AN ASSESSMENT OF AGRICULTURAL PROGRAM IN LIBERIA* 
Submitted To: USAID/Liberia 
Prepared By: Dr. Emmanuel T. Acquah** 
December 20, 2001 
*The support for the preparation of this report was provided by the University of Maryland Eastern Shore and 
USDA/FAS/ICD/DRD under Cooperation Agreement #58-3148-6-012. Poims of views or opinions stated in 
this document do not necessarily represem the views or policies of either source of support. The author is 
solely responsible for the factual accuracy of all materials presented in this report. 
**Enmlanuel Acquah is an Agricultural Economist and the Director of International Programs at the University 
of Maryland Eastern Shore. Princess Anne, USA. 

TABLE OF CONTENT 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 
I. INTRODUCTION 
II. REVIEW OF LUTHERAN WORLD FED ERA TION/WORLD 
SERVICE AGRICULTURAL PROJECT 
Project Identification Information 
Project Goal & Objectives 
Summary of Major Accomplislunents 
Lessons Learned 
General Recommendations for USAID 
III. REVIEW OF CATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICE AGRICULTURAL 
PROJECT 
Project Identification Information 
Project Goals & Objectives 
Summary of Major Accomplislunent 
Lessons Learned 
Implementation Strategies That Influenced Project Performance 
Overall Comments & Recommendations 
1 
2 
2 
2 
2 
6 
7 
10 
10 
10 
10 
12 
12 
12 
III. REVIEW OF WORLD VISION LIBERIA AGRICULTURE PROJECT 14 
IV. 
Project Identification Information 
Project Goal & Objectives 
Review of Project Accomplislunent 
Recommendations 
GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR USAID CONSIDERATION 
Attachments I: Excerpts from Mid-Year Review of Agricultural 
Program in Liberia 
Attachment 2: Letter from USAID/Liberia to WVL 
14 
14 
14 
15 
16 

The review and comments of USAID/Liberia agricultural staff (Mr. 
MacArthur Payee and Bill Massaquoi) on an earlier draft of this report is 
greatly appreciated. 
I recognize, with gratitude, the review, comments and contributions made by 
Dr. Charles Whyte, the Senior Agribusiness Advisor of 
USAIDI AFRISDI ANRE to an earlier draft of this report. His companionship 
and comradeship made it easier to stay long enough under the hardship 
conditions in Liberia to complete the review exercise. 
I thank the USAID/Liberia administrative and support staff for their 
cooperation during my stay in Liberia. I am indebted to the management, 
staff and collaborators of the Catholic Relief Services, World Vision Liberia, 
and Lutheran World Fellowship Service, who participated in several meetings 
and field visits with me during my stay in Liberia. 
To Ms. Clarice Corbett of UMES, I thank you for your professional support 
in preparing the final report. I gratefully appreciate the support of Ms. 
Catherine Watkins and Mrs. Loretta Shaw of USDA for the logistical travel 
arrangements for the trip to Liberia. 

AN ASSESSMENT OF THE AGRICULTURAL PROGRAM 
ACTIVITIES IN LIBERIA 
Dr. Emmallllel T. Aeqllall 
I. INTRODUCTION 
The purpose of the assessment of the agncultural program activities in Liberia was to detennine 
the progress made by the three NGO- grantees (World Vision Liberia, Lutheran World FederationIWorid 
Service and Catholic Relief Services) towards accomplishing their objectives in the implementation of the 
"Rehabilitation of Liberia Food Production Capacity project" The specific scope of work of the consultant 
was to: 
A. Review reports and work plans of the NGO Grantees implementing the Agricultural Program 
and use the infonnation from the project documents to provide inputs into the development of 
the Mission's Perfonnance Monitoring Plan (PMP). 
B. Participate in orientation of the Mission's new agricultural staff. 
C. Assess the agricultural program activities (using the reviews of reports and selected site visits) 
and prepare report with recommendation consistent with mission's new agricultural strategic 
objective. 
D. Brief Mission Director and staff on findings and recommendations for improving activities in the 
agricultural program. 
E. Any other duties that may be assigned. 
The assessment was done through review of quarterly and other project reports, discussions with 
each Grantee's representatives, and field visits to project sites. The outgoing and incoming Mission 
Agricultural Officers and the Senior Agribusiness Advisor (AFRISDI ANRE) participated in the 
discussions with the Grantee representatives and the field site visits. 
Sections II, III, and IV cover the assessments for L WF/WS, CRS and WVL respectively. Section 
V provides suggested recommendations for Mission's consideration. 

