Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No: ICR00006716 IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT IDA-D3020; IDA-D8060 ON A GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 38.9 MILLION (US$56 MILLION EQUIVALENT) TO THE REPUBLIC OF CHAD FOR THE CLIMATE RESILIENT AGRICULTURE AND PRODUCTIVITY ENHANCEMENT PROJECT JUNE 27, 2024 Agriculture and Food Global Practice Western and Central Africa Region CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective May 31, 2024) Currency Unit = XAF XAF 604.33= US$1 US$ 1.32 = SDR 1 FISCAL YEAR January 1 - December 31 Regional Vice President: Ousmane Diagana Country Director: Clara Ana Coutinho De Sousa Regional Director: Chakib Jenane Practice Manager: Abel Lufafa Task Team Leaders: Elisee Ouedraogo ICR Main Contributor: Eustacius N. Betubiza ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS CERC Contingency Emergency Response Component CMU Country Management Unit CNCPRT Conseil National de Concertation des Producteurs Ruraux du Tchad (National Consultation Council of Rural Producers of Chad) CORAF Conseil Ouest et Centre Africain pour la Recherche et le Développement Agricoles/ (West and Central African Council for Agricultural Research and Development) CPF Country Partnership Framework CSA Climate-Smart Agriculture DEPS Department of Studies, Planning and Monitoring EA Environmental Assessment EFA Economic and Financial Analysis EIRR Economic Internal Rate of Return FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FCV Fragility, Conflict, and Violence FIRR Financial Internal Rate of Return GDP Gross Domestic Product IDA International Development Association ICR Implementation Completion Report ISR Implementation Status and Results Report IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development IOM International Organization for Migration NDC Nationally Determined Contribution NGO Non-Governmental Organization PAD Project Appraisal Document PDO Project Development Objective PURCAE Emergency Food and Livestock Crisis Response Project WAAP West Africa Agricultural Productivity Program WBG World Bank Group WFP World Food Program TABLE OF CONTENTS DATA SHEET .......................................................................................................................... 1 I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES ....................................................... 6 A. CONTEXT AT APPRAISAL .........................................................................................................6 B. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DURING IMPLEMENTATION (IF APPLICABLE) .......................................9 II. OUTCOME .................................................................................................................... 12 A. RELEVANCE OF PDOs ............................................................................................................ 12 B. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDOs (EFFICACY) ...................................................................................... 13 C. EFFICIENCY ........................................................................................................................... 17 D. JUSTIFICATION OF OVERALL OUTCOME RATING .................................................................... 18 E. OTHER OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS (IF ANY) ............................................................................ 18 III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME ................................ 20 A. KEY FACTORS DURING PREPARATION ................................................................................... 20 B. KEY FACTORS DURING IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................. 20 IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME .. 21 A. QUALITY OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) ............................................................ 21 B. ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND FIDUCIARY COMPLIANCE ..................................................... 22 C. BANK PERFORMANCE ........................................................................................................... 22 D. RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME ....................................................................................... 23 V. LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................. 23 ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS ........................................................... 25 ANNEX 2. BANK LENDING AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT/SUPERVISION ......................... 37 ANNEX 3. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT ........................................................................... 40 ANNEX 4. EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS ........................................................................................... 41 ANNEX 5. BORROWER, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS ... 52 ANNEX 6. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS (IF ANY) ..................................................................... 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) DATA SHEET BASIC INFORMATION Product Information Project ID Project Name Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity P162956 Enhancement Project Country Financing Instrument Chad Investment Project Financing Original EA Category Revised EA Category Partial Assessment (B) Partial Assessment (B) Organizations Borrower Implementing Agency Ministry of Agricultural Production and Transformation, Republic of Chad West and Central African Council for Agricultural Research and Development (CORAF/WECARD) Project Development Objective (PDO) Original PDO The proposed Project Development Objective (PDO) is to “to promote the adoption of improved technologies leading to increased productivity and to enhance the climate resilience of agricultural production systems in the areas targeted by the Project”. Page 1 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) FINANCING Original Amount (US$) Revised Amount (US$) Actual Disbursed (US$) World Bank Financing 41,000,000 41,000,000 34,783,186 IDA-D3020 15,000,000 15,000,000 13,233,005 IDA-D8060 Total 56,000,000 56,000,000 48,016,191 Non-World Bank Financing 0 0 0 Local Beneficiaries 3,600,000 3,600,000 2,033,709 Total 3,600,000 3,600,000 2,033,709 Total Project Cost 59,600,000 59,600,000 50,049,900 KEY DATES Approval Effectiveness MTR Review Original Closing Actual Closing 30-Apr-2018 30-Nov-2018 21-Mar-2022 31-Dec-2023 31-Dec-2023 RESTRUCTURING AND/OR ADDITIONAL FINANCING Date(s) Amount Disbursed (US$M) Key Revisions 28-May-2020 5.02 Change in Results Framework Change in Components and Cost Reallocation between Disbursement Categories Change in Institutional Arrangements 23-Aug-2021 26.88 Additional Financing Change in Results Framework Reallocation between Disbursement Categories 13-Jun-2023 36.99 Change in Results Framework Reallocation between Disbursement Categories Change in Institutional Arrangements Page 2 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) KEY RATINGS Outcome Bank Performance M&E Quality Satisfactory Satisfactory Substantial RATINGS OF PROJECT PERFORMANCE IN ISRs Actual No. Date ISR Archived DO Rating IP Rating Disbursements (US$M) 01 09-Oct-2018 Satisfactory Satisfactory .91 02 09-May-2019 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 2.44 03 30-Oct-2019 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 3.48 04 03-Mar-2020 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 4.12 05 17-Aug-2020 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory 18.90 06 12-Feb-2021 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 23.57 07 20-Aug-2021 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 26.88 08 21-Feb-2022 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 30.28 09 07-Nov-2022 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 33.65 10 01-May-2023 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 36.99 11 22-Dec-2023 Satisfactory Satisfactory 43.77 SECTORS AND THEMES Sectors Major Sector/Sector (%) Agriculture, Fishing and Forestry 71 Agricultural Extension, Research, and Other Support 60 Activities Public Administration - Agriculture, Fishing & Forestry 11 Page 3 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) Industry, Trade and Services 29 Agricultural markets, commercialization and agri- 29 business Themes Major Theme/ Theme (Level 2)/ Theme (Level 3) (%) Finance 69 Finance for Development 69 Agriculture Finance 69 Human Development and Gender 100 Gender 100 Urban and Rural Development 100 Rural Development 100 Rural Markets 100 Rural Infrastructure and service delivery 100 Disaster Risk Management 17 Disaster Preparedness 17 Environment and Natural Resource Management 39 Climate change 39 Mitigation 9 Adaptation 30 ADM STAFF Role At Approval At ICR Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop Ousmane Diagana Country Director: Soukeyna Kane Clara Ana Coutinho De Sousa Director: Juergen Voegele Chakib Jenane Practice Manager: Simeon Kacou Ehui Abel Lufafa Page 4 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) Task Team Leader(s): Amadou Ba, Ziva Razafintsalama Elisee Ouedraogo ICR Contributing Author: Eustacius N. Betubiza Page 5 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES A. CONTEXT AT APPRAISAL Context A. Country Context 1. At the time of Project Appraisal in early 2018, Chad’s oil and agriculture dependent economy was severely under stress. Of the country’s 14 million inhabitants at the time, 47 percent of them lived below the poverty line. Annual Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth had plummeted from 6.3 percent in 2014 to 0.2 percent in 2017 due to a sharp drop in oil prices in 2014.1 Agricultural growth also exhibited excessive volatility, from 10.1 percent in 2015 to -6.0 percent in 2016 due to increasingly erratic weather patterns. These unfavorable developments were exacerbated by the growing insecurity spilling over from neighboring countries (Sudan, Nigeria, Central African Republic, and Libya). The confluence of these factors was undermining food security and triggering the urgency for improving the performance of the agriculture sector. B. Sectoral and Institutional Context 2. Average yields of the country’s staple cereals remained among the lowest in Sub-Saharan Africa. Yet the country was highly dependent on the agriculture sector which employed 80 percent of the Chadian workforce and accounted for 22.6 percent of the national GDP. Some of the major factors behind the sector’s poor performance that were highlighted in the 2017 Agriculture Sector Review included inadequate institutional capacity, particularly in agricultural research and extension services, widespread use of low-yielding agricultural technologies (less than 5 percent of the farmers were using improved seeds), climate shocks, and lack of coherent agricultural policies. In response to these challenges, the Government of Chad had developed the National Development Plan (PND 2017- 2021) and the National Rural Investment Plan (PNSIR 2016-2022) as frameworks to guide sector investments and had requested for World Bank support in their financing and implementation. In this particular instance, the requested support was to promote adoption of improved technologies in the high potential provinces of Mandoul, Moyen-Chari, and Salamat, especially the intensification of rainfed cereals (sorghum, beriberi, millet, maize, rice) and their associated crops (groundnuts, cowpeas, sesame and other legumes), as well as diversification into smallholder livestock farming (small ruminants, poultry, fish farming), agroforestry, and small-scale value addition activities to strengthen resilience in those communities. C. Higher Level Objectives to which the Project Contributed 3. The requested support was consistent with the World Bank’s Country Partnership Framework (CPF) for Chad for FY2016 – 2020. The CPF particularly emphasized helping the country to improve returns to agriculture and reduce vulnerability. This emphasis was in line with the Government’s objectives of improving productivity, strengthening human capital, and reducing vulnerability. It was also in keeping with the World Bank Group (WBG) Africa Climate Business Plan especially its focus on contributing to farmers’ access to climate services and the adoption of climate-smart agricultural practices. The requested support was also consistent with the WBG’s strategic goals of ending poverty and boosting shared prosperity through job creation and women and youth inclusion. Finally, it would complement other WBG support to Chad, including the Emergency Food and Livestock Crisis Project (P151215), the Chad Hydrological and Meteorological Services Modernization Project (P164256), the Regional Sahel Pastoralism Support Project (P147674), and the Rural Mobility and Connectivity Project (P164747) which would be implemented in two of the three targeted regions. 