if needed. 6.6 Cross-cutting themes 6.6.1 Communication strategy In the implementation of ASTER, communication was seen as one of the key aspects to be emphasized in order to reach the target audience. In order to optimize ASTER's communication, a communication and knowledge management officer was recruited among the first staff. In addition, a communication strategy has been developed and validated to ensure that the activities in this area are coherent and harmoniously integrated with all other project activities. Throughout the implementation of ASTER, the communication component has worked in two main directions, namely (i) improving the visibility of ASTER and its actions and (ii) informing and sensitizing the target public in the intervention areas. In the implementation of the communication strategy, several communication materials were produced, including radio programs and spots, educational posters, stickers for equipment grants, models for ASTER's visibility plaques, video montages, newsflashes, etc. Communication products have also been translated into the main languages of communication of the populations of the intervention zones, namely Moré, Fulfulde and Gulmacema, in order to reach the maximum number of people. For 41 greater efficiency, several channels were used to disseminate the communication materials, including several community radios stations with long broadcasting radii. According to the information collected in the field, these communication actions have reached the large number of ASTER's target audience. All the actors met during the field trips to the communes and villages affirmed that they had been touched by several of the messages conveyed by the communication products disseminated. 6.6.2 Environmental and social safeguards The mission notes that environmental and social considerations have been a reality for the ASTER activity. In accordance with good practice, prior to the implementation of the activities, an environmental assessment was carried out in order to determine the possible environmental and social impacts of ASTER and to determine the mitigation and compensation measures to be taken. According to the conclusions of this study, ASTER would not have negative impacts if measures to mitigate environmental and social risks are observed during the implementation of the activities in the beneficiary communes. The main risks identified by the study are those of: • degradation of the environment and natural resources (soil, water, forest, pasture, etc.) if the beneficiaries of the APFRs use the plots of land inappropriately; • conflicts after demarcation if there is a lack of sensitization to encourage good community support and if the titles of use are delivered in an unfair manner; • environmental pollution linked to the use of inputs from agroforestry activities on newly registered land; The measures recommended to deal with these risks are information and awareness-raising activities, as well as training for beneficiaries in the adoption of good sustainable land management practices. The mission notes that among the awareness, information and training actions for the population, messages are addressed to these risks in order to reduce them. 6.6.3 Gender Consideration Taking gender into account is one of the major axes of implementation of the ASTER activity, as the primary beneficiaries are women and youth. This can easily be observed in the indicators, which are broken down by taking into account women and youth. A gender specialist has been recruited by ASTER in order to master this theme and to take it into account in an adequate manner. Although the mission regrets that the gender specialist was recruited with some delay, his presence in the team is a very positive aspect to be highlighted. In addition to the recruitment of a gender resource person, ASTER commissioned a study to better understand the inequalities between men, women, youth and other vulnerable people in the intervention regions. The data from this study provided an understanding of the situation of men, women, youth and other vulnerable people and also serves as a gender reference situation in terms of land in ASTER's intervention areas. In essence, the study indicated that women have limited access to and control over land because of their social status and economic vulnerability. In addition, it highlighted that in the beneficiary communes, women and youth are largely excluded from decision-making bodies and have limited access to land administrations, training opportunities, educational systems and microfinance institutions (MFIs). Following the study, the report produced was validated in a national feedback workshop and sent to USAID, which has not yet validated it. In addition, an ASTER gender strategy was also developed following the study by the ASTER team, but has not been validated either. In other words, to date ASTER does not have an official validated strategy for taking gender into account, which the mission 42 wishes to emphasize given the importance of taking women, youth, etc. into account in the activities and target values expected at this level. Despite the absence of an official strategy, efforts have been made and have resulted in a draft gender strategy, the elements of which are used within ASTER to promote the inclusion of gender in activities. The first axis of this draft strategy is to group women and youth in organizations in order to accompany them in their access to secure land titles. Thus, we have noted that ASTER supports several groups so that they comply with the OHADA law, but also that they have access to secure titles to production land. The other axis is to support the groups that already have land in order to plead in their favor with landowners, but also to motivate them to request titles of land security. Within the framework of the same gender strategy, approaches are made to landowners to encourage them to give or lend land to women and young people in their localities before they are supported in applying for documents from the CFV and CCFV. Finally, in order to improve women's access to financing, ASTER has linked women's and youth organizations with MFIs and advocated for the acceptance of APFRs as collateral in the context of financial loan procedures. In the establishment of village land tenure security bodies, ASTER is monitoring the representation of women and youth in the CFVs and CCFVs in accordance with the application decrees of Law N°034/2009 of June 16 on rural land tenure in Burkina Faso. The mission notes that the strategy of supporting groups has made it possible to reach a