II. REVIEW OF LUTHERAN WORLD FEDERATIONIWORLD SERVICE 
AGRICUL TURAL PROJECT 
A. Project Idell1ificatio" In(ormatio,,: 
Project Title: Rehabilitation of Liberia Food Production Capacity Project 
Location/Project Area: Bomi County 
Cooperative Agreement #: 669-CA-0099-00303 
Official Starting Date: August 1999 
Project Manager: Mr. R. Jarsiah Weedor 
B. Project Goal: To improve the general living condition of rural residents in project area 
C. Project Objectives: 
(i) To establish the basis for increased production of diversified food crops and food 
processing through: 
• Local seed/vegetative planting materials production; 
• Food processing; 
(ii) To undertake the restocking oflivestock involving 2000 farmers in 100 communities; 
(iii) Rehabilitation of tree crop plantations and establishment of nurseries benefiting 3200 
farmers; and 
(iv) Support for 35 community based micro development projects in support of food security 
benefiting and estimated 15,000 rural residents. 
D. SUIIlmary of Major Accomplishmell1S 
Objective 1: To Establish the basis for increased production of diversified food crops and Food 
processing. 
Local SeedIV egetative Planting Materials Production 
;.. 00 CBOs engaged in food crop activities involving upland and lowland rice, root and tuber 
crops, legumes (peanuts, yams & eddoes). Of this number 60 CBOs are currently receiving 
technical support from project while the remaining 40 CBOs are receiving training and extension 
serVIces. 
>- 3500 farmers have participated in food crop activities. A total of 9 metric tons of assorted seeds 
were distributed to these farmers; 
>- 300 hectares of assorted food crops were planted against a project target of 189 ha. 
2 

A total of 12,950 fann families directly benefited from the food crop activIties. 
A total of 132 training workshops were conducted in food crop production, and attended by 5130 
fanners. 
For this activity, the achieved milestolle (300 lUI.) exceeded the target (J891U1) by 
59% 
Food Processing 
Two food processing units (1 cassava & 1 rice) have been installed in Tubmanburg (Bomi 
County) and Lorplay (Nimba County) respectively. These mills are perfonning satIsfactorily. 
One more rice mill will be installed by December 25,2001 in Tubmanburg 
Pelj"ormallce level: Actlla/milestolle did Ilot meet its target. The actual milestolle (3 filllctiollillg 
processillg mills) was ollly 30% of the target (10 filllctiollillg processing mill!!J). 
The less than expected perfonnance was attributed to: 
(i) Technical operational problems of the first two mills installed; 
(ii) Uncertainty about readily availability of spare parts; 
(iii) Uncertainty about availability of local technician to repair the mills in case of 
breakdowns; and 
(iv) Uncertainty about whether the type purchased was the most appropriate for Liberian 
conditions vis-a-vis those produced by lIT A and those in use in Ghana & Cote 
d'!voire. USAID advised delay of the purchase of the other 7 mills until they have 
enough infonnation to make a final decision. 
Recommended Action: 
L WFIWS management was advised to complete its comparative analysis quickly and decide 
which model is to be purchased. It may be advantageous to purchase the additional 7 and the expected 20 
in the extension phase from one source. This might lead to cost-savings, ready availability of spare parts 
and opportunity for maintenance training by the manufacturer. 
Objective 2: Restocking of Livestock in 100 communities 
Seventy small ruminants purchased and kept at breeding paddocks at 10 communities (42 animals 
to 6 communities in Bomi, and 28 animals to 4 communities in Tappita). 
Two livestock management workshops conducted by Veterinarian Sans Frontiers (VSF) for 36 
project staff and 12 CBO members (total of 48 participants). 
Two livestock awareness workshops held for 174 community residents. 
3 