1Whereas petroleum prices averaged US$ 107.59 during 2011-2013, the price only averaged US$ 47.56 during the period 2014-2016, less than half of what it was during the previous three years (Data source: OPEC Basket Price https://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/data_graphs/40.htm). Page 6 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) Theory of Change (Results Chain) 4. As the Theory of Change was not developed at appraisal, it has been reconstructed at ICRR stage on the basis of the project’s objectives, components, and the results framework. It is premised upon the recognition that the prevailing food insecurity and high rural poverty are accentuated by low agricultural productivity and the sector’s poor resilience to climate change which are in turn compounded by Chad’s weak institutional environment, low use of proven climate smart technologies, and limited access to finance, all within an ecosystem of weak rural institutions such as farmers’ organizations. Hence the need for building capacity in technology generation/adaptation, innovating in their dissemination for effective outreach especially among the poor and underserved groups, addressing relevant policy and strategy gaps, strengthening rural institutions, and providing investment support, among other things. (Figure 1). Figure 1: Theory of Change of the Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project Page 7 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) Project Development Objectives (PDOs) 5. The project’s development objective (PDO) was to “to promote the adoption of improved technologies leading to increased productivity and to enhance the climate resilience of agricultural production systems in the areas targeted by the Project”. Key Expected Outcomes and Outcome Indicators 6. Attainment of the PDO would be gauged through the following outcome indicators (as stated in the PAD’s main text): (i) Number of farmers reached with agricultural assets or services (disaggregated by gender); (ii) Surface area (in hectares) under improved technologies disseminated by the project (including surface area under climate-smart agriculture technologies and practices); (iii) Percentage increase in average agriculture yields of the direct beneficiaries compared to average yields in the project area; and (iv) Share of targeted beneficiaries with rating “Satisfied” or above on project interventions (disaggregated by gender). Components 7. Component A: Institutional Support for Sustainable Agriculture Development and Climate Resilience (Appraisal: US$ 12.6 million equivalent of IDA; Actual: US$ 8.25 million equivalent). This component was comprised of three subcomponents. • A.1 Strengthening the agricultural research and development system. Project support included: (i) rehabilitating selected research infrastructure, training young researchers, producing breeder and foundation seeds of targeted crops, and funding other research activities; (ii) facilitating interaction among principal stakeholders to ensure coherence and demand-driven research (researchers, academic institutions, extension staff, farmers’ organizations, women and youth organizations, NGOs, and the private sector); and (iii) enabling Chad’s interaction with other researchers in the subregion for knowledge sharing. • A.2 Strengthening of national support services for sustainable agricultural development and climate resilience. Project activities included: (i) training extension staff including on gender and developing/scaling up digital solutions to facilitate access to advisory and climate services; (ii) supporting the organizational and technical capacity of farmers’ organizations; and (iii) supporting the acquisition and distribution of reliable weather data and updating and disseminating cropping calendars and crop variety maps to farmers. • A.3 Strengthening the framework for preparing and monitoring sector strategies and reforms . Project support included: (i) improvement of sector policies; (ii) building capacity for agricultural input quality control and certification; and (iii) training Ministry of Agriculture staff on policy analysis and evaluation. 8. Component B: Supporting Adoption of Demand-Driven Technologies and Climate-Smart Agriculture (Appraisal: US$ 27.2 million equivalent of which US$ 23.6 million equivalent from IDA, US$ 3.6 million from Beneficiaries; Actual: US$ 19.34 million of which US$ 17.31 million from IDA and US$2.03 million from Beneficiaries). This component was comprised of three subcomponents. • B.1 Improving the efficiency of agricultural support services in the targeted areas. Project support included: (i) financing regional innovation platforms; (ii) promoting ICT-based extension and weather information delivery services; and (iii) providing matching grants to SMEs and farmers’ groups to acquire improved planting materials, livestock and fish fingerlings, and supporting mechanization services (for production, processing, etc.). • B.2 Accelerating the adoption of improved technologies and innovations. Project support included establishing demonstration plots (high-yielding varieties; soil and water management; integrated Page 8 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) management of pests, diseases, and weeds; improved harvesting and post-harvest management practices to reduce losses, etc.). • B.3 Support to the Implementation of Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) Plans. Project support included preparing and funding community investment plans for climate-smart agriculture, and integrating them into long-term sustainable landscape management. 9. Component C: Contingent Emergency Response (Appraisal: US$ 0 million; Actual: US$ 13.08 million). This “zero-dollar” component would create a mechanism for financing emergency eligible expenses in case of calamities. 10. Component D: Project Management, Coordination, Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E), and Knowledge Management (Appraisal: US$ 4.8 million equivalent from IDA; Actual: US$ 7.50 million).2 This component supported: (i) project coordination and management; (ii) monitoring, evaluation, and technical studies; (iii) knowledge management and communication; (iv) safeguards, citizen engagement, and beneficiary feedback; and (v) a Grievance Redress Mechanism. B. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DURING IMPLEMENTATION (IF APPLICABLE) 11. There were three level 2 restructurings: • The first restructuring took place in May 2020 to integrate the residual activities of the Emergency Food and Livestock Crisis Response Project (PURCAE) into ProPAD. PURCAE had been approved by the WBG Board of Directors on October 14, 2014, to support the Government of Chad in dealing with the refugee and returnees crisis resulting from the conflicts in the neighboring Central African Republic. By May 2020, most of PURCAE activities had been implemented except for a few residual activities relating to Food for Work executed by the International Organization for Migration (IOM). In order to consolidate the WBG portfolio in Chad, these residual activities were transferred to ProPAD (the IOM-ProPAD contract was signed on 01- June-2020). This entailed restructuring ProPAD as follows: (a) bringing over IOM as an executing agency under ProPAD; (b) extending the Project intervention area to Logone Oriental region (ProPAD previously only intervened in Salamat, Moyen-Chari, and Mandoul regions); (c) adding a new “Sub-component B.4 – Strengthening the resilience of target refugees, returnees, and selected host communities”; (d) revising the results framework to add three intermediate indicators at the level of Component B; and (e) adding a new disbursement category "Cash transfers" and a reallocation of funds. • The second restructuring was approved in August 2021 in the form of a US$ 15 million Additional Financing to fill the financing gap created by the CERC which had been activated in May 2020 to respond to the food crisis triggered by COVID-19. Triggering the CERC had entailed: (i) re-deploying US$ 7 million toward distributing a food basket of cereals, pulses, and vegetable oil sufficient for a period of three months to be implemented by the World Food Program (WFP); and (ii) utilizing US$ 8 million for the distribution of improved seeds and small agricultural equipment to prevent the targeted farmers from eating their seeds during the lean period – to be implemented by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Two intermediate indicators were added at the level of Component C to measure the results of the activities financed by the CERC. • The third restructuring which occurred in June 2023 was related to implementing the recommendations of the project’s Mid-term Review which was conducted in March/April 2022. The MTR’s recommendations 2 As discussed further down, the project’s geographical scope expanded which increased the costs of project implementation support and monitoring by the PCU. In addition, there was a flare up in insecurity in the project area, adding to operating costs (replacing stolen items, hiring security guards, paying for armored convoys during field trips, etc.). Page 9 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) included, among other things, adding some output indicators to the project’s results framework to better capture the results from the CERC activities, and seeking a project extension in view of some initial startup delays. However, an agreement was reached between the Bank and the Government (during one of the portfolio review meetings) to consolidate the portfolio and thus to not extend the closing date, in which case some of the project’s expected outputs needed to be revisited accordingly. Although the MTR took place in early 2022, the actual restructuring was delayed due to those ongoing discussions. There were also delays in getting the government’s request for the restructuring. Revised PDOs and Outcome Targets 12. The PDO was not revised, but the Outcome Targets were revised as follows (see Table 1). The number of Farmers reached with agricultural assets or services as well the Surface area under improved technology disseminated by the Project were revised upward to reflect the increase in beneficiaries due to the restructurings above. The Surface area under climate-smart agriculture technologies/practices was reduced to reflect the project implementation delays experienced thus far which were due to belated project implementation startup, onerous procurement processes, high staff turnover, and COVID-19 disruptions, among other factors as discussed in more detail under the section “Key Factors that Affected Implementation and Outcome”. However, it should be noted that this reduction had not taken into consideration the fact that majority of the hectares to be added to the “Surface area under improved technology” which was being raised from 21,400 to 40,000 hectares (as indicated in Table 1 below) would actually be under climate-smart agriculture technologies as well (since FAO would use