significant number of women and youth in the communes where ASTER is implemented. Beyond that, however, it must be noted that the actions intended to promote gender mainstreaming have not yet led to an improvement in the situation of women in terms of access to secure land in the communes where the ASTER activity is implemented. Indeed, of the first 51 APFRs issued by the sample communes, 47 were for men and only four (4) for women (ASTER 2021, 2nd quarter activity report), i.e., 7.83%. Among these first certificates, none belong to the women's and youth organizations supported. The access to credit hoped for by putting women in contact with MFIs has not had any effect at this stage either. It should be noted, however, that this linkage is being pursued in collaboration with CATALYSE, a member of the RISE II consortium. On another level, we note that in the activity reports, the numbers of participants in the organized activities are given by disaggregating the participants into men and women, which is satisfactory. In conclusion, the observation is that the consideration of gender is largely below expectations at this stage of the implementation of ASTER. We note that among the various training topics provided to the actors, the concept of "gender and development" has been lacking until now. Such a theme should be developed for the benefit of local land management bodies such as the CFVs and CCFVs, which are in direct contact with the population, but also for other land governance actors. On the other hand, it is urgent to finalize and adopt ASTER's gender strategy and to share it with all the partners involved, particularly during gender training sessions. 7 VERIFICATION OF THE THEORY OF CHANGE The theory of change for the ASTER activity was established as follows: IF the land management institutions and organizations located at the commune and community levels in the RISE zone have a better knowledge of land laws and land tenure; IF these institutions and organizations are better equipped and appropriate the MAST and LandPKS (Land Potential Knowledge System) tools for sustainable management of land resources; IF best practices in land governance are applied for the benefit of vulnerable people, namely women and youth; 43 THEN, vulnerable people in the RISE zone will have secure access to productive land resources; land use conflicts will be mitigated and better managed; and people will be able to invest sustainably in their land. This theory of change is, of course, accompanied by conditionalities, i.e., the assumptions that must be met for the conditionalities to be transformed into change. These assumptions, which we have discussed, should have been addressed in the ASTER results and objectives. The investigations carried out by the mid-term evaluation team have shown that, thanks to ASTER's support, the land management institutions and organizations in the intervention communes have improved their knowledge of land laws and regulations. This improvement in knowledge is attested to by the testimonies of the actors we met. In addition, they have been equipped and have adopted the MAST and LandPKS tools that they use for the benefit of the entire community, including women and youth. In addition, the populations have been informed and sensitized to good practices and to the legislative and regulatory provisions in force with regard to rural land tenure. In other words, ASTER has put land governance actors in the intervention communes in a position to allow vulnerable people to have secure access to productive land resources. However, this has been difficult to achieve, as few vulnerable people have had secure access to these land resources. However, according to the evaluation team, this does not mean that ASTER's theory of change is flawed, but that not all assumptions have been met. In the evaluation team's view, the project's theory of change is indeed valid. However, as noted in the M&E plan, the verification of the theory of change is linked to the assumptions that were listed. Most of the hypotheses were verified, but according to the mission, one very important hypothesis was omitted from the list, namely that of the population's adherence to the proposed changes. The analyses suggest that the population's support for these changes has not yet been achieved, as it requires time. 8 LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ASTER The main lesson learned by the evaluation team from the implementation of the ASTER activity is that the changes proposed in an area as sensitive as land tenure require sufficient time for the population to adhere to them. The second lesson that follows from the first is that it is not enough for the population to be informed and sensitized for them to immediately and massively demand land tenure titles. 9 RECOMMENDATIONS Table 7 presents the recommendations made by the ASTER mid-term evaluation team. Table 7 : recommendations of the evaluation team Recommendation Responsible Actor Recruit additional land agents in order to obtain an average ratio of 2 or 3 communes per land agent depending on the number of villages ONF-BF Continue efforts to improve the content of technical and financial reports Monitoring and Evaluation Officer Administrative and Financial Manager Increase efforts in the effective consideration of gender in the implementation of ASTER Project team 44 Recommendation Responsible Actor Complete the monitoring and evaluation system with a database on the activities carried out and the detailed typologies of the project beneficiaries Monitoring and Evaluation Officer Organize training sessions on the concept of "gender and development" and on ASTER's gender strategy for land authorities (SFR/BD, CFV, CCFV) and partners Gender Officer Diligent accompaniment of IDPs for their access to secure agricultural land (land loan) Chief Of Party; Deputy Chief of Party To complete the equipment of the land managers in the field of logistic security Chief Of Party Expedite the process of preparing and delivering finalized APFRs to applicants Town halls of the intervention areas Revisit ASTER indicators and indicator targets ONF-BF USAID 45 CONCLUSION In terms of the investments made at the central level in Ouagadougou and in the intervention zones, the actors we met were unanimous that despite the late start of ASTER, the team put in place has generally succeeded in carrying out the activities planned for the mid-term in the intervention zones. Indeed, in accordance with the mid-term forecasts, the team has succeeded in deploying ASTER in nineteen (19) communes in the Centre-North, East and Sahel