Performallce Level: The llclzieved milestolle (10 comlllllllities restocked with small rumillallts) did 1I0t 
meet tile target (100 COllllllllllities to be restocked witlI small I'lII1l ill allts). Tile actual pelforlllallce was 
ollly 10% of tile target. NOlie of tile 1I0uselI0ids selected to receive the allimals lIas received allY 
allimals yet. 
Reasons for the low perfonnance include the following: 
(i) L WF delayed in planning for the livestock management training; 
(ii) The strategy for restocking was not completed on time by L WF; 
(iii) Delays in transfer of funds from US AID to L WF; 
(iv) Difficulties in locating sheep locally in quantities needed for distribution to selected 
communities; and, 
(v) Heavy down pour of rain made movement of animals from project paddock to the 
communities difficult. 
Recommended Action: 
LWFIWS Management was advised to: 
(a) Explore the possibility of procuring breed of sheep that are adaptable to Liberia condition from 
neighboring countries. 
(b) Continue to use Veterinarians Sans Frontier to help train project staff and community residents 
involved in multiplication and rearing of small ruminants. 
(c) The current system of having a breeding stock of 6 females and one male per community will 
not yield the desired spread effect over the life of the project. 
It is recommended that within budget constraints, L WF should supply each selected household 
with 1 female small ruminant for breeding or provide selected households with one pregnant goat or 
sheep. 
Objective 3: Rehabilitation of Tree Crop plantation and establishment of nursery 
34.5 hectares (30.5 ha - Coffee and 4 ha - cocoa) of tree crops rehabilitated. 
31 tree crop nurseries established. 
266,350 seedlings produced. Of this number, 246,350 seedlings have been planted on 276 
hectares 
895 fanners participated in 11 training workshops and field day demonstrations in project areas. 
Pelforlllallce Lel'ei: Tile achieved milestolle of tree crop Illlrseries estllblislIed (31) did 1/01 meet tile 
target '(55 Iwrseries). TIle -IIctlwlipeljormallce 56% of tlte ta-rget lIurst:..ries-to be_e ... tablished .. -
Tlte acllieved milestolle of seedling prodllced (266 350) did 1101 meet tile tllrgel of 1560000. The IIctlllll 
pelfo/"IIII11lCe WII.\ jllsl 17% of the target IIlllllbers of plalltillg 1Il1Iterials. 
4 

The 34.5 hectares of tree crops rehabilitated did I/ot meet the established target 55 (20 Jill of CO('(l, 
alld 35 ha of coffee). The (tctual performallce was 63% of the turget. 
Although the II traillillg workshops cOllstitllted 011(1' 41 % the targeted 27 traillillg lI'orlisJlOps, the 
total participallt" (895 farmers) exceed the target of540 farmers by 66%. 
The 41 field day demollstratioll did not meet the targeted 48 field day demo/lStratiolls. The 840 
participallts were 011(1' 58% Of the target (J 440) all(l did I/O! meet the established target. 
Deletion of Marketing Activities: 
A major concern in the implementation of Objective 3 is the conspicuous absence of "Marketing" 
activities under this objective. The original proposal, as well as the approved work plans, had this 
objective listed as "Revitalization of Cash Crops and Marketing". According to USAID, LWF changed it 
to "Rehabilitation of Tree Crop Plantations and Establishment of Nurseries" without the approval of 
USAID. The current role and function of the Liberia Produce Marketing Corporation (LPMC) makes it 
even more imperative for the project to provide marketing advice and services to the small tree crop 
farmers. The deletion of the Marketing activities by LWF is a mistake and every effort should be made to 
reactivate those Marketing activities, if Objective 3 is to be successfully completed. 
According to L WF, the very low performance rating was attributed to: 
(i) Delay by farmers to underbrush their farms for rehabilitation. 
(ii) Termite attack on tree crop nurseries throughout project areas. 
(iii) Reluctance of farmers to engage in tree crop production (especially in Bomi) due to low 
prices for cocoa and coffee, coupled with the fact that cash crops are not major features of 
their farming systems. 
(iv) Tree crop rehabilitation activities were discontinued in Bomi County. 
(v) Some farmers wanted to get into oil palm production but since oil palm nurseries were not 
included in the original plan, it took some time before seedlings could be produced. 
However, the reviewer believes that reasons (i) and (ii) could have been avoided by appropriate 
technical advice, and regular field visitations. Reason (iii) should have been anticipated from the base￾line studies and alternative strategy developed. 
5 