climate-smart seeds under the CERC).3 This would compensate for the slow pace of implementing climate smart technologies experienced prior to the restructuring, and the ultimate “Surface area under climate- smart agriculture technologies/practices” was bound to increase, not decrease, thus making its proposed reduction unwarranted (as will be noticed later). Table 1: Changes to the Project Outcome Targets Indicator Unit of Original Revised measure PDO Farmers reached with agricultural assets or services Number 360,000 500,000 - Farmers reached with agricultural assets or services – female Number 108,000 150,000 Surface area under improved technology Hectares 21,400 40,000 - Surface area under Climate-smart Agriculture Hectares 10,700 3,000 technologies/practices Revised PDO Indicators 13. As indicated above, the PDO indicators were not revised although the targets were adjusted as discussed above. Revised Components 14. The overall structure of the components was not changed. However, there were a few notable adjustments as already indicated above. First, some residual activities of PURCAE were absorbed into ProPAD as Subcomponent B.4 which expanded ProPAD’s geographical scope by one region (and three new associated intermediate indicators added 3 Some improved technologies (e.g., improved plowing equipment that facilitates timely planting thus enhancing productivity) were not necessarily considered as climate smart technologies whereas some other improved technologies were (e.g., early maturing and drought resistant crop varieties). Thus, whereas all promoted technologies were improved, only some were climate smart. Hence, “Surface area under Climate-Smart Agriculture technologies/practices” was a subset of “Surface area under improved technology”). Page 10 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) as presented in Table 2 below). Second, the CERC under Component C was triggered for providing food and inputs (especially climate-smart seeds) to vulnerable rural households to forestall a sharp decline in production and livelihoods which expanded the geographical scope nationwide and project content (and two new associated indicators added as presented in Table 2 below). Third, the Additional Financing to replace funds used in the CERC increased the total funds available for the project. Fourth, some of the existing component output indicators were reduced for multiple reasons. For instance, the number of young researchers was reduced because one (female) student had passed away, and it was late for making a replacement. The target for the proportion of women among young researchers was reduced from 50 percent to 25 percent because there just were not many female scientists available. The target for sector reforms was reduced as one of them was already being supported by another development partner. Regarding improved seed, the sizeable reduction in the target is due to the peculiarity of seed development whose amplification factor can be very significant. For example, a single grain of breeder seed for maize can result in an average of 800 grains of foundation seeds which can result in 640,000 grains of certified seeds or about 0.21 tons of certified seeds.4 Hence a small number of foregone basic seeds (e.g., due to delayed project start-up) can result in a major reduction in the final quantity of certified seeds available. This amplification factor is compounded by the fact that completing the full cycle (breeder seed to foundation seed to certified seed) takes multiple years, hence the high sensitivity of the seed value chain to disruptions. Finally, the targets for the “Diversification subprojects supported” and the pilot program of “Local community climate smart agriculture (CSA) subprojects financed” were reduced given the extended time needed for community mobilization, investment plan preparation, and implementation of the selected investment activities. Delayed project start-up had shortened the time available. Table 2: Changes to the Component Output Indicators and Targets Indicator Unit of Measure Original Revised COMPONENT A Young researchers trained Number 17 16 - Young researchers trained – female Percent 50 25 Agriculture sector reforms supported Number 5 4 COMPONENT B Improved seeds produced by targeted beneficiaries Ton 3,000 850 Diversification subprojects supported Number 360 250 Pilot local community CSA subprojects financed Number 100 50 Beneficiaries participated in Cash for Work program Number - 13,600 Productive assets rehabilitated Number - 25 People trained (IOM) Number - 5,183 COMPONENT C Beneficiaries that received emergency food assistance Number - 190,000 Smallholder farmers provided improved seeds and small agricultural Number - 20,000 equipment Quantity of cereals and oilseeds distributed Tons - 2,125 Quantity of seeds of garden vegetables and fruits distributed (FAO) Tons - 16 Vegetable gardening tools distributed (FAO) Tons - 100,000 15. Because of these component changes, the resulting funding allocations are presented in Table 3 below. Table 3: Component Costs after Restructurings (Currency: US$ Millions) At Appraisal After Actual Restructurings Commitments* Institutional support for sustainable agriculture development and 12.6 12.6 11.5 4 This scenariois based on a maize ear of 800 seeds. However, the number of maize seeds per ear can vary from 500 to 1,000 and beyond, depending upon the variety (all things being equal). The scenario is also based on an average weight of 332 mg per grain of grain. Page 11 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) climate resilience Supporting the adoption of demand-driven technologies and climate- 23.6 23.6 21.5 smart agriculture Contingency Emergency Response 0 15.0 13.8 Project Management, Coordination, M&E, and Knowledge 4.8 4.8 4.4 Management IDA Total 41.0 56.0 51.2 Beneficiary Contribution 3.6 3.6 3.6 Project Total 44.6 59.6 54.8 * Based on Client Connection data showing the actual commitments in US$ for the project. The difference is due to the exchange rate fluctuations between the US$ and SDR. Other Changes None Rationale for Changes and Their Implication on the Original Theory of Change 16. As indicated above, the first restructuring was for absorbing the residual activities of a closing project, the second restructuring was for funding a CERC to blunt COVID-19’s impact on rural livelihoods, and the third restructuring was for recalibrating some of the project’s expectations following the Mid-Term Review and the decision not to extend the project’s closing date, as well as the need to acknowledge some of the CERC’s significant outputs that hadn’t been included in the previous revision of the results framework. These changes did not affect the fundamentals of the Theory of Change. Cash for Work activities as well as distribution of CSA seeds and agricultural implements strengthened resilience during a very difficult period including forestalling decapitalization of productive assets. This was fully consistent with ProPAD’s overarching objectives and Theory of Change whose ultimate goal was to strengthen food and nutrition security as well as enhance resilience for rural communities. II. OUTCOME A. RELEVANCE OF PDOs Assessment of Relevance of PDOs and Rating 17. The PDO’s continued relevance is rated High. It is consistent with the WBG’s Country Engagement Note for the period FY23-FY24 which was discussed on November 29, 2022, especially with its objective regarding promoting “..natural resource management and sustainable agriculture to prevent and manage conflicts based on natural resource scarcity and climate change”. These themes have been continued in the new Bank-funded project, the Chad Agribusiness and Rural Transformation Project (P179238). It is also aligned with the World Bank’s Western and Central Africa Regional Strategy, especially Goal 4 pertaining to promoting “climate resilience.” The Systematic Country Diagnostic approved in April 2022 underscored the importance of supporting climate-smart agricultural practices and ensuring sustained agricultural productivity growth through innovation. Furthermore, the PDO is also aligned with key elements of the WBG Strategy for Fragility, Conflict, and Violence (FCV), 2020-2025, and the Global Crisis Response Framework especially regarding “building the resilience and preparedness of communities, including the ability to manage climate change and environmental degradation.” Chad’s Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) cites the development of adaptation actions in the agricultural sector with a view to ensuring food and nutrition security through enhanced crop and livestock productivity. Finally, the PDO also remains consistent with the government’s overall goals outlined in its “Vision 2030: The Chad We Want”, and the National Development Plan Page 12 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) (PND 2017-2021), currently in use, of transforming Chad through diversification, given the country’s over-reliance on the oil sector. B. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDOs (EFFICACY) Assessment of Achievement of Each Objective/Outcome Justification of Overall Efficacy Rating 18. The PDO was to “promote the adoption of improved technologies leading to increased productivity and to enhance the climate resilience of agricultural production systems in the areas targeted by the Project.” The project’s performance is measured against its two principal objectives, namely: (i) increased productivity; and (ii) enhanced climate resilience. PDO indicator targets were either surpassed or significant progress was made toward their attainment (see Table 4). There was a significant increase in the productivity of the targeted crops—averaging 30.5 percent above yields of non-beneficiaries (versus a target of 25 percent) and 39 percent compared to the baseline. Resilience for the project’s primary beneficiaries was also enhanced, with an outturn for the surface area under climate-smart agriculture technologies/practices of 295 percent relative to the original target at appraisal. However, unlike productivity, there is no single summary indicator that fully encapsulates resilience. As discussed under the Resilience PDO Section further down, resilience was enhanced through multiple interventions. In addition to adopting early maturing and drought-and-disease resistant varieties as well as other CSA technologies that are captured under the indicator “Surface area under climate smart agriculture technologies/practices”, climate resilience was also significantly enhanced by diversifying, especially into those activities that succumb less to adverse weather events. 19. Regarding other PDO indicators, the project surpassed its target for farmers reached with agricultural assets and services, reaching 684,399 beneficiaries against the upward-revised target of 500,000 beneficiaries, i.e., surpassing it by 37 percent. The majority of the beneficiaries expressed satisfaction with the project’s interventions. 