regions. In the intervention zones, ASTER has implemented several activities that have enabled the establishment, renewal and equipping of local land management bodies such as Village Land Commissions (VLC) and Village Land Conciliation Commissions (VLC), as well as land tenure structures such as Rural Land Services (RLS) and Land Offices (LO). In addition, ASTER has conducted several training sessions on the National Policy for Securing Land in Rural Areas (PNSFMR) and Law No. 034/2009 AN of June 16, 2009 on rural land tenure in Burkina Faso for the benefit of local authorities, land tenure structures and all actors involved in land governance in its intervention communes. All these activities have helped to put the key authorities and actors of the land tenure chain of the concerned communes in a situation of optimum functionality in order to be able to play their role in land tenure governance appropriately. In addition, during this first period of its implementation, ASTER has carried out important communication activities that have made it possible to inform and raise awareness among the target populations, but also among all the actors concerned in the three regions covered. At mid-term, while the financial achievement rate is normal and stands at 66.23% after two years, the rate of progress towards the target values of the indicators is low and stands at 28.27% despite the activities carried out. Notwithstanding the establishment of local authorities and authorized structures within the communes and their functionality following ASTER's support, the issuance of land tenure titles remains low. In the same sense, ASTER has not been able to issue land titles to the disadvantaged segments of the population, particularly women and young people. According to the evaluation team's analysis, this situation is due to several reasons, the most important of which is the long time needed to change attitudes, especially in the area of land in rural areas. The implementation of ASTER has been marred by various difficulties, the most significant of which is the security situation throughout the country, but which is more acute in many localities in the intervention communes. On the other hand, the situation of the pandemic in COVID-19 has also strongly hindered the implementation of ASTER activities. Faced with these two main difficulties, ASTER has developed coping strategies and continues to conduct its activities as best it can. In order to improve the level of achievement of ASTER's targets in its final year of implementation, the evaluation mission made recommendations aimed at further strengthening the capacities of the ASTER team, but also those of the land authorities and partners involved. 46 BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES Assemblée Nationale du Burkina Faso, 2009. Loi N°034-2009/AN portant régime foncier rural au Burkina Faso, 20 p. ASTER, 2021. Rapport Trimestriel : Avril - Juin 2021, 45 p. ASTER, 2021. Activity Contingency Plan : October 2019 – October 2022, 19 p. ASTER, 2021. Annual work plan : October 2020 - September 2021, 35 p. ASTER, 2021. Rapport Trimestriel : Janvier - Mars 2021, 33 p. ASTER, 2021. Quarterly Report : October - December 2020, 30 p. ASTER, 2021. Rapport annuel : Octobre 2019 - Septembre 2020, 30 p. ASTER, 2020. Fiscal Year Budget 2020-2021, file MS Excel. ASTER, 2020. Protocole de sécurité sanitaire pour les activités terrain et les cérémonies, 2 p. ASTER, 2020. Stratégie d’intervention au profit des PDI, 6 p. ASTER, 2020. Coordinating secretariat management plan, 7 p. ASTER, 2020. Activity Monitoring Evaluation and Learning Plan (AMELP), 62 p. ASTER, 2020. Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (EMMP), 8 p. ASTER, 2020. Quarterly report : April - June 2020, 33, p. ASTER, 2020. Quarterly report : January - March 2020, 23 p. ASTER, 2020. Initial work plan : October 2019 - September 2020, 21 p. ASTER, 2019. Budget année fiscale 2019-2020, fichier MS Excel. Burkina Faso, 2007. Politique Nationale de Sécurisation Foncière en Milieu Rural, 49 p. Burkina Faso, 2012. Décret N°2012-263/PRES/PM/MATDS/MJ/MAH/MRA/MEDD/MEF portant attributions, composition, organisation et fonctionnement de la Commission de Conciliation Foncière Villageoise (CCFV), 10 p. ONF, 2018. Document de projet, 34 p. TEV, 2020. Stratégie du projet Terres Eau Vie, 14 p. USAID. Principles of Sequencing, Layering and Integrating, 15 p. 47 APPENDICES Appendices A : list of people we met N° Last name and first name(s) Structure/location Function 1 ABDRAMANE Hama CCFV/Niagassi (Sampelga) President 2 ADOU Hama Mamoudou CFV/Ouro Daka (Seytenga) President 3 ALI Boubacar CCFV/Lamana (Seytenga) Parcels boundaries officer 4 ALOU Amadou CFV/Niagassi (Sampelga) President 5 AMADOU Boureima Seytenga CVD President 6 AMADOU Mamoudou Sampelga CVD President 7 AMADOU Mamoudou CFV/Sampelga Haousagore (Sampelga) President 8 ANATA Hama Women’s group/Niagassi (Sampelga) Treasurer 9 TIORO André TerresEauVie (TEV) Responsible for the sustainable land use component TEV 10 BADINI Mariam Women’s group/Loulouka (Kongoussi) President 11 BAMOGO Aminata Women’s group/Bangansé (Kaya) President 12 BANDE Hamadou Breeding service /Piéla Breeding agent 13 BANDE Salimata Women’s group/Loagha foulbé (Kongoussi) President 14 BARBARA Harma Prefecture/Coalla Prefect 15 BARRY Djibrila CCFV/Kario (Yalgo) Secretary 16 BELEMOU Ali Environment Service /Piéla Head of service 17 BELEMOU Ali Environment Service /Piela Head of service 18 BIKIENGA ABIBOU Women’s group/Piéla President 19 BOGOLITAN Abdoul Moïse AG Mada Town Hall /Seytenga First Deputy Mayor 20 BOUBACAR Amadou CFV/Lamana (Seytenga) President 21 BOUBACAR Amadou Lamana (Seytenga) APFR Beneficiary 48 N° Last name and first name(s) Structure/location Function 22 BOUGMA Mariam ASTER Land manager: Kaya, Pissila, Barsalogho 23 BOUGOUMA KOKORO Youth group/secteurs 2 (Piéla) President 24 BOUREIMA Oursi Youth group /Niagassi (Sampelga) President 25 BOURGOU Yenfoudouma Mixed group/Secteur 2 (Yalgo) President 26 CISSE Fatimata Women’s group/Seytenga Secretary 27 COULIBALY/K. Angèle DGFOMR DLRSF Agent 28 DABIRA Raulan Agriculture Service/Sampelga ZATE Chief 29 DABOURGOU Potiaga Nafissatou Women’s group/Bandiedaga Gourmantche (Seytenga) President 30 DAMBINA Francine Women’s group/Bamasgou (Coalla) Secretary 31 DAMBINA Sakou Bandiedaga Gourmantche (Seytenga) APFR Beneficiary 32 DAMIBA Boukari CCFV/Soargou (Piéla) Secretary 33 DAYAMBA Djinri Women’s group/secteurs 2 (Piéla) President 34 DAYAMBA Yendie Soargou (Piéla) CVD President 35 DIAGBOUGA Djakambi Youth group /Coalla Secretary 36 DIAGBOUGA Eloi Youth group/Coalla Organization