Recommended Action: 
(a) L WFIWS Management was advised by USAID to intensify their activities In oil palm as 
alternative cash crop. 
(b) The Marketing activities under this objective should be reinstated. 
Objective 4: Support for 35 community based micro development projects in support of food 
security 
25 micro projects were completed as follows: 
• 12 blacksmith workshops for local farm tools production (target was 20); 
• 10 metal rail bridges on farm - to market roads (target was 7); and 
• 3 community markets rehabilitated (target was 8). 
Six CBOs leadership & management workshops were held with 210 CBO members In 
attendance. 
Performallce level: Tile acllieved milestolle (25 project.') did IIOt meet tile target (35 achievemellt 
for tile projects). Tile actual peljormallce level was 71 % of the targeteLi milestolle to be completed. 
Tile achievemellt for tile blacksmitll worksllops was 60% of the target; the pellormallce for bridges 
011 farm- to market roots was 43% above the target; alld tile pellormallce of markets rehabilitation 
was ollly 38% oft/Ie target. 
An analysis of the M&E Plan indicates that the lower levels of performance have been occurring 
since the first quarter of Year 1. This suggests that L WF has not been using its M&E Plan information 
effectively in making management control function decisions. 
Recommended Action: 
In future activities L WR should more effectively use information from its M&E Plan to make 
management control function decisions. 
E. Lessolls Leamed 
1) Food Processing 
The project experimented with two CBOs to manage processing facilities in Bomi County. The 
experience gained working with this group provided the following lessons that are being used to reshape 
the direction of food processing in the project areas. 
a. Prior to engagement, the management capacity of the CBOs was over estimated and later found 
to lack such virtues as literacy, record-keeping, cash management and organizational 
management skills. 
b. There was lack of good leadership, exhibited by lack of transparency in management, and 
manipulation of the group by the only educated member of the group (a male) resulting in a drop 
in group membership from 10 to 5. 
6 

Lesson Leamed: In organizing individuals into producer organizations, it is necessary to assess the 
management, leadership skills, and capabilities of individual members and the group as a whole before 
assigning leadership roles to individual members. 
2) Rehabilitation of Plantation Nurseries 
a. The project originally envisioned the development of commercial nurseries established and run 
by CBOs for the production of coffee and cocoa seedlings and plantain suckers for sale to other 
farmers. This strategy did not prove very successful as CBO members showed a clear preference 
for planting the seedlings on their own farm. 
b. In Bomi, the rejection of coffee and cocoa was aggravated by the reluctance of farmers to engage 
in tree crop production. It was noted that once the CBOs absorbed the seedlings into their 
individual farms, they discontinued their involvement in the CBO nurseries. 
Lessoll Leamed: Community based organization(s) may not necessarily work in all places. Therefore, 
other factors (social-cultural) should be considered before adopting CBO as the mechanism for effective 
group organization(s). 
As a result of the lessons learned, the project has shifted from centralized commercially run CBO 
nursery to a community-owned nursery approach. In this approach, a group of farmers with interest in 
cultivating cocoa, coffee and/or plantains is supported on a one-time basis with required inputs to produce 
seedlings for planting on their individual farms and the necessary training to continue their activities in 
the future. 
F. General Recommendation For USAfD 
Although considerable progress has been made by L WF in the implementation of their activities, 
the following concerns were observed: 
1) Objective 1: Establishment of the basis for increased production of diversified food crops 
and food processing: 
(a) Ineffective advising on improved management practices/transfer of technology: 
The visit to the rice production site in Tubmanburg/Zelekai clearly showed that L WF technical 
staff is not providing adequate production management advices that would help increase production and 
productivity. The farmers are not using proper water management techniques and are not taking 
advantage of available scarce water resource from the river near the farm. By constructing canals to divert 
water from the river to the 10 hectare lowland area, production yield from the farm could easily be 
increased from 3.6 tons/ha/year to 5.2 tons/ha/year in the lowland area. 
These observations reflect poor planning and seemingly lack of technical knowledge on the part 
of the grantee-LWF. 
The selection and use of Suakoko -8 rice variety in the area is not appropriate without provision 
of adequate supply of water, as the field is planted now. The WARDA variety being used may also not be 
very appropriate due to problems of lodging and too Iowa height for current harvesting methods. 
It is obvious that technical advice and field monitoring by L WF agronomists are not adequate. 
Recommendation: 
7 