20. Generally, the PDO indicators were useful in capturing the achievement of the expected outcomes but needed to be supplemented with other data in the project’s M&E system, especially on diversification which is critical for gauging resilience beyond suitably adapted crop varieties. The M&E system contained the required information which was based on continuous data collection and periodic sample surveys, including the baseline, midline, and end of project surveys which were conducted by contracted independent service providers. Table 4. PDO Indicators and Outcomes PDO Indicator Target at Revised Actual Actual over Appraisal Target Revised Target (Percent) Farmers reached with agricultural assets or services (Number) 360,000 500,000 684,399 137 Farmers reached with agricultural assets or services - Female (Number) 108,000 150,000 189,844 127 Percentage increase in average agriculture yield of direct beneficiaries 25 25 30.5 122 compared to average yields in the Project area (Percentage) Surface area under improved technology disseminated by the Project 21,400 40,000 68,483 171 (Hectares)) - Surface area under Climate-smart Agriculture technologies/practices 10,700 3,000 31,545 295* (Hectares) Share of targeted beneficiaries with rating ‘Satisfied’ or above on project 80 80 78 98 interventions (Percentage) Share of targeted female beneficiaries with rating ‘Satisfied’ or above on project 90 90 79 87 interventions (Percentage) Note: * For this particular indicator, the comparison is made with the original (and not the revised) target. The revised target is not used here since it was a miscalculation (as noted earlier) as it had not accounted for other CSA technologies (mainly improved climate-smart seeds and Page 13 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) small-scale irrigation support activities) promoted under the CERC funding implemented by FAO. PDO 1: Increased Productivity 21. The increase in agricultural productivity among project beneficiaries was compared to that of non-project beneficiaries by independent consultants. Beneficiary households were selected randomly from the list of beneficiaries provided by the monitoring-evaluation services whereas non-beneficiary households were selected randomly in villages not benefiting from the project. In total, 2,216 households (997 beneficiary households, and 1,219 non- beneficiary households) were surveyed. 22. As indicated in Table 5 below, average crop productivity among project beneficiaries relative to non-project beneficiaries progressively grew from 6.4 percent in 2019-2020 to 30.5 percent in 2023-2024, reflecting increased use of improved technologies promoted by the project. Most of the differential performance is particularly related to sesame, rice, berbere, and millet. More generally, project performance was very slow at the beginning but picked pace in the latter years of project implementation, culminating in particularly good performance in the final year hence the ultimate very high differential yields in 2023/2024. Although there were initial project startup delays (as will be explained later under “Key Factors that Affected Project Implementation”), a critical factor behind the initial slow growth in differential yields during the project’s earlier years is the inherent multi-year gestation period of seed development (breeder seed to foundation seed to certified to actual crop production by project beneficiaries) as discussed earlier. In a country where there is only one cropping season per year, with each seed production phase taking up an entire year before proceeding to the next phase, those processes take multiple years to play out before improved seed is ready for distribution to farmers. Hence project outcomes were most pronounced in the latter years of the project. This is also a reflection of the progressive accumulation of a wider range of mutually synergistic technologies and practices acquired by project participants which increasingly amplified their performance as time passed. 23. Equally noteworthy is the variability in the annual average differential increments (e.g., the decline in the average differential during the 2022-2023 agricultural campaign) which is reflective of the exposure to natural hazards (droughts and floods) that seed producers face thus hampering their ability to sometimes deliver the expected quantities of improved seed (discussed further under factors that affected implementation). Finally, the negative differentials, especially in the earlier years of project implementation (and particularly evident in the case of maize) reflect the project’s purposeful targeting of the most disadvantaged community members whose performance took time to catch up with, and eventually surpass, their peers. Table 5. Percentage comparison between yields of beneficiaries over those of non-beneficiaries 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024 Sesame 67.40% 12.00% 33.10% 64.20% 64.90% Rice 16.70% 24.40% 9.00% 13.40% 42.40% Berebere 0.60% 19.70% 16.70% 9.90% 25.50% Millet -11.30% -3.20% 6.30% -0.90% 52.00% Sorghum 7.70% -0.90% 7.50% -2.00% 17.20% Cowpea -10.00% -0.80% 27.30% -2.60% 10.10% Groundnuts -4.20% 18.10% -8.50% -4.70% 19.50% Maize -15.70% -8.60% 4.70% 4.10% 12.10% Average 6.40% 7.60% 12.00% 10.20% 30.50% 24. It is also interesting to note the differential performance across the three project regions (Mandoul, Moyen- Chari, and Salamat) such as high productivity differential for rice, sesame, and cowpeas in Mandoul region, and high productivity differential for cowpea across all the three regions (Table 6). Page 14 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) Table 6: Change in Productivity by Region Among Project Beneficiaries Berbéré Rice Sorghum Maize Sesame Peanuts Niébé Millet Mandoul -53% 201% 36% 11% 126% 51% 116% 79% Moyen-Chari 16% 54% -4% 82% 32% 102% 343% Salamat 25% 25% 56% 40% 152% 195% 25. Crop Productivity was principally driven by access to improved inputs as well as farmer training and information, among other factors. (i) Access to improved seeds and fertilizers. The Federation of Seed Producers produced 1,112.9 tons of seeds for rain-fed crops that were made available to farmers in the project area, with basic seeds provided by ITRAD thanks to the institutional support provided by the project (training, rehabilitation/construction of research facilities, and equipment). In addition, ITRAD obtained some of the basic seeds from Senegal as part of the regional collaboration fostered by the project.5 FAO also supplied 2,489.6 tons of seed funded by the project under the CERC. Furthermore, some 17,256 qualifying farmers benefited from e-vouchers to receive a package of inputs that consisted of improved seed, fertilizer, and pesticides (the latter on an as needed basis since the project promoted integrated pest management to minimize use of pesticides). This e-voucher innovation was successfully piloted by the project in 5 cantons initially before being rolled out to 32 cantons by the project’s closing. (ii) Access to information and training. The project supported a multi-faceted approach to availing information to project beneficiaries aimed at augmenting the limited number of extension workers in the project intervention regions. These approaches included: (i) training and supporting 450 relay farmers (lead farmers trained and equipped with bicycles, phones, solar chargers, etc. to share their knowledge with other farmers in the community); (ii) availing weather forecasts through radio, sms, and paper bulletins to inform decisions on planting and other farming activities; (iii) establishing a Call-Center for providing e-extension (118,438 calls made by project closing on such topics as crop itineraries, pesticide and other input dosages and safety protocols, etc.); (iv) establishing demonstration plots in farmers’ fields; and (v) distributing tablets with farming applications to producers’ organizations, federations of seed producers, and agents of the National Rural Development Agency (ANADER) which were found to be effective and costing a third of the cost of using field demonstration plots. The project also supported farmer training on agronomical practices and better soil management and restoration including such practices as construction techniques of stone bands, half-moons, zaï techniques, assisted regeneration and other techniques. In total, the project promoted 21 technologies, against a target of 20.6 (iii) Access to Markets. With increased productivity, access to markets creates a loop where greater sales enhance incentives for reinvesting in further productivity and resilience-enhancing technologies. In this regard, the project supported the construction of 12 community markets (implemented by IOM as part of the carryover from PURCAE) for facilitating not only intra community trade but for also serving as aggregation centers for off-takers. PDO 2: Increase in Resilience 26. The project promoted several activities aimed at strengthening resilience. These included: (i) promoting early maturing, drought tolerant, and disease resistant crop varieties; (ii) addressing predisposition to climate vulnerability; (iii) diversifying sources of income to avoid exclusive reliance on highly vulnerable ones; and (iv) piloting community- wide natural resource management. 27. Climatic resilience through suitably adapted seeds and cropping practices. The seeds (including those distributed under the CERC FAO to mitigate the impacts of COVID-19) as well as good agricultural practices promoted 5 Varieties received from the “Centre d’Etude pour l’Amélioration de l’Adaptation à la Sécheresse » in Senegal include: Page 15 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) by the project were not only aimed at increasing productivity but also strengthening drought and disease resistance thus enhancing the beneficiaries’ climatic resilience. 28. Climatic reliance by addressing predisposition to vulnerability . The project’s CERC (in partnership with the World Food Program as the lead implementing agency) financed food distribution to 194,952 vulnerable households (out of the 190,00 planned). In a similar vein, the cash-for-work activities financed by the project (a carryover from PURCAE and implemented by IOM) supported 12,367 returnees and refugees (out of 13,600 planned). In both situations, addressing these beneficiaries’ prevailing precarious food situation (directly or indirectly) was critical for bridging the gap before the next harvest thus avoiding their entrapment in a spiral of continuous vulnerability if they consumed the seed meant for sowing and/or disposed of their productive assets which would undermine their ability to withstand even minor climate shocks in a country rated as the second most vulnerable and least ready in the world on the ND-GAIN Index Country Rankings.7 29. Climatic resilience through diversification. A judiciously constituted portfolio of farm and off-farm activities possessing varying degrees of climatic resilience stabilizes household income thus moderating the impact of climate- induced stresses on income and consumption. The following activities were carried out in this regard. (a) Diversification activities for enhancing climatic resilience implemented under the project as per its initial design (i.e., before any restructuring) include facilitating (through matching grants) the acquisition and/or rearing of small ruminants, pigs, chicken, guinea fowl, and undertaking fish farming. These activities’ wide dietary range and diverse levels of hardiness help them survive several adverse climate-induced stressors. Similarly, the project supported small-scale irrigation for vegetable gardens. It also supported growing hardy fruit trees under agro- forestry, undertaking beekeeping, carrying out small-scale processing activities such as shea butter and groundnut oil production, cassava flour production, fabrication of agricultural equipment, and operating agricultural input kiosks, among others, whose income flow can modulate shortfalls in climate-induced crop failures. In total, the project financed 179 such subprojects out of the 250 planned. (b) Diversification activities for enhancing climatic resilience carried out under the CERC in response to COVID-19 were implemented in eight most affected provinces in Chad (with FAO as the partner agency).8 Activities included distributing 16 tons of vegetable seeds to 18,890 households, equipping 114 market gardening sites with motor pump-equipped boreholes, distributing motor pumps to 640 groups, and 17,250 tools consisting of shovels, pickaxes, rakes, watering cans and wheelbarrows to 3,450 households. (c) Diversification facilitation activities carried out under PURCAE’s residual activities brought over to ProPAD (and implemented by IOM) included rehabilitation of 3 vaccination parks aimed at enhancing the communities’ resilience against the expected surge in animal diseases associated with climate change. According to the literature, vaccinations are estimated to reduce mortality by 5.1 percent for Contagious Bovine Pleuro- Pneumonia (CBPP), 5.3 percent for Peste des Petits Ruminants (PPR), and 5.2 percent for fowl pox.9 These mortality reductions increase herd productivity in as far as the meat available per herd is increased by stopping animal loss. They also increase individual animal productivity by reducing morbidity from these principal diseases which hamper weight gain. These potential outcomes are particularly important in facilitating recovery after climatic stressors thus enhancing climatic resilience. Millet (2), Maize (3), Sorghum (2), and Cowpeas (4). 