responsible 37 DIAGBOUGA Popoali Women’s group/Coalla Coordinator 38 DIAGBOUGA Sakou Youth group/Coalla President 39 DIAGBOUGA Tibandiba Women’s group/Coalla Treasurer 40 DIALLO Amadou Hamidou Lamana (Seytenga) APFR Beneficiary 41 DIALLO Djènèba Women’s group/Sampelga President 42 DIALLO Hamidou Amadou Lamana (Seytenga) CVD Président 43 DIALLO Hamidou Amadou Lamana (Seytenga) APFR Beneficiary 44 DICKO Aïssa Amadou Women’s group/Seytenga President 45 DICKO Amadou CCFV/Seytenga President 46 DICKO Amadou Abdramane CFV/Seytenga Member 47 DICKO Amadou Abdramane Lamana (Seytenga) APFR Beneficiary 49 N° Last name and first name(s) Structure/location Function 48 DICKO Amadou Boureima Mixed group/Damdegou (Sampelga) Secretary 49 DICKO Hama Mamoudou Mixed group /Sampelga President 50 DICKO Hamadou Toufado CFV/Damdegou (Sampelga) President 51 DICKO Hamidou Hama Niagassi (Sampelga) President CVD 52 DICKO Oumarou ASTER Land manager: Dori, Seytenga, Sampelga, Bani 53 DJELGOU Manacé ASTER Land manager: Piéla, Mani, Thion, Gayéri, Coalla, Bartiébougou 54 DJOLGOU AHADOU Town Hall/ Piéla Land agent 55 DJOLGOU Ahandou Service domanial de Piéla Head of Land Services 56 FARE Naaba CCFV/Secteur 2 (Yalgo) Deputy president 57 GUITANGA Adissa Women’s group/Piéla President 58 HAMA Alkadri CCFV/Sampelga Haousagore (Sampelga) President 59 HAMA Amadou Ouro daka (Seytenga) CVD Président 60 HAMA Amadou (Sousou) Mixed group /Niagassi (Sampelga) President 61 HAMA Oussmana Mixed group/Sampelga President 62 HAMADOU Boubacar Lamana (Seytenga) APFR Beneficiary 63 HAMIDOU Hama Mamoudou Youth group/Ouro Daka (Seytenga) President 64 HAMIDOU Woursi Mixed group/Sampelga President 65 ILY Raogo Environment Service /Yalgo Agent 66 ILBOUDO Eric Agriculture Service/Seytenga Agriculture Area Manager 67 SAWADOGO Jean de Dieu Kora (Kongoussi) APFR Applicant 68 KABORE Karim ASTER DCOP 69 KABORE Raguidawindé Agriculture Service/Piéla Head of service 70 OUEDRAOGO Kayouré Albert Loagha (Kongoussi) APFR Applicant 71 KIENI Boureima Agriculture Service /Kaya Head of service 72 KIENI Daouda Breeding service /Sampelga Head of service 50 N° Last name and first name(s) Structure/location Function 73 KINDA Adama Service foncier rural de Kongoussi Head of Land Service 74 KINDA Joikime Town Hall /Coalla Secretary général 75 KOMONDI Amiroufou Bandiedaga Gourmantche (Seytenga) APFR Beneficiary 76 KONGZABRE Abdoul Kader Prefecture Kaya Prefect 77 KORGO Mohamed ASTER Land manager: Kongoussi, Rollo 78 KOUBORI Hadjatou Women’s group/Bandiedaga Gourmantche (Seytenga) President 79 KOUDOUGOU Jacob Town Hall /Kaya Secretary General 80 LALOGO Niogyame Women’s group/Bamasgou (Coalla) Treasurer 81 LANKAONDE Kokoro CFV/Bandiedaga Gourmantche (Seytenga) Responsible for farmers and breeders 82 LANKOANDÉ ALAIN Youth group/Secteur 1 (Piéla) Auditor of accounts 83 LANKOANDE Ardjima Agriculture Service/Piéla Technical agent of agriculture 84 LANKOANDÉ ASSATOU Youth group/Secteur 1 (Piéla) President 85 LANKOANDE Bora Women’s group/Bamasgou (Coalla) Informant 86 LANKOANDÉ MARIE Women’s group/Piéla President 87 LANKOANDE Namoussa Women’s group/secteurs 2 (Piéla) Treasurer 88 LARE Sankpedja Agriculture Service/Yalgo Head of Service 89 KOPI Lauren Programme Sahel Colaboration and Communication (SCC) Deputy chief of party SCC 90 LOMPO Paamba Town Hall/ Coalla Head of Land Service 91 MADIEGA Djahourga CFV/Bamasgou (Coalla) Secretary 92 MAÏGA Aïssa Women’s group/Seytenga President 93 MAÏGA Fati Women’s group/Seytenga President 94 MAMOUDOU Amadou CCFV/Ouro Daka (Seytenga) President 51 N° Last name and first name(s) Structure/location Function 95 MAMOUDOU Hama Youth group/Ouro Daka (Seytenga) President 96 MARIAMA Boubacar Women’s group/Damdégou (Sampelga) President 97 MOUSSA Amadou CCFV/Damdegou (Sampelga) President 98 NADINGA Djinguiri Bandiedaga Gourmantche (Seytenga) APFR beneficiary 99 NADINGA Jean Marc Bamasgou (Coalla) CVD Secretary 100 NAMOUNTIUGOU Diakiro Bandiedaga Gourmantché (Seytenga) CVD President 101 NAMOUNTIUGOU Hama CCFV/Bandiedaga Gourmantche (Seytenga) President 102 NAMOUNTIUGOU Kezié Bandiedaga Gourmantche (Seytenga) APFR Beneficiary 103 NAMOUNTIUGOU Koka Bandiedaga Gourmantche (Seytenga) APFR Beneficiary 104 NATAMA Samuel Town Hall /Piéla First Deputy Mayor 105 NIKIEMA Rosalie Dondollé (Kaya) PDI 106 ZONGO Nouria Cindy ASTER Communication Manager 107 OUDIN Diayoudou Mixed group/Kario (Yalgo) President 108 OUEDA Bagyamba Mixed group/Gouengo (Yalgo) President 109 Ouedraogo W. P. Denis Environment Service /Sampelga Chief of service 110 OUEDRAOGO Abdoulaye Cadaster Service /Kaya Head of the land registry and land works department 111 OUEDRAOGO Assami Koulogo (Kaya) APFR Applicant 112 OUEDRAOGO Assèta Women’s group/Konkin (Kaya) President 113 OUEDRAOGO Desiré Environment Service /Kongoussi Agent 114 OUEDRAOGO Édouard CFV/Dondollé (Kaya) Secretary 115 OUEDRAOGO Fatimata Town Hall/ Seytenga Land agent 116 OUEDRAOGO Hamado CCFV/Rissiam (Kongoussi) Secretary 52 N° Last name and first name(s) Structure/location Function 117 OUEDRAOGO Hyacinthe ASTER Responsible for monitoring and evaluation 118 OUEDRAOGO Issouf Rissiam (Kongoussi) PDI 119 OUEDRAOGO Karim Rissiam (Kongoussi) PDI 120 OUEDRAOGO Moustapha Rissiam (Kongoussi) PDI 121 OUEDRAOGO Ouanogo Mahamadou Bangansé (Kaya) CVD deputy president 122 OUEDRAOGO Payidiwinde Town Hall/ Sampelga Head of Land Service 123 OUEDRAOGO Pougyanga Dondollé (Kaya) PDI 124 Ouedraogo Raogo Dondollé (Kaya) PDI 125 OUEDRAOGO Raogo CFV/Rissiam (Kongoussi) Deputy President 126 OUEDRAOGO RAZINGA Dondollé (Kaya) PDI 127 OUEDRAOGO Saïdou CCFV/Bangansé (Kaya) Secretary 128 OUEDRAOGO Sayouba Koulogo (Kaya) APFR Applicant 129 OUEDRAOGO V. Hermann Rissiam (Kongoussi) CVD President 130 Ouedraogo Wentare Bangansé (Kaya) APFR Applicant 131 OUEDRAOGO/Sawadogo Marcelline Environment Service /Kongoussi Head of service 132 OUMAROU Saadatou USAID/Burkina Faso Agriculture Specialist 133 PARKOUDA Eric ASTER Land manager : Tougouri, Yalgo, Bouroum, Nagbingou 134 BEAUJAULT Patrice TerresEauVie (TEV) DCOP TEV 135 ROUAMBA Karim Cadastral and land works department / sahel region head of the land registry and land works department 136 SALIFOU Boukari TerresEauVie (TEV) Technical Advisor TEV 137 SANA Salamata Women’s group/Boulenga (Kongoussi) President 138 SANGLA Lancina Breeding service /Piéla Head of service 139 SAWADOGO Abdoulaye Breeding service /Seytenga Head of service 140 SAWADOGO Adama Women’s group/Dondollé (Kaya) President 53 N° Last name and first name(s) Structure/location Function 141 SAWADOGO Aïdara DGFOMR ASTER Focal point 142 SAWADOGO Boukaré Rissiam (Kongoussi) PDI 143 SAWADOGO Fidèle Kora (Kongoussi) APFR