Technical assistance in fann management should be improved and monitoring by production 
agronomists from LWF's headquarters increased. 
2) Objective 1: Food Processing discussions with the SUW ATIG group members involved in 
the processing of cassava revealed that: 
(a) The group currently does not have the capacity to detennine if the enterprise is profitable 
or not. They are not aware of all the resource requirements needed for efficient operation of 
the processor. They need training on how to detennine economic profit, by including all 
cost items, both out of pocket expenses and the value of resources that they own and are 
used in the processing activities. Currently they are not including an estimated cost of their 
labor, fuel, management and capital in assessing their profit. If the costs of the inputs that 
they own and used are included in their current operational cost, they will have negative 
profit. 
(b) A complete system for efficient production of gari is not in place. The current set up lacks 
the press for draining water from the grated cassava; and the method of frying the gari is 
very rudimentary. For the facility to serve the community in addition to the SUWATIG 
group there is a need to have an improved system of producing gari. Such complete 
component systems (grater, presser and fryer) are available on the market. The lIT A food 
processing unit prototype and other prototypes in use in Cote D' Ivore and Guinea could be 
ideal candidates to be considered for adoption. 
Recommendation: 
(a) USAID should ensure that procurement of processing facilities should be stopped now; and, L WF 
should do a thorough assessment of alternative systems appropriate for Liberia, and decide on 
which system to acquire before additional procurement is made. 
(b) L WF/WS should be requested to update its "State of the Project Report" (October I, 1999 -
November 30, 2001) with section on "Impacts". The milestone indicators data should be 
analyzed and infonnation obtained used to derive the impact statements. The project impact 
statements should focus on how project accomplishments are impacting on problems being 
addressed, i.e., availability of food, access to food, and food utilization; gender related issues; 
domestic capacity building of fanners, LNGOs & INGOs. 
(c) The revised "State of the project report" should be thoroughly reviewed by USAID to streamline 
the activity of L WF/WS and delete those activities that are not meeting acceptable perfonnance 
levels and bring in those with good opportunities of attaining acceptable perfonnance levels (i.e. 
delete upland rice and emphasize lowland rice technology, de-emphasize the poultry component, 
but intensify the inland fishery component). The review should ensure that current technical 
personnel capacity is in line with retained activities. 
The reviewer and the USAID team were very impressed with both the physical and human 
resources capacity of the LWF/WS' aquaculture facility at Klay, Bomi County. It has great potential to 
influence L WFIWS' USAID activities. 
(d) It is recommended that all tree crop activities in Bomi County should be discontinued, but they 
should be continued in Nimba County. 
8 

III. CATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICES 
A. Project Identificatioll ;,'forlllatiOl': 
Project Title: Rehabilitation Of Liberia Food Production Capacity Project 
LocationlProject Area: Bomi County 
Cooperative Agreement #: 669-CA-0099-00303 
Official Starting Date: 1999 - September 2001 
Project Manager: 
B. Project Goal: To facilitate a sustainable increase in household livelihood security in Bong and 
Upper Lofa Counties through improved access to sources of income. 
C. Project Objectives: 
(i) To increase rural income-earning opportunities through the rehabilitation of up to 3,000 
acres of household cash crop plantations to productive levels by June 30, 2001. 
(ii) To increase the stock of tree crops in the project area, and thereby increasing household 
stocks of productive assets, by improving access to cash crop seedlings through the 
establishment of 100 nurseries by June 30, 2001. 
D. SlI"""all' Of Major Accolllplishlllellts 
Objective I: To increase rural income-earning opportunities through the rehabilitation of up to 
3,000 acres of household cash crop plantations to productive levels by June 30,2001. 
>- Six hundred tree crop fanners sub-divided into 55 kuus were identified and selected in five 
districts (Zota, Panta, Kpaai, Kokoyah and Sonoyea) in Bong County. The participating tree 
crop fanners received a package of tools and extensive on-fann technical assistance in 
plantation rehabilitation techniques. They also participated in workshops on best tree crop 
management practices. 
)- By the end of April 2000, the beneficiaries had under-brushed a total of 1,407 acres of cash 
crops as follows: Cocoa (623.6 ac,) (coffee - 700 ac.); and Oil Palm (83 ac). Additionally, 
approximately 50,000 cocoa seedlings had been planted in various rehabilitated plantations 
(in-filling) and 37% of the seedlings were used to extend the plantations. 
;,. Five acres of existing coffee plantations were "back-cut" for plantation rejuvenation. The 5 
one-acre sites were used as demonstration plots to encourage reluctant fanners to adopt the 
rehabilitation technique. 
9 