6 The technologies referred to here are the number of new varieties introduced, namely: millet (3), maize (4), sorghum (3), cowpeas (7), rice (1), and Groundnuts (3), for a total of 21 new varieties. In addition to unique desirable features (such as high oil content for ground nuts), all of these varieties were generally productive, early maturing, and drought resistant. 7 https://gain-new.crc.nd.edu/ 8 Tandjilé, Mayo Kebbi-West, Mayo Kebbi-East, Lac, Kanem, Barh El Gazal, Ouaddai and Borkou 9 These statistics come from “Entrepôt de données des ressources animales et halieutiques, Burkina Faso” but are likely to be similar in Chad given the agro-climatic similarity between the two countries. Page 16 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) 30. Climatic resilience through landscape management. ProPAD supported 47 subprojects (out of an initial target of 50 subprojects) for resilience at the community level, the majority of which were agroforestry activities and restoration of community forests. The project also piloted establishing climate-smart villages. The climate-smart village is a participatory approach that helps guide the actions needed to transform and reorient agricultural systems to effectively support development and ensure food security in a changing climate. Three climate-smart villages were set up with the technical support of CORAF and in collaboration with Alliance CIAT & Biodiversity.10 The stakeholders and beneficiaries of this intervention benefited from training and technical support from ITRAD's partners. Justification of Overall Efficacy Rating 31. Overall Efficacy is rated Substantial. Some PDO indicator targets were surpassed whereas others were almost achieved. C. EFFICIENCY Assessment of Efficiency and Rating 32. Financial analysis. A total of 13 models were developed, 10 on crop production and 3 on income generating activities. An 8 percent financial discount rate was used (same as at project appraisal), and an investment horizon of 10 years. Core financial performance indicators used were the Internal Rate of Return (IRR), Benefit/Cost Ratio, Net Present Value, and Return to Family Labor (see Annex 4). 33. The financial results show that farm-level income can grow by 30 percent up to respectively a 3 to 9-fold increase on farms with small livestock production and agricultural products processing. The increase ranges between US$ 74 - 3,459 per farm per year or US$ 12 - 576 per household member (assuming an average of 6 members per farm household). This is between 2 and 75 percent of the Chad poverty line estimated at US$ 2.15 per person per day in 2017 amounts. 34. The carbon balance results are positive and significant, with ProPAD’s activities leading to a total of -2.63 million tons of CO2e that are mitigated over a period of 20 years starting from project implementation. Per year, the average mitigation potential is roughly -131,824 tons of CO2-e, or -0.3 tons of CO2e per hectare. 35. Economic analysis. The economic analysis was carried out for the whole project including the additional financing, using a 6 percent discount rate and a 20-year investment horizon. The EIRR is estimated at 13.9 percent and the NPV at US$ 13.1 million. When environmental benefits are considered, the EIRR is estimated at 61.6 percent for a low carbon price estimate range with an NPV of US$ 95.2 million, and 134.3 percent for a high carbon price estimate range with an NPV of US$ 177.1 million (see Table 7). Details are in Annex 4. Table 7: EIRR and NPV Estimates Without ENV Benefits Benefits @low Benefits @high estimate range estimate range ICR STAGE EIRR (percent) 13.9 61.6 134.3 NPV (US$, Million) 13.1 95.2 177.1 APPRAISAL STAGE EIRR (percent) 14.2 56.7 97.1 NPV (US$, Million) 14.7 122.7 230.4 10 These climate smart villages are in Maïbéssé (Moyen Chari), Bédogo 2 (Mandoul), and Amsinéné (Salamat). Page 17 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) Aspects of Design and Implementation 36. Several design and implementation factors affected the project’s efficiency . First, the project capitalized on the technologies already developed and tested by the WBG-financed West Africa Agricultural Productivity Program (WAAPP, P122065) which closed on 31-Dec-2019.11 Second, the project coordinated with other projects in the portfolio, such as the Chad Hydrological and Meteorological Service Modernization Project (P14256) to provide weather forecasts to farmers, and the Rural Mobility and Connectivity Project (P164747) which was implemented in two of the three targeted regions. Third, the successful intervention through the CERC contributed to protecting the agricultural sector in the Project Areas against setbacks from COVID-19 related disruptions. Fourth, there was only one team leadership change (and with extended overlap for smooth handover, including one co-TTL that overlapped between the two other co-TTLs), and very limited changes in the task team members throughout the project’s preparation and implementation, thus ensuring continuity. These positive features enabled the project to attain several of its development targets despite adverse events and circumstances, such as : (i) belated project effectiveness (project was approved in April 2018, became effective in November 2019, and PCU was fully staffed and functional in April 2019); (ii) COVID 19 pandemic outbreak; (iii) death of the first regional coordinator as a result of Covid; (iv) slow procurement processes; (iv) three-month suspension of World Bank disbursement following political developments in April of 2021. 37. Efficiency is rated Substantial. The economic rate of return is comparable to that of similar projects in the sector especially in the Sahel, and several design and implementation factors were generally favorable and contributory to the project’s efficient use of its resources. Despite some implementation challenges, the project was fully implemented within its appraised timeframe, without any extension. D. JUSTIFICATION OF OVERALL OUTCOME RATING 38. Overall Outcome is rated Satisfactory. There were minor shortcomings in the operation’s achievement of its objectives, relevance remains high, and the efficiency is Substantial. E. OTHER OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS (IF ANY) Gender 39. The project almost fully achieved its gender targets. There were 189,844 female project beneficiaries reached with project assets and services, against the project target of 150,000 (i.e. 127 percent). About 79 percent of the women beneficiaries were satisfied with the project’s interventions (versus the target of 90 percent). The percentage of young female researchers to be trained was only 15 percent (against the original target of 50 percent that was subsequently reduced to 25 percent). There were two main problems, one is structural (there just aren’t many females with high levels of education in Chad, worse still in the sciences), and the other reasons were unfortunate developments (one female student passed away, and another dropped out due to health issues). Institutional Strengthening 40. The project supported several Institutional Strengthening activities. These include: a) Strengthening the research system. The goal was to modernize the research system through better facilities, equipment and personnel, and making it more demand driven. Activities accomplished include: (i) establishment (with facilitation from CORAF) of 9 regional innovation platforms bringing together key 11 The 13 participating countries of WAAPP were: Benin, Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, The Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone and Togo. Although Chad was not a participant, many lessons and outcomes from WAAPP were very valuable to Chad. Page 18 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) stakeholders including farmers, training institutions, extension staff, traders, processors and other private sector members, policy makers, NGOs, financial sector and researchers) which ensures demand-driven research and better value-chain coordination, and enhances value chain efficiency; (ii) rehabilitating the offices and laboratory at ITRAD’s station in Bebidja hence improving the research capacity of this strategically located facility; (iii) training 15 young researchers to replace the aging staff; (iv) facilitating the participation of 10 researchers in short-term training and seminars to exchange ideas with their peers in the subregion; (v) instituting on-farm experimentation for demand-driven technology development; and (vi) constructing the Soil, Water and Plant Analysis Laboratory (LASEP). b) Modernizing agricultural extension. The goal was to modernize the agricultural extension service by incorporating more technology. Key activities accomplished include: (i) training agricultural extension officers in climate smart agricultural practices; (ii) piloting (initially in 5 cantons) and successfully rolling out (in 32 Cantons) e-extension with a 24-hour service; (iii) installing five modern rain gauges in Danamadji, Koumogo, Koumra, Békamba and Goundi to replace obsolete ones whose measurements were no longer reliable in order to strengthen the meteorological data collection network. c) Modernizing input subsidy mechanisms for the poor through e-vouchers. As indicated earlier, this benefited over 17,000 poor farmers. This system has been adopted by other development partners, including the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). d) Strengthening Government Departments. Acquisition of laboratory equipment for two government departments – the Directorate for Plant Protection and Food Storage and Packaging (Direction de la Protection des Végétaux et du Conditionnement), and the Directorate for Seeds and Seedlings (Direction des Semences et des Plants). e) Supporting Policy Reforms and Strategy Development. The project supported: (i) the finalization of the AgroSylvo-Pastoral policy; (ii) the Medium-Term Plan for Agricultural Research; (iii) the feasibility study for the revitalization of the seed sector; and (iv) the National Strategy for Agricultural Extension and Advisory services. Mobilizing Private Sector Financing 41. Besides contributions by project beneficiaries (US$ 2.03 million), this project was not designed to attract private sector financing as a major focus. Nonetheless, various private sector actors participated in the project at various nodes of the value chains (input supply, output purchase, transportation, processing, etc..) although their involvement did not entail major singular investments that would be easy to value nor was the M&E system designed to capture atomized financial investments by a broad range of actors. Poverty Reduction and Shared Prosperity 42. Most of the 685,286 project beneficiaries were smallholder farmers who were assisted by the project to improve their food security and nutrition. The project focused on value chains that are commonly grown by the poor (such as maize, sorghum, millet, rice, sesame, cowpea) for food security or poultry which are rich in protein to close the malnutrition gap. Other Unintended Outcomes and Impacts 43. The capacity built at ProPAD has become very useful in helping the Ministry of Agriculture build a portfolio of projects. Besides absorbing the residual activities of the Emergency Food and Livestock Crisis Response Project (P151215), ProPAD helped the ministry in the preparation of the West Africa Food System Resilience Program-Phase 2 (P178132), Chad Local Development and Adaptation Project (P171611), Lake Chad Region Recovery and Development Project (P161706)), and more recently the Chad Agribusiness