Applicant 144 SAWADOGO Kiougou CFV/Koulogo (Kaya) President 145 SAWADOGO Kitouaga Breeding service /Coalla Head of service 146 SAWADOGO Koudougou CFV/Kora (Kongoussi) Secretary 147 SAWADOGO Kouka Albert CFV/Loagha (Kongoussi) Deputy president 148 SAWADOGO Lassane CCFV/Koulogo (Kaya) Secretary 149 SAWADOGO Lassane Koulogo (Kaya) APFR Applicant 150 SAWADOGO Luc Loagha (Kongoussi) CVD President 151 SAWADOGO Mahamadi CFV/Bangansé (Kaya) Deputy president 152 SAWADOGO Managawendin Boureima Bangansé (Kaya) APFR Applicant 153 SAWADOGO Manegré CFV/Konkin (Kaya) President 154 SAWADOGO Missiri Saïdou Dondollé (Kaya) CVD President 155 SAWADOGO N Michel Mixed group/Konkin (Kaya) President 156 SAWADOGO Natewende Jean Baptiste Koulogo (Kaya) CVD President 157 SAWADOGO Nawoubzanga CCFV/Dondollé (Kaya) President 158 SAWADOGO Ousseni Kora (Kongoussi) APFR Applicant 159 SAWADOGO Ramata Rissiam (Kongoussi) PDI 160 SAWADOGO Rasmane CCFV/Konkin (Kaya) President 161 SAWADOGO Safiétou Women’s group/Loulouka (Kongoussi) President 162 SAWADOGO Saidou CFV/Gouengo (Yalgo) President 163 SAWADOGO Saidou CCFV/Kora (Kongoussi) President 164 SAWADOGO Salifo Town Hall/ Kaya Land agent 165 SAWADOGO Sidonie Women’s group/Kora (Kongoussi) President 166 SAWADOGO Soumaila Mixed group/Konkin (Kaya) President 167 SAWADOGO Soumaila Konkin (Kaya) CVD President 168 SAWADOGO Tiibo CFV/Secteur 2 (Yalgo) President 54 N° Last name and first name(s) Structure/location Function 169 SAWADOGO Yacouba CCFV/Loagha (Kongoussi) President 170 SEBGO Bengdo Gouengo (Yalgo) CVD President 171 SEBGO Kamoidi Youth group/Secteur 2 (Yalgo) President 172 SINARE Issouf Environment Service /Seytenga Head of service 173 SIOGO Issa Kario (Yalgo) CVD President 174 SIOGO Kayaba Mixed group/Secteur 2 (Yalgo) President 175 SIOGO Kirsi CFV/Kario (Yalgo) President 176 SIOGO Raaga Mixed group/Secteur 2 (Yalgo) President 177 SOMANDA Minata Town Hall /Sampelga Secretary général 178 SOME Frédéric Breeding service /Yalgo ZATE 179 SORGHO Arsène Service domanial de Piéla Communication Officer 180 SOUMBOUGMA Raymond ASTER MAST Coordinator/Geographic Information System (GIS) Specialist 181 TAMBOANGOU Bedipoga Youth group/secteurs 2 (Piéla) President 182 TAMBOURA Aïssatou Women’s group/Seytenga President 183 TAMBOURA Djeneba Women’s group/Lamana (Seytenga) President 184 TAMBOURA Mamoudou Hama Damdegou (Sampelga) Head of village 185 TIENDREBEOGO Edouard ASTER COP 186 TINDANO Alou Youth group/Sampelga President 187 TINDANO Guiakiro CCFV/Gouengo (Yalgo) Information Officer 188 TINDANO Koapougimba Town Hall /Piéla Chairman of the Land Use and Management Commission 189 TINDANO Rouki Women’s group/Bandiedaga Gourmantche (Seytenga) President 190 TINDANO Tiabritieba Youth group/Coalla President 191 TINDREBEOGO Soulemane Agriculture Service/Coalla Head of service 192 SANDWIDI Boureima Secteur 2 (Yalgo) CVD Secretary 193 WANGO Tingouri Youth group/Coalla President 194 WANGRAWA Bassé ASTER Gender manager 55 N° Last name and first name(s) Structure/location Function 195 YAMEOGO Ali Town Hall/ Yalgo Land agent 196 YAMEOGO Guingri Mixed group/Secteur 2 (Yalgo) President 197 YAMEOGO Samande Mixed group/Kario (Yalgo) President 198 YAMEOGO Sonre Mixed group/Secteur 2 (Yalgo) President 199 YAMEOGO Zande Mixed group/Kario (Yalgo) President 200 YARGA Possi Women’s group/Coalla Information officer 201 YONI Rafael Environment Service /Kaya Head of service 202 ZABRE Jean Bosco Breeding service /Kaya Head of service 203 ZEBRA Issa Town Hall /Yalgo SG 204 ZONGA Minata Women’s group/Loulouka (Kongoussi) President 205 ZORE B. Benjamin DGFOMR Intern 206 ZOROME Abdoulaye USAID/Burkina Faso 207 ZOUNGRANA Abdoul Karim Town Hall /Kongoussi Secretary général 208 ZOUNGRANA Sambo Mixed group /Kario (Yalgo) President 56 Appendix B: Data Collection Tools I. Interview guides Interview with the project team date: Time : Surnames, first names, functions and contacts of the people met: - Global presentation of ASTER and its implementation? (areas of intervention, implementation team, funding, partners, target audiences, implementation strategy, etc.); - Overall assessment of the team in relation to the achievement of the objectives and results of the ASTER Activity at mid-term; - Were the means made available to the ASTER activity, in your opinion, in line with the objectives and expected results? (human resources, financial resources, equipment); - Have the various positions provided for in the PMU been filled? - What is the date of mobilization of the staff? (item by item) - Assessment of the collaboration with the financial backer in the implementation of the project; - Assessment made of the steering/review committee in the implementation of ASTER? (regularity of meetings, role played, lessons to be learned); - Appreciation of the collaboration with other RISE partners, technical services, local authorities, partner projects and programs; - Have ASTER's partners (town hall, SFR, STD, etc.) played their role properly? - Does ASTER have a database? if yes: summary to date of the quantities carried out by ASTER since its start (number of structures, implementation, number of APFR issued, training sessions carried out, participants in men and women, etc.) - Detail of the beneficiaries of the actions of the ASTER activity by area of intervention; - Level of involvement of beneficiaries in the implementation of ASTER; - Assessment of the consideration of gender in the formulation and implementation of the ASTER activity; - Main effects of the mid-term ASTER activity in the intervention area; Major changes observed; - What are the successes of the project in its implementation? - What innovations has the project introduced in land governance in municipalities; - Main difficulties encountered in the implementation of the ASTER activity? - Effects of the security situation on the implementation of the ASTER activity; - Arrangements made to deal with the security situation in the areas of intervention; - Effects of COVID19 on the implementation of the ASTER activity; - Strategies developed to adapt to COVID19 in the implementation of the ASTER activity; - How do you think that the achievements of the ASTER activity can be sustained? - Suggestions/recommendations for greater success of similar projects? - What else do you have to add? Interview with the financial partner (USAID) date: Time : Surnames, first names, functions and contacts of the people met: - Overall assessment of the implementation of the ASTER Activity at mid-term? - Assessments of the reports made by the project managers? (Respect of deadlines, conformity of content, quality of reports) - USAID points