A crea2e 0 fPI antatlOns R h e a bTt II ate d 
Year Crop Tar2et Milestone Achievement Level 
1999/2000 Cocoa 600 acres 624 acres 104% 
1999/2000 Coffee 600 acres 700 acres 117% 
1999/2000 Oil Palm N/A 83 acres2 N/A 
Total 1,200 acres 1,407 acres 
Performance Level: The achieved milestone (1407 ac) exceeded the target (1200) by 17%. 
Rehabilitation Of Less Productive Plantations 
The target was to bring 560 acres of older less productive plantations back to productive levels 
through back-cutting, under brushing, sanitary pruning and shade reduction. Farmer training was 
conducted for an estimated 150 farmers. To date, the total acreage, which has gone through rehabilitation, 
is over 580 acres. This figure represents an excess of the total target. 
Older Less Productive Plantations Rehabilitated 
Year Crop Target Achievement % Achievement 
1999/2001 Cocoa 280 acres 360 acres 129% 
1999/2001 Coffee 280 acres 280 acres 100% 
Total 560 acres 580 acres 
Performallce level: The achieved milestolle (580 acres) e.:'(ceeded the target (560 acres) by 3%. 
Objective 2: 
To increase the stock of tree crops in the project area, and thereby increasing household 
stocks of productive assets, by improving access to cash crop seedlings through the 
establishment of 100 nurseries by June 30,2001. 
Achievement in Year 1: 
• Six hundred tree crop farmers received nursery tools, polythene bags, seeds and extensive 
technical assistance in nursery establishment and management. 
• Six hundred farmers established 63 community-based nurseries with a combined production of 
approximately 118,562 seedlings (cocoa - 66,380: coffee - 51,134 & Oil Palm - 1048). 
Achievement in Year 2: 
• Five hundred farmers established 38 community based nurseries and produced 82,500 seedlings 
(cocoa - 75,000, oil palm - 7,500). 
• Year 1 & Year 2 combined accomplishments: 
Total number of acres rehabilitated: 1987 
Total number of acres planted 642 
Total number of acres back cut: 150 
Total acres brought back into production: 2,779 
Perform alice Level: The target of 1 00 11lIrseries to be established was met. 
10 

E. Lessolls Leamed 
The following observations during the implementation of the project provide some important 
Lessons. 
1. During the period when the poro/sande cultural activities are taking place, farming activities 
come to a virtual stand still. 
2. Farmers are involved in multiple farming activities thus limiting the amount of time they can 
spend on project activities. 
Lessoll Learned: Introduction of new management and production practices should be guided by analysis 
of labor calendar, which incorporates socio-cultural dimensions. 
3. Farmers are hesitant to back-cut coffee and cocoa plantation due to loss income in first 3 - 4 
years. 
Lessoll Learned: A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. 
4. It was not easy to introduce new ideas and innovations which are different from traditional 
practices. 
5. For the first year of the program, the target was to rehabilitate 1,200 acres by June 30. Targets 
were exceeded (1,400 acres) but after the June 30 deadline. 
Lessons Learned: Target dates should be realistically planned and set. 
F. Implemelltatioll Strategies That Illfluellced Performallce 
1) To ensure that cultural practices, multiple farming activities and reluctance to adopt new practices 
do not hamper implementation, CRS/Liberia fully involved the beneficiaries during the 
development of the implementation plan for year II. This ensured that the plan was in accordance 
with farmers' priorities and respective of farmers' multiple engagements. 
2) The criteria and selection procedures were modified to ensure greater supervision from 
CRS/Liberia's staff during the registration of the beneficiaries. 
3) CRS/Liberia increased sensitization meetings and explained to beneficiaries that prices fluctuate 
and that today's efforts in rehabilitating the plantations and increasing the number of productive 
trees will be rewarded by tomorrow's prices. 
G. Overall Commellts alld Recommelldation 
Comments 
a) CRS is commended for their outstanding performance, despite several problems encountered 
during the implementation of the project. The ability of the management team to make quick and 
effective corrective decisions made a significant difference. 
b) CRS should be requested to produce a final project report with a section on "potential impact". 
11 