and Rural Transformation Project (P179238). Page 19 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME A. KEY FACTORS DURING PREPARATION 44. There were several elements which occurred during project preparation which influenced implementation outcomes. First, the project was anchored in clear policy frameworks, most notably PND and PNSIR. As a result, this project was a top priority for the government which very actively participated in its formulation, rendering all possible assistance. Second, the 2017 agricultural sector review which had just been concluded gave the project solid technical grounding and made sure it was addressing the most pressing issues. Third, the project drew heavily from the regional experience of the Bank-financed regional WAAPP and the regional research body CORAF. Fourth, the project struck strategic partnerships with apex organizations, especially the National Consultation Council of Rural Producers of Chad (CNCPRT) to ensure the project’s relevance to the intended beneficiaries and smooth collaboration during implementation. B. KEY FACTORS DURING IMPLEMENTATION (a) Factors subject to the control government and/or implementing entities 45. Several factors within Government control that favored project implementation include : (i) Government’s quick reaction to request for a reallocation of funds towards the CERC to mitigate the disruptions caused by the COVID-19 outbreak; (ii) Government’s active preparation of, and participation in, implementation support missions and diligent follow up on mission recommendations; (iii) establishing strong partnerships with the National Consultation Council of Rural Producers of Chad which was instrumental in the capacity building of farmers’ organizations; and (iv) continued oversight through its Department of Studies, Planning and Monitoring (DEPS) which carried out periodic missions and offered guidance from its findings. 46. Some factors that negatively affected implementation include: (i) the project’s belated effectiveness (7 months after board approval) and delayed project startup (12 months after board approval) largely due to slow onboarding of critical staff; (ii) high staff turnover in the PCU and slow replacement;12 (iii) absence of a systematic project management performance assessment mechanism to continuously evaluate strengths to reinforce and weaknesses to correct; (iv) long procurement processes with average lead time of 9 to 12 months for procurements of US$ 52,000 (FCFA 30 million) and above needing approval from the President’s office; (v) long delays in receiving approvals of submitted withdrawal requests from the Ministry of Planning, which affected the replenishment of the Designed Account, delaying project implementation and payment of invoices; (vi) several changes in Government counterparts which disrupted dialogue (about 5 different ministers in charge of Agriculture from Board Presentation to the Project’s Closing, and several Secretary Generals which created discontinuity since they were responsible for chairing the Steering Committee). (b) Factors subject to World Bank control 47. Factors which favorably affected project implementation include: (i) continuous project implementation support with the TTL based in-country; and (ii) project team stability, with only one change in team leadership throughout the project’s implementation (more factors that positively affected implementation are discussed under “Quality of Supervision”). 48. However, there were some factors which adversely affected implementation to varying degrees, including: (i) the World Bank’s freezing of its portfolio in Chad from April 20 – June 2021 due to the ongoing political situation which resulted in a temporary disruption of projects activities; and (ii) although ProPAD was reimbursed for the 12The PCU suffered from high staff turnover (including change of the National Coordinator, Procurement specialist, Administration and Financial Manager, the Regional Coordinator, and the M&E Specialist etc.) but also the extended vacancies of certain key positions. Page 20 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) CERC funds (CERC triggered in May 2020, and reimbursement made in August 2021), the project had to temporarily scale down its activities. (c) Factors outside the control of government and/or implementing entities 49. A number of factors beyond government control affected implementation. First, the outbreak of COVID-19 and the ensuing containment measures affected some project activities, including hindering the PCU from undertaking field visits, or conducting group trainings (congregation of people was limited to 50 individuals). Second, the country experienced floods during the 2022- 2023 agricultural campaign that negatively impacted the production of improved seeds thus impacting the level of attainment of some of the project targets. Third, the security situation in the Salamat area led to the disappearance of a ProPAD vehicle, caused delays in transferring funds to partners working in the field, and the project had to incur additional costs for hiring security guards for some of the project sites (example Salamat) and paying for military convoys to accompany them during field trips. Fourth, some cantons within the targeted regions did not have adequate telephone network coverage, thus limiting the efficacy of ICT-based technologies in those particular areas. IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME A. QUALITY OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) M&E Design 50. M&E had adequate indicators, institutional arrangements, and staffing to generate data for testing the Theory of Change. The project indicators, together with other data sources envisaged under the project, were adequate for gauging progress towards attaining the PDO and testing the Theory of Change. The system had adequate provisions for baseline surveys, continuous data collection to gauge progress, and end-of-project impact assessments to gauge performance and draw lessons. The design consisted of a computerized M&E system (RUCHE software package) to provide real-time data on the project’s indicators and on its technical and financial aspects. The GEMS tool, developed by the World Bank, was used for monitoring subprojects. All data collected was disaggregated by gender and age groups to adequately inform decision making on gender and the youth (as this was a key project priority). Staffing and funding were adequate. Overall, the data collection system in place was sufficient to guide project implementation and impact evaluation. M&E Implementation 51. The M&E system was satisfactorily implemented. The baseline study, the mid-term evaluation and the final evaluation were carried out, as well as annual follow-up surveys of the results framework indicators. It was also very useful in collecting daily data on the usage of the flagship e-extension and e-voucher activities as discussed next under M&E utilization. M&E Utilization 52. The M&E system was very useful in guiding project implementation. When implementation of project activities started, the M&E system was particularly critical in facilitating constant adaptation of the e-extension and e-voucher pilot programs. For instance, constant tracking of call volumes of the e-extension pilot helped guide staffing arrangements at the Call-Center in order to improve service and enhance customer experience. Tracking languages most commonly used by callers also helped calibrate language competences accordingly. With respect to the e- voucher, the M&E system monitored demand patterns which helped determine the types of inputs most preferred, but also determine the most preferred stocking time, thus guiding the private sector partners. There are numerous examples of how the M&E system played a critical role in the piloting and successful roll-out of the e-extension and e-voucher systems in particular. Page 21 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) Justification of Overall Rating of Quality of M&E 53. The M&E system is rated Substantial. This is based on the adequacy of its design, its effective implementation, and its usefulness in guiding implementation. B. ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND FIDUCIARY COMPLIANCE 54. The Project complied with environmental management safeguards. The project had triggered Environmental Assessment OP/BP 4.01 and Pest Management OP 4.09 safeguards. The mitigation measures specified in the Environmental and Social Management Plans (ESMPs) and the Pest Management Plans (PMPs) were implemented. Environmental screening and social assessments were carried out at the level of all subprojects financed by the project in line with the World Bank's environmental and social safeguard policies. 55. The Project complied with social safeguards. The project triggered Physical Cultural Resources OP/BP 4.11 and Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP 4.12 social safeguards. There were no cases of physical cultural resources involved in the project. The project relied on a joint Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) developed for three Bank-funded projects that were being implemented in the same target areas, namely the ProPAD, the Sahel Irrigation Initiative Project (P154482), and the Rural Mobility and Connectivity Project (P164747). The GRM was accessible to project-affected people. Local resolutions committees were active in regions where project activities were being implemented. The project had set up a functional complaints management committee in each of the project cantons. The project recorded 18 complaints. All complaints were resolved in an inclusive manner involving the complainants, the committees, and the PCU, and were archived. COVID-19 control measures were adopted consistently throughout the pandemic period although, unfortunately, a regional director was lost to the pandemic. There were no reports of Occupational, Health and Safety (OHS) incidents during project implementation. The project had not recorded any cases of Gender Base Violence (GBV). 56. Procurement. Procurement documents for all contracts financed by IDA proceeds were uploaded into Systematic Tracking of Exchanges in Procurement (STEP) as well as all signed contracts, acceptance certificates and payment documents. There was no reported malfeasance in the procurement processes. 57. Financial Management. Interim Financial Reports were submitted on time and were of acceptable quality. Project audits were generally submitted on time and financial statements were certified without reservation. The disbursement rate under IDA financing was 90.07 percent because of slow project implementation as discussed earlier. C. BANK PERFORMANCE Quality at Entry 58. The project had several positive quality-at-entry attributes. First, as indicated earlier, the project was fully aligned with the Government’s principal policy frameworks, namely PND and PNSIR, making it a top Government priority. Second, as noted in the PAD (paragraph 12), the project sought close coordination and synergy with ongoing projects and programs to optimize development outcomes.13 Third, the project’s financial and economic analysis had demonstrated strong feasibility. Fourth, the project had a strong link to poverty reduction through its emphasis on value chains that are most depended upon by the poor for food security and nutrition. Fifth, adequate social and environmental safeguards were put in place, and all requisite disclosures made, and overall project risk assessments were thorough and candid, and where possible mitigation measures planned. Sixth, the M&E arrangements were adequate. Seventh, the composition of the Bank project preparation team sufficiently reflected the nature of project activities. All these elements gave the project firm technical and institutional grounding. 