of satisfaction with the project - USAID points of dissatisfaction with the project - Assessment of the use of funds allocated to ASTER 57 - Suggestions for further implementation of the Activity - Others to add? Interview with local authorities (municipalities) date: Time : Surnames, first names, functions and contacts of the people met: - Roles played by the municipality in the implementation of the project; - Review of all the actions carried out by the project in the municipality during its implementation; - Training received by the municipality (local elected officials and municipal officials) as part of the project (themes and number of beneficiaries per theme); - Have the actors of the municipality benefited from training in MAST tools and LandPKS? If so, what are the effects of these trainings? - Other support from which the town hall has benefited within the framework of the project; - How do you judge the participation of the beneficiaries in the execution of the activities? - Assessment of the consideration of gender in the activities carried out by the project; - What are the effects of the issuance of APFR in your municipality? - In your opinion, what have been the successes of the project in its mid-term implementation in your municipality? - What do you think were the weaknesses in the implementation of the project in your municipality? - What are the positive impacts of the project actions on the communities in your municipality? - What are the negative impacts of the project actions on the communities in your municipality? - In general, what is your level of satisfaction with the implementation of the project in your municipality? Why ? - When the Program comes to an end, how do you plan to continue or replicate the supported activities? - What are your suggestions/recommendations for greater success in the further implementation of the project? - What else do you have to add? Interview with the Deconcentrated Technical Services (STD) date: Time : Surnames, first names, functions and contacts of the people met: - Was your structure involved in the implementation of the project? - Is there a collaboration protocol between your structure and the project? If so, what are the terms? - Assessment of the partnership between your structure and the project (success, weak points, lesson to be learned)? - Details of the actions carried out by your structure as part of the implementation of the project; - Actions carried out jointly by your structure and the project; - In your opinion, what are the successes in the implementation of the project at mid-term? - In your opinion, what are the weaknesses in the implementation of the project? - What do you think are the positive social effects of the project on the local populations in its areas of intervention? 58 - What do you think are the negative social effects of the project on the local populations in its areas of intervention? - What difficulties have you encountered in your partnership with the project? - What is your overall level of satisfaction with the execution of the project? Why ? - What are your suggestions/recommendations for greater success in the rest of the project? - What else do you have to add? Interview with the project's partner structures date: Time : Surnames, first names, functions and contacts of the people met: - Brief presentation of your structure and its activities; - When was the start of the partnership between your structure and the project? - How do you assess the collaboration between your structure and the project? Why ? - Details of the actions carried out by your structure within the framework of the partnership with the project? - In your opinion, what are the successes in the implementation of the project? - In your opinion, what are the weaknesses in the implementation of the project? - What difficulties have you encountered in your partnership with the project? - What do you think are the impacts of your actions on the project's target audience? - What are your suggestions/recommendations for better results in your partnership with the project? - What else do you have to add? Interview with the direct beneficiary structures date: Time : Surnames, first names, functions and contacts of the people met: - Presentation of the structure (name, role and mission, activities, areas of intervention, target audiences, etc.); - Details of the project actions from which you have benefited (training, equipment, other support, etc.); - Effect of project support on your activities; - What is your overall assessment of the implementation of the project in your locality? Why ? - What are the main difficulties you encounter in the implementation of your activities? - What are your suggestions/recommendations for greater success of the rest of the project? - What else do you have to add? 59 II. Questionnaires SFR/BD; 1. IDENTIFICATION 1.1. Surname and first name(s) of the interviewer: …………………………………………….. 1.2. Survey date:……..…/…….…/2021 1.3. File number: ……………………………………. 1.4. Survey start time:…………………….. 2. INTERVIEWER IDENTIFICATION 2.1. Region : …………………………........ 2.2. Province:……………..............……………… 2.3. Municipality:…………………...……….. 2.4. Village/sector:…………………………………………………… 2.5. Last name and first names) : …………………………………..………………………………… 2.6. Telephone number of the interviewee: ………………………………………….. 2.7. Gender:/__/Feminine ; /__/Male 2.8. Age : ………………… 2.9. Organization: ……………………………………………………………………….. 2.10. Function in the structure: ………………………………………………………………………… 2.11. What is your level of school education? /__/Any ; /__/Primary; /__/Post-primary; /__/Secondary; /__/Superior 2.12. Date of establishment of the structure: …………………………………… 2.13. GPS coordinates : ………………………………………………………………….. 3. IDENTIFICATION OF PROJECT ACTION 3.1. Project action from which the interviewee/structure benefited: /__/Training; /__/Sensitization ; /__/Equipment/consumable; /__/Coaching; /__/ Support for taking the oath; /__/Other (s) to be specified 3.2. Topics of training from which your structure has benefited: /__/MAST tool; /__/LandPKS; /__/Law 034 and PNSR; /__/Roles and missions of structures; /__/GIS; /__/Renewing instances; /__/Filling of forms; /__/Other (s) to be specified 3.3. Themes of awareness-raising from which your structure has benefited: …………………………………………………. 3.4. Types of equipment and/or consumables your structure has benefited from: /__/Computer ; /__/Printer ; /__/Router; /__/Cellphone ; /__/GPS; /__/Register; /__/Other (s) to be specified 3.5. Photography equipment: 4. EFFECT ON BENEFICIARIES 4.1. What were the effects of the training and equipment you received on your performance and your activities? ……………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………… …………………………………………………….. 