Recommendations 
1. Although CRS field officers and monitors spent considerable amount of time preparing the 
farmers for follow-up activities that they would have to do on their own without CRS support 
(i.e. nursery maintenance, out-planting, and plantain establishment for oil palm, there is a need 
for more technical assistance through 2003. It is important to note that all the oil palm seedlings 
are still in nurseries. To protect and ensure that investments made in this project are nurtured to 
attain full benefit in the future, it is strongly recommended that CRS and or its local NGO, 
partners be funded (within US AID limited budget) to continue monitoring and providing advise 
to the farmers involved in this project for up to two years. 
2. The actual impact from the investment made in this project will be depended on the participating 
farmer's capacity and readiness to handle post harvest/marketing issues related to cash crops 
(cocoa, coffee, and oil palm). There is a need for some follow-on activities to determine the 
anticipated future income. Activities under this follow-up phase should concentrate on 
management capacity building, post-harvest and marketing issues. To take advantage of the 
investment made in this project, USAID may want to explore follow-up activities with CRS. 
12 

IV. WORLD VISION LIBERIA 
A. Project Identificatioll In(ormatioll 
Project Title: Rehabilitation of Liberia Food Production Capacity Project 
Location/Project Area: Grand Cape Mount County, Bong County (Suakoko & Fuam 
Cooperative Agreement #: 
Official Starting Date: 
Project Completion date: 
Country Project Director: 
Districts), Margibi County (Lakayta Township), and Peri-urban 
area of Montserrado County 
669-CA-0099-00303 
1999 
September 2002 
Jonas Njelango 
B. Project Goal: To improve the socio-economic welfare of residents in the project area. 
C. Project Objectives: 
(i) To improve Community-based Production Capacity - through community based lowland 
production, provision of diverse planting materials, community-based capacity development, 
community-based extension services, and provision of small animal to households. 
(ii) To strengthen technology transfer system - through training and capacity development. 
(iii) To improve value of agricultural products - through introduction of post-harvest processing 
facilities. 
(iv) To increased farmers income - through developed marketing systems. 
D. Review Of Project Accomplishmellts 
After reading the four quarterly reports, it was concluded that an adequate review could not be 
performed due to: 
)Po The format and contents of the quarterly reports are not consistent. 
)Po The first three reports do not have any information on objectives 3 (post-harvest processing 
facilitates) and 4 (development of marketing systems). 
The information on objectives 3 & 4 in the fourth quarterly report lack technical substance and 
depth. It is clear from this reviewer that WVL does not know what to do to achieve these two 
objectives. WVL appears not to have the requisite technical capacity to accomplish objectives 3 & 
4, or it has reneged on these activities. 
Despite verbal guidelines and written suggestions (see attachment 1 & 2) from USAID to WVL, 
the third and fourth quarterly reports are still not adequate and unacceptable. 
Although a recommendation was made that the first and second quarterly reports be updated, they 
have still not yet been updated. 
13 

>- Project accomplishments consistent with annual work plans, and the monitoring & evaluation plan 
with milestones and indicators are grossly missing in all quarterly reports. 
E. Recommelldatiolls: 
a) It is recommended that a "State of Project Report" should be submitted to USAID within two 
weeks. The report should address issues raised above as well as those in attachment I &2, plus 
a detailed section on impact assessment. 
b) If the "State of Project Report" is not received by the requested deadline, USAID should 
consider taking an appropriate non-compliance action. 
Comments 
• The reviewer's perceptions and recommendations were shared with WVL officials (Dr. Sizi 
Morris, Mr. James Keih and Mr. Jones Njelango). 
• Upon receipt ofthe "State of Project Report" the consultant will complete and submit assessment 
report to USAID within 5 days. 
14 