13ChadHydrological and Meteorological Services Modernization Project (P164256), Rural Mobility and Connectivity Project (P164747), Regional Sahel Irrigation Initiative Project (P154482), Regional Sahel Pastoralism Support Project (P147674). Page 22 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) Quality of Supervision 59. In addition to continuous support provided by the N’Djamena World Bank Office staff through constant interactions with government counterparts to solve implementation issues as they arose, the project team maintained an average of two formal implementation support missions per year for more robust progress assessments. Mission aide-memoirs were candid, with clear action plans. The teams were pro-active in addressing the project’s critical issues, including restructuring the project to realign resources to mitigate the impact of COVID- 19. The skills mix of the project team was in full consonance with project activities. When implementation support was handicapped by COVID-19 travel restrictions, the project implementation support team intensified virtual interactions to make up for that shortcoming. As mentioned earlier, there was only one team leadership change (and with extended overlap for smooth handover), and very limited changes in the task team members throughout the project’s preparation and implementation, thus ensuring continuity. Justification of Overall Rating of Bank Performance 60. Overall Bank Performance is rated Satisfactory. This is because both quality at entry and project supervision were satisfactory. D. RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME 61. The two major risks relate to: (a) continued access to improved inputs; and (b) continued access to advisory services, especially the innovative e-extension services. Regarding continued access to inputs, farmers’ organizations had taken the lead in seed multiplication in collaboration with ITRAD (the research institution). This collaboration is expected to continue. However, domestic multiplication and distribution systems of improved seed are still at a very nascent stage. Continued government support and monitoring will be required to maintain seed quality and supply, including promoting greater private sector involvement. The Food System Resilience Project (P178132) and the newly approved Chad Agribusiness and Rural Transformation Project (P179238) are continuing this nurturing phase. Similarly, given the current high prices of fertilizer, exacerbated by the Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, access to fertilizer is likely to remain problematic. Some farmers were trained in making compost, although this is not sufficient to cater for optimal soil nutrient requirements at a large scale. The fertilizer issue remains an area of active government engagement, working together with the private sector and farmers’ organizations such as CNCPRT. The government now has a good tool (the e-voucher to more effectively and inclusively support the input sector). Regarding continued access to e-extension, the framework which has been put in place is still nascent but demonstrated its usefulness in expanding outreach at low cost. The new World Bank financed project intends to continue working with the system as it matures. There are no significant risks associated with subprojects. Household subprojects were simple and within the beneficiaries’ technical capacity to handle either personally or through local artisans (rearing of small quantities of local animal species, simple milling or oil-pressing equipment used in the case of extracting groundnut oil, processing shea butter, making maize flour, etc.). Communal subprojects mostly entailed the rehabilitation of communal forests and woodlands, as well as carrying out agroforestry activities at the farm level, both of which are easy to maintain. V. LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 62. E-extension can be an effective tool for expanding the outreach of agricultural advisory services . For its effectiveness, key lessons from this project’s experience include: (i) extensive testing within a limited geographic area before the full roll out (was tested in 5 cantons before rolling out to 32 cantons ) to iron out technical, linguistic, and other modalities; (ii) preceding with widespread user publicity to elicit demand; (iii) providing for after-hour services (reasons for the proportionately higher call volume in late evening hours were not clear, but could possibly include less congested phone networks, greater opportunities for phone-sharing in the evenings, more free time for farmers, etc..); (iv) catering for several commonly used languages across the different localities served by the system; (v) as some areas may not have good phone network coverage, non-electronic services (e.g. extension staff) could be more optimally used in such locations. Page 23 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) 63. Similarly, e-vouchers can be an effective tool for efficiently providing more targeted input subsidies to poor farmers. For their effective use, key lessons from this project are: (i) defining clear qualification criteria and undertaking a massive and highly diligent registration drive to ensure inclusivity and avoid elite capture (in this case criteria included limiting input kits to 0.5 – 1.0 ha per crop which was consistent with smallholder crop plots); (ii) give enrollment ample lead time (in this case February-March was found ideal for the July planting season); (iii) ensure close coordination with input suppliers very early on for timely input availability and placement within reasonable distances of farming communities; (iv) some qualified beneficiaries lacked the 20 percent co-payment – future programs could link this program with the productive alliance arrangements so that participating local financial institutions in the alliance (e.g. local MFIs) could advance them with the required co-payment as this appeared to be a purely temporary liquidity issue; (v) some farmers (especially women) lacked SIM cards – future programs could provide such SIM cards free as part of enhancing gender inclusion; (vi) some areas did not have phone network coverage – other mechanisms, such as paper coupons could be arranged. 64. A multi-faceted approach to technology dissemination is particularly opportune in a low institutional capacity environment. Chad has a poorly staffed, poorly equipped, and poorly funded agricultural extension service. This project used, to great effect, a judicious combination of delivery mechanisms, including: (i) strategic partnerships with the farmers’ federation and its member organizations; (ii) contracting private operators to provide advisory services; (iii) using “relay farmers” trained and equipped to assist fellow farmers; and (iv) establishing call-centers for on-demand advise. These combined efforts helped the project achieve significant results in a very challenging environment. 65. Community seed production can fill gaps where private sector-based seed production is still at a nascent stage. Key lessons from this project include: (i) ensuring very close collaboration between the primary stakeholders – the researchers for providing basic seeds, government as certifying agent, and farmers’ federations; (ii) facilitating the government certifying agencies since they have to visit the seed farmers at multiple stages; (iii) shielding the seed farmers from the vagaries of weather, including providing them with small-scale irrigation facilities. 66. Supporting reforms in a politically and institutionally fragile environment requires focusing on strongly felt needs. During this project’s implementation, senior government officials were changing very frequently (e.g., five ministers in charge of agriculture for a project that was never extended). Yet, the project was able to successfully support reforms in research and extension, and overall sector management. From this project’s experience, for successfully supporting reforms in a fragile environment, the reforms have to address a felt need that transcends the leaders of the day. The process has to be inclusive and client-led, with technical assistance to facilitate and enrich the deliberations as needed. . Page 24 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS A. RESULTS INDICATORS A.1 PDO Indicators Objective/Outcome: Supporting adoption of demand-driven technologies and climate-smart agriculture Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Farmers reached with Number 0.00 360,000.00 500,000.00 685,286.00 agricultural assets or services 01-Jan-2018 01-Jan-2018 30-Apr-2023 31-Dec-2023 Farmers reached with Number 0.00 108,000.00 150,000.00 189,844.00 agricultural assets or services - Female Comments (achievements against targets): Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Surface area under improved Hectare(Ha) 0.00 21,400.00 40,000.00 68,483.00 Page 25 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) technology disseminated by 01-Jan-2018 01-Jan-2018 30-Apr-2023 31-Dec-2023 the Project Surface area under Climate- Hectare(Ha) 0.00 10,700.00 3,000.00 31,545.70 smart Agriculture technolgies/practices Comments (achievements against targets): Objective/Outcome: Institutional support for sustainable agriculture development and climate resilience Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Percentage increase in Percentage 0.00 25.00 30.50 average agriculture yield of direct beneficiaries compared 01-Jan-2018 01-Jan-2018 31-Dec-2023 to average yields in the Project area Comments (achievements against targets): Objective/Outcome: Project management, coordination, M&E, and knowledge management Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Share of targeted Percentage 0.00 80.00 78.00 Page 26 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) beneficiaries with rating 01-Jan-2018 01-Jan-2018 31-Dec-2023 ‘Satisfied’ or above on project interventions Share of targeted female Percentage 0.00 90.00 79.00 beneficiaries with rating ‘Satisfied’ or above on 01-Jan-2018 01-Jan-2018 31-Dec-2023 project interventions Comments (achievements against targets): A.2 Intermediate Results Indicators Component: Institutional support for sustainable agriculture development and climate resilience Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Young researchers trained Number 0.00 17.00 16.00 15.00 01-Jan-2018 01-Jan-2018 30-Apr-2023 31-Dec-2023 Young researchers trained - Percentage 0.00 50.00 25.00 25.00 female Comments (achievements against targets): The project financed 17 students. One of the student deceased and an another one was not able to complete her studies due to health issues. Page 27 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Quantity of foundation seeds Metric ton 0.00 97.00 122.40 produced - cereals 01-Jan-2018 01-Jan-2018 31-Dec-2023 Quantity of foundation Metric ton 0.00 48.00 41.10 seeds - other crops Comments (achievements against targets): Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Improved technologies Number 0.00 20.00 21.00 disseminated by the project 01-Jan-2018 01-Jan-2018 31-Dec-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Agriculture sector reform/ Number 0.00 5.00 4.00 4.00 Page 28 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) policies & strategies 01-Jan-2018 01-Jan-2018 30-Apr-2023 31-Dec-2023 supported Comments (achievements against targets): Component: Supporting adoption of demand driven technologies and climate-smart agriculture Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Operational regional Number 0.00 9.00 9.00 innovation platforms 01-Jan-2018 01-Jan-2018 31-Dec-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Direct beneficiaries using Percentage 0.00 50.00 95.00 agricultural climate services 01-Jan-2018 01-Jan-2018 31-Dec-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Page 29 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) Target Completion Improved seeds produced by Metric ton 0.00 3,000.00 850.00 1,117.00 the targeted beneficiaries 01-Jan-2018 01-Jan-2018 30-Apr-2023 31-Dec-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Number of sub-projects to Number 0.00 2,100.00 2,080.00 intensify sustainable production systems 01-Jan-2018 01-Jan-2018 31-Dec-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Number