4.2. Is your structure currently functional?/__/Yes No 4.3. If not why ? ……………………………………………………………………. 4.4. How many APFR requests have you received since the support: ………………. 4.5. Of these requests, how many APFRs has your structure issued since you received support from the project? …………………………………………………………. 4.6. What explains the difference between the number of applications received and the number APFR issued: /__/ Applicants' financial difficulties; /__/Dispute on the land concerned; /__/Bad quality of request; /__/Incomplete application file; /__/Others to explain 4.7. If other, list the difficulties: …………………………………………………………………………. 4.8. Of these issued APFRs, number of collective APFRs ……; 60 4.9. Of these APFRs issued, number of individual APFRs ……..; 4.10. Of these APFR issued, number of women beneficiaries:…….. 4.11. What do you think are the reasons for the low number of APFR issued /__/Dispute on the land concerned; /__/Low interest of the populations; /__/Financial difficulties ; /__/Others to explain 4.12. Are actions taken for APFR beneficiaries in the area of environmental protection?/__/Yes No 4.13. If so, what are these actions? ……………………………………………………………………………………. 4.14. What are the three main difficulties that your structure encounters in issuing APFRs? 4.15. In general, what is your level of satisfaction with ASTER's actions? Very satisfied: /__/; Satisfied) : /__/, Not satisfied: /__/; Not at all satisfied: /__/. 4.16. Why: …………………………….. 5. LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE BENEFICIARY 5.1. What are the main lessons (three maximum) that you draw from the implementation of ASTER? ……………………………………………….…………………………………………………… ………… ………………… ……………………………………………………………………………….. 5.2. What are your suggestions (three maximum) for a better success of ASTER? …………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………… … 6. CONCLUSION 6.1. What else do you have to add? .................................................. .................................................. ................................... .................................................. .................................................. ................................... 6.2. End time of the interview: ……………………………………………………… CFV and CCFV 1. IDENTIFICATION 1.1. Surname and first name(s) of the interviewer: …………………………………………….. 1.2. Survey date:……..…/…….…/2021 1.3. File number: ……………………………………. 1.4. Survey start time:…………………….. 2. INTERVIEWER IDENTIFICATION 2.1. Region : …………………………........ 2.2. Province:……………..............……………… 2.3. Municipality:…………………...……….. 2.4. Village/sector:…………………………………………………… 2.5. Surname and first name(s) of the interviewee: …………………………………..………………………………… 2.6. Telephone number of the interviewee: ………………………………………….. 2.7. Gender:/__/Feminine ; /__/Male 2.8. Age : ………………… 2.9. Organization: ……………………………………………………………………….. 2.10. Function in the structure: ………………………………………………………………………… 2.11. What is your level of school education? /__/Any ; /__/Primary; /__/Post-primary; /__/Secondary; /__/Superior 2.12. If none, have you been literate: /__/Yes/ /__/No 2.13. Date of establishment of the structure: …………………………………… 2.14. GPS coordinates : ………………………………………………………………….. 3. IDENTIFICATION OF PROJECT ACTION 61 3.1. Project action from which the interviewee/structure benefited: /__/Training; /__/Sensitization ; /__/Equipment/consumable; /__/Coaching; /__/Other (s) to be specified 3.2. Topics of training from which your structure has benefited: /__/MAST tool; /__/LandPKS; /__/Law 034 and PNSR); /__/Roles and missions of structures; /__/GIS; /__/Renewing instances; /__/Filling of forms; /__/Other (s) to be specified 3.3. Themes of awareness-raising from which your structure has benefited: ……………………………………… 3.4. Types of equipment and/or consumables your structure has benefited from: /__/Cellphone ; /__/GPS; /__/Register; /__/Other (s) to be specified 3.5. If effective support in equipment: Photography 4. EFFECT ON BENEFICIARIES 4.1. What were the effects of the support you received? …………………………………….. ………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………….. 4.2. Is your structure currently functional?/__/Yes No 4.3. If not why ? …………………………….. 4.4. How many requests for APFR from your village have been submitted to your SFR or BD since the support for the project? ………………. 4.5. Of these requests, how many APFRs were issued by the SFR or BD? …………………………………………………………. 4.6. To your knowledge, what explains the difference between the number of applications received and the number APFR issued: /__/ applicants' financial difficulties; /__/Dispute on the land concerned; /__/Bad quality of request; /__/Incomplete application file; /__/Others to explain 4.7. If other, list the difficulties: …………………………………………………………………………. 4.8. Of these APFR issued, number of collective APFR, ……; 4.9. Of these APFRs issued, number of individual APFRs ……..; 4.10. Of these APFR issued, number of women beneficiaries:…….. 4.11. What do you think are the reasons for the low number of APFR issued /__/Dispute on the land concerned; /__/Low interest of the populations; /__/Financial difficulties ; /__/Others to explain 4.12. Are actions taken for APFR beneficiaries in the area of environmental protection?/__/Yes No 4.13. If so, what are these actions? ……………………………………………………………………………………. 4.14. What are the three main difficulties that your structure encounters in its mission? 4.15. In general, what is your level of satisfaction with ASTER's actions? Very satisfied: /__/; Satisfied) : /__/, Not satisfied: /__/; Not at all satisfied: /__/. 4.16. Why: …………………………….. 5. LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE BENEFICIARY 5.1. What are the main lessons (three maximum) that you draw from the implementation of ASTER? ……………………………………………….…………………………………………………… ………… ………………… ……………………………………………………………………………….. 5.2. What are your suggestions (three maximum) for a better success of ASTER? …………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………… … 6. CONCLUSION 6.1. What else do you have to add? .................................................. .................................................. ................................... .................................................. .................................................. ................................... 62 6.2. End time of the interview: ……………………………………………………… CVD; Women and youth groups 1. IDENTIFICATION 1.1. Surname and first name(s) of the interviewer: …………………………………………….. 1.2. Survey date:……..…/…….…/2021 1.3. File number: ……………………………………. 