v. RECOMMENDATION FOR USAID'S CONSIDERATION 
The NGOs have some difficulties in analyzing their performance indicators (from their M & E 
plan) and using the information to derive impact statements. Given the new USAID reporting 
requirements, it is very important for the Mission's Agricultural Development Specialist (ADS) and NGO 
project managers to synchronize and link the NGO's M & E P indicators with Mission's PMP. 
The following suggestions are made for USAID's consideration: 
a) Training workshop for NGO partners (local & international) in analysis of M & EP milestone 
indicators and their use in developing impact statements should be organized in Monrovia. A 
three-day intensive hand-on workshop is recommended. 
b) Collaborating NGOs should be advised to study the approved Mission's strategy (2001-2003) and 
use it as a guide to amend their current activities or develop their extension proposals. 
c) Given the level of staff at post, Mission and NGO partners should jointly develop a plan for semi￾annual and annual program reviews with assistance from the Senior Agribusiness Advisor from 
Washington, D.C. 
d) Hiring of new selected candidates for future technical positions under the current program must 
be approved by USAID. 
e) Mission ADS should collaborate with collaborating INGOs to develop a strategic plan for more 
direct involvement of LNG Os in approved Agricultural SO (2001-2003) activities. 
f) Mission should conduct a needs assessment for capacity enhancement of collaborating NGOs (I 
& L) in key areas in Mission's New Strategy (Marketing, Agribusiness Management, Micro￾enterprise Development, etc). 
g) World Vision appears to be doing well but not properly reporting its activities. However, WVL 
appears to be doing too many things. The addition of the proposed micro-credit component will 
require more specialized manpower and a possible re-orientation of the project, thus there is a 
need to reduce some of the other activities. It is suggested that the micro-credit effort concentrate 
on yertical integration type of activities, which will add values to farmers' produce. This means 
that geographic coverage will be limited to areas already covered by Mission's current 
interventions; and program activities must emphasize post-harvest loss prevention. 
h) There is a need to increase information flow among the INGOs, as well as between/among 
INGOs, LNGOs and community groups. Networking should become an integral part of the ADS' 
management strategy. Sufficient resources (time and budget) should, therefore, be allocated to 
facilitate meetings and site visits. 
i) Encourage implementing partners to collaborate with field technicians of the Ministry of 
Agriculture to ensure project continuity when USAID funding phases out. 
j) Given that most of the NGO staff has not completely graduated from humanitarian mode to 
development mode, it is recommended that mission staff site visit be intensified. 
15 

k) It is suggested that the Mission explores the possibility of using performance base grant awards 
with all its grantees. 
I) Given the new Mission Strategy (200 I - 2003), the new USAID reporting requirement, the 
structurellevel of USDH at the Mission, and the classification of the Mission as a third tier post, it 
may be useful for the mission to make some streamlining decisions, if it were to successfully 
accomplish its agriculture strategic objective. The following ideas are suggested for 
consideration: 
(i) Project Focus Area: The agriculture program should be limited to Bomi, Bong, 
Margibi, Nimba, Grand Cape Mount Counties and the Peri-Urban areas of Montserrado 
County. 
(ii) Manageable Mission Oversight: Effective management of three different grantees 
with the current level of one position (ADS) is unrealistic. It is suggested that one 
INGO, with a better chance of successfully accomplishing the new agriculture SO is 
selected to serve as an apex organization for implementing the agriculture program. 
Such an organization should be given the task and responsibility to sub-contract with 
other interested individuals and organizations including INGOs, LNGOs, and 
Community Groups. 
(iii) Potential Apex Organization Candidates: 
• L WFIWS: Their current performance is about average. Does not have full 
complement of teclmical expertise in: a) post harvest/marketing and product 
development areas; b) rapid mUltiplication of planting materials; and, c) farm 
management. It has good expertise in a) community group formation and 
development, b) general extension service, and c) aquaculture. 
The evidence available does not show that L WF is a strong candidate. 
• CRS: Its current performance is outstanding. It has teclmical expertise in: a) 
multiplication of planting materials for tree crops, b) farm management, c) community 
group formation and development. The reviewer does not have enough information to 
assess CRS on: a) post harvest/marketing/product development and b) Food crop 
production. 
Available evidence suggests that CRS has a good potential to be the apex organization. 
• WVL: Its current performance in teclmical food crop production and management is 
outstanding (even though they do not write good reports). It has a unique individual 
with outstanding experience in teclmology development and transfer, and rare ability to 
work with farmers. It has full complement of technical expertise in: a) rapid 
multiplication of planting materials/seeds; b) farm management; c) group formation 
development; d) general extension service; and, e) food crop production. It lacks 
expertise in: a) post harvest/ marketing/product development; b) animal/aquaculture 
production; and, c) market development. The reviewer does not have enough 
information to assess WML on tree crop production. 
The evidence available suggests that it could be a strong candidate for the Apex organization. 
However, given their current shutdown strategy and the loss of their agricultural program 
manager, (who is the back bone of most of their current technical capacity) it would not be a 
strong candidate. 
16 

• Other Candidates: It may be in the best interest of USAlD to encourage other INGOs 
with proven track records in agricultural development in Africa (i.e. ACDIIVOCA, 
UMCOR, and Africare) to compete for the Apex Organization position. 
(iv) Selection of Apex Organization: The selection process should be opened up to all 
interested candidates including the current NGO partners. The RF NRFP should be 
driven by the new Agriculture SO. 
17