1.4. Survey start time:…………………….. 2. INTERVIEWER IDENTIFICATION 2.1. Region : …………………………........ 2.2. Province:……………..............……………… 2.3. Municipality:…………………...……….. 2.4. Village/sector:…………………………………………………… 2.5. Last name and first names) : …………………………………..………………………………… 2.6. Telephone number of the interviewee: ………………………………………….. 2.7. Gender:/__/Feminine ; /__/Male 2.8. Age : ………………… 2.9. Organization: ……………………………………………………………………….. 2.10. Function : ………………………………………………………………………… 2.11. What is your education level ? /__/Any ; /__/Primary; /__/Post-primary; /__/Secondary; /__/Superior 2.12. If none have you been literate: /__/Yes/ /__/No 2.13. Date of creation of the structure: …………………………………… 2.14. Have you become a cooperative society?/__/Yes No 2.15. If yes, in what year did you become a cooperative. ……………………………… 2.16. GPS coordinates : ………………………………………………………………….. 3. IDENTIFICATION OF PROJECT ACTION 3.1. Project action from which the interviewee/structure benefited: /__/Training; /__/Sensitization ; /__/Other (s) to be specified 3.2. Topics of training from which your structure has benefited: /__/Law 034 and PNSR; /__/Roles and missions of structures; /__/Renewing instances; /__/Other (s) to be specified 3.3. Themes of awareness-raising from which your structure has benefited: ……………………………………. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… … 4. EFFECT ON BENEFICIARIES 4.1. What were the effects of the support you received on your performance and your activities: ………………………………… 4.2. Has your structure benefited from APFR? /__/Yes No 4.3. If yes, in which year: ……………………………… 4.4. Have you obtained loans from banking institutions (MFIs) as a result of the support you received from the project? /__/Yes No 4.5. If yes, how much: ………………………… 4.6. In general, what is your level of satisfaction with the actions of ASTER from which you have benefited? /__/Very satisfied; /__/Satisfied) ; /__/Not satisfied; /__/Not at all satisfied. 4.7. Why : …………………………….. 5. LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE BENEFICIARY 5.1. What are the main lessons (three maximum) that you draw from this support? ……………………………………………….……………………………………………………………… ………………… ……………………………………………………………………………….. 5.2. What are your suggestions (three maximum) for the project? ……………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………….. 6. CONCLUSION 63 6.1. What else do you have to add? .................................................. .................................................. ................................... 6.2. End time of the interview: ……………………………………………………… APFR beneficiaries I.IDENTIFICATION 1.Surname and first name(s) of the interviewer: …………………………………………….. 2.Survey date:…..…/………/2021 3.File number: ……………………………………. 4.Survey start time:…………………….. II. CHARACTERIZATION OF THE HOUSEHOLD 5.Region : …………………………………….. 6.State: …………………………………… 7.Municipality: ……………………………………………………………. 8.Town : …………………………………………………………………. 9.Geographical coordinates: …………………………………………………… 10. Surname and first name(s) of the person interviewed: ……………………………… 11. Telephone number of the interviewee: ….……………………………………… 12. Gender of interviewee: /__/Female; /__/Male 13. Age of the interviewee: …………..... years 14. Are you the head of household: /__/Yes/ /__/No 15. How many people make up your household:…………………. People 16. Distribution of household members Household members Number Men (under 35) Young women (girl) (under 35) Young men (over 35) Women (over 35) 17. What is your education level ? /__/Any ; /__/Primary; /__/Post-primary; /__/Secondary; /__/Superior 18. If none, have you been literate: /__/Yes/ /__/No. 19. Have you benefited from an APFR? /__/Yes No 20. Since when ? ……………………………………………… 21. Why did you request an APFR? ………………………………………………….. 22. Did you have any difficulties obtaining your APFR? /__/Yes No 23. If yes, what difficulties: …………………………………………………………………………….. 24. What effects has APFR had on you and your household? …………………………………… 25. Have you benefited from support or awareness-raising in the field of environmental protection since obtaining your APFR? /__/Yes No 26. If yes which one(s)? ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 27. Have you had any difficulties related to your land since obtaining your APFR? /__/Yes No 28. If so why : ……………………………………………………………………………. 29. What are your suggestions (three maximum) regarding the issuance of APFR by the municipality? ………………………………………………………………………………………… 30. What else do you have to add? …………………………………… 31. End time of the interview: ……………………………………………………… PDI I.IDENTIFICATION 1. Surname and first name(s) of the interviewer: …………………………………………….. 64 2.Survey date:…..…/………/2021 3.File number: ……………………………………. 4.Survey start time:…………………….. II. CHARACTERIZATION OF THE HOUSEHOLD 5.Region : …………………………………….. 6.State: …………………………………… 7.Municipality: ……………………………………………………………. 8.Village/sector: …………………………………………………………………. 9.Geographical coordinates: …………………………………………………… 10. Surname and first name(s) of the person interviewed: ……………………………… 11. Telephone number of the interviewee: ….……………………………………… 12. Gender of interviewee: /__/Female; /__/Male 13. Age of the interviewee:…………….. years 14. Are you the head of household: /__/Yes/ /__/No 15. How many people make up your household:…………………. People 16. Distribution of household members Household members Number Men (under 35) Women (under 35) Young men (over 35) Young women (girl) (over 35) 17. What is your education level ? /__/Any ; /__/Primary; /__/Post-primary; /__/Secondary; /__/Superior 18. If none, have you been literate: /__/Yes/ /__/No. 19. What locality are you from? …………………………………………………………… 20. How long have you been settled here? ……………………………………………….. 21. Do you have land to carry out your agricultural activities? /__/Yes No 22. If yes how did you get it? ………………………………………………………………….. 23. Since when ? ……………………………………………… 24. Do you have any difficulties concerning this field? /__/Yes No 25. If yes, what difficulties: …………………………………………………………………………….. 26. If not, how do you carry out your agricultural activities? ………………………………………… 27. Have you been approached by ASTER in terms of land security /__/Yes/ /__/No 28. If yes, what did you benefit from the ASTER project? /__/Awareness of land security; /__/Information on land tenure security, /__/Other 29. If other specify: ………………………………………………………………………………. 30. What are your suggestions (three maximum) regarding your secure access to agricultural land? ………………………………………………………………………………………… 31. What else do you have to add? …………………………………… 32. End time of the interview: ……………………………………………………… 65 Appendix C: ASTER Logical Framework