of diversification Number 0.00 360.00 250.00 179.00 sub-projects supported 01-Jan-2018 01-Jan-2018 31-Dec-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Page 30 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) Target Completion Number of CSA sub-projects Number 0.00 100.00 50.00 45.00 01-Jan-2018 01-Jan-2018 30-Apr-2023 31-Dec-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Total beneficiaries who Number 0.00 13,600.00 12,367.00 participated in Cash for Work rotations (IOM) 09-Mar-2020 09-Mar-2020 31-Dec-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Productive assets Number 0.00 25.00 25.00 rehabilitated (IOM) 09-Mar-2020 09-Mar-2020 31-Dec-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Page 31 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) Target Completion People trained (IOM) Number 0.00 5,183.00 5,201.00 09-Mar-2020 09-Mar-2020 31-Dec-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Component: Contingency emergency response Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Time required for the Weeks 0.00 4.00 4.00 government to make requested funds available for 01-Jan-2018 01-Jan-2018 31-Dec-2023 an eligible crisis or emergency Comments (achievements against targets): Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Beneficiaries that received Number 0.00 194,952.00 194,952.00 emergency food assistance 03-Aug-2020 03-Aug-2020 31-Dec-2023 Page 32 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) Comments (achievements against targets): Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Small holder farmers Number 0.00 20,000.00 20,000.00 provided with improved seeds and small agricultural 03-Aug-2020 03-Aug-2020 31-Dec-2023 equipment Comments (achievements against targets): Component: Project management, coordination, monitoring and evaluation and knowledge management Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Annual audits submitted on Number 0.00 5.00 4.00 time and without major qualification 01-Jan-2018 21-Feb-2018 30-Apr-2024 Comments (achievements against targets): Audit for 2024 and grace period are not yet due. They will be submitted the latest on Jun3 30, 2024 Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Formally Revised Completion Page 33 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) Target Grievance Resolution Yes/No No Yes Yes Mechanism established and operational 01-Jan-2018 21-Feb-2018 31-Dec-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Technical audit report for Number 0.00 5.00 2.00 matching grants funded sub- projects 21-Feb-2018 21-Feb-2018 31-Dec-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Matching grants started with a delay Page 34 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) B. KEY OUTPUTS BY COMPONENT Objective/Outcome 1: Increased Productivity Outcome 1) Percentage increase in average agriculture yield of direct beneficiaries compared to average yields in the Project Area Indicators 2) Farmers reached with agricultural assets or services 1) Young researchers trained 2) Quantity of foundation seeds produced 3) Quantity of improved seeds produced 4) Number of improved technologies disseminated Intermediate 5) Number regional innovation platforms Results Indicators 6) Percentage of beneficiaries using agricultural climate services 7) Quantity of improved seeds produced by targeted beneficiaries 8) Number of sub-projects to intensify sustainable production systems 9) Smallholder farmers provided with improved seeds and small agricultural equipment Component 1 1) 15 young researchers trained Key Outputs by 2) 163.5 tons of foundation seeds produced (cereals plus others) Component 3) 21 improved technologies disseminated (linked to the Component 2 achievement of 1) 9 regional innovation platforms established the 2) 95% of beneficiaries using agricultural climate services Objective/Outcom 3) 1,117 tons of improved seeds produced by targeted beneficiaries e 1) 4) 2,080 sub-projects to intensify sustainable production systems Component 3 1) 20,000 smallholder farmers provided with improved seeds and small agricultural equipment Page 35 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) Objective/Outcome 2: Increased Resilience Outcome 1) Surface area under climate-smart agriculture technologies/practices Indicators 2)Farmers reached with agricultural assets and services 1) Number of operational regional platforms 2) Percentage of direct beneficiaries using climate services 3) Improved seeds produced by targeted beneficiaries 4) Number of diversification projects Intermediate 5) Number of climate-smart agriculture projects Results Indicators 6) Number of beneficiaries receiving food assistance 7) Number of beneficiaries who participated in cash-for-work rotations (IOM) 8) Number of Productive assets rehabilitated 9) Number of people trained Component 1 1) Number of improved technologies Component 2 Key Outputs by 1) 9 operational regional platforms Component 2) 95 percent of beneficiaries using climate services (linked to the 3) 1,117 tons of improved seeds produced achievement of 4) 179 diversification subprojects the 5) 45 CSA subprojects Objective/Outcom 6) 12,367 beneficiaries who participated in cash-for-work rotations (IOM) e 2) 7) 25 Productive assets rehabilitated 8) 5,201 people trained Component 3 1) 194,952 beneficiaries received emergency food assistance Page 36 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) ANNEX 2. BANK LENDING AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT/SUPERVISION A. TASK TEAM MEMBERS Name Role Preparation Amadou Ba, Ziva Razafintsalama Task Team Leaders Haoussia Tchaoussala Procurement Specialist Josue Akre Financial Management Specialist Michael L. Morris Peer Reviewer Abdoulaye Toure Team Member Bleoue Nicaise Ehoue Team Member Demba Balde Social Specialist Sossena Tassew Team Member Tayelim Berthe Ngarbaye Team Member Cheikh A. T. Sagna Social Specialist Vikas Choudhary Peer Reviewer Paulette C.E. Aida Thioune Zoua Team Member Emeran Serge M. Menang Evouna Environmental Specialist Andrianirina Michel Eric Ranjeva Team Member Julie Rieger Counsel Brahim Sall Team Member Mahaman Sani Team Member Bougadare Kone Environmental Specialist Page 37 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) Mohamed Nanzoul Team Member Aletheia Amalia Donald Team Member Mousson Estelle Jamel Koussoube Team Member Kandi Magendo Team Member Supervision/ICR Elisee Ouedraogo Task Team Leader Monique Ndome Didiba Epse Azonfack, Berlin Apang Procurement Specialists Tahirou Kalam Financial Management Specialist Herve Cossi Ahouissou Financial Management Specialist Mahaman Sani Team Member Aletheia Amalia Donald Team Member Mousson Estelle Jamel Koussoube Team Member Marie Aria Nezam Counsel Ndoya-Allah Bantiga Social Specialist Yaye Ngouye Ndao Team Member Kandi Magendo Team Member Mahamat Seidou Seidou Ahmat Environmental Specialist Adama Diop Team Member Mistoura Iyabo Motunrayo Salami Team Member Amadou Ba Team Member Halime Mahamat Hissene Environmental Specialist Babacar Dione Team Member Josue Akre Team Member Timoleon Kossadoum Procurement Team Brahim Sall Team Member Paivi Koskinen-Lewis Social Specialist Nikolai Alexei Sviedrys Wittich Procurement Team Julie Rieger Counsel Page 38 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) Salam Hailou Team Member Andrianirina Michel Eric Ranjeva Team Member Erik Winter Reed Environmental Specialist Ndolassem Christabelle Mbairo Procurement Team Paulette C.E. Aida Thioune Zoua Procurement Team Kristyna Bishop Social Specialist Vikas Choudhary Peer Reviewer Anta Tall Diallo Procurement Team Sossena Tassew Team Member Volana Andriamasinoro Team Member Bleoue Nicaise Ehoue Team Member B. STAFF TIME AND COST Staff Time and Cost Stage of Project Cycle No. of staff weeks US$ (including travel and consultant costs) Preparation FY17 10.761 58,164.65 FY18 33.859 224,177.92 FY19 1.247 9,224.64 Total 45.87 291,567.21 Supervision/ICR FY19 16.738 113,376.87 FY20 24.494 147,062.74 FY21 22.994 126,395.72 FY22 32.819 189,511.25 FY23 21.352 133,200.79 FY24 6.081 67,975.48 Total 124.48 777,522.85 Page 39 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) ANNEX 3. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT Amount at Amount at Actual Actual at Percentage Components Approval Restructuring Commitments Project Closing Actual (US$M) (US$M) (US$M) (US$M) Commitments Institutional support for sustainable agriculture 12.60 12.60 11.49 8.25 71.75 development and climate resilience Supporting adoption of demand driven technologies 27.20 27.20 25.13 19.34 76.99 and climate- smart agriculture Contingency emergency 0.00 15.00 13.82 13.08 94.62 response Project management, coordination, monitoring and 4.80 4.80 4.40 7.50 171.33 evaluation and knowledge management Total 44.60 59.60 54.84* 48.18** 87.87 *Based on Client Connection data showing the actual commitments in US$ for IDA resources. The difference is due to the rate fluctuation between the US$ and SDR. **A difference between Client Connection and the Operational Portal data is noticed. This is due to the dollar exchange rate used (Actual vs. average exchange rate). Page 40 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) ANNEX 4. EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS 1. This report contains the efficiency analysis for the Implementation Completion and Results Report (ICRR) of CHAD’s Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (ProPAD). It evaluates how economically resources and inputs of the Project were converted to results, mainly whether the costs / investments involved in achieving the Project Development Objective (PDO) were reasonable and efficient compared to the achieved benefits and whether the allocation of funds was efficient. Additionally, the ex-post Economic and Financial Analysis (EFA) reviews whether there were significant deviations from the original EFA due to various restructurings and changes during implementation. 2. Chapter I of this Analysis summarizes the Project background. Chapter II briefly discusses the methodology and assumptions of the Ex-post Economic and Financial Analysis (EFA). Chapter III summarizes the Project achievements, benefits, and beneficiaries. This information is essential to determine the scope and outreach of the EFA. Chapters IV presents the financial analysis, Chapter V the economic analysis. Chapter VI assesses Project design and implementation efficiency. 3. Overall Efficiency Rating: Substantial. CHAD ProPAD has shown substantial efficiency based on estimated ENPV, EIRR and other economic results combined to the qualitative assessment in terms of the use of the project resources and PDO achievements. This conclusion is valid for the project as a whole including the additional financing. With an estimated ENPV of US$13.1 million (at 6 percent discount rate, over 20 years period), an EIRR of 13.9 percent and the additional potential net benefits that could not be quantified, the project investment has yielded significant returns in an efficient manner even when considering key risk factors such as reduction in technology adoption rate and benefits up to 30% after project closure. When environmental benefits are considered, the EIRR is estimated at 61.6 percent for low carbon price estimate range with an ENPV of US$ 95.2 million and 134.3 percent at high carbon price estimate range with a NPV of US$177,1 million. 4. Indeed, it was expected from the Project at the appraisal to respectively generate an ENPV of US$14.7 million (at 6 percent discount rate) and an EIRR of 14.2 percent over 20 years period not accounting for environmental externalities. The expected results of the overall project could have been higher considering the various restructurings, mainly the additional financing of July 202114. However, the economic indicators obtained at completion, even though slightly lower (deemed moderately satisfactory), remain strongly justified by the significant delay in achieving the expected annual targets (due to the socio-political context, the COVID-19 crisis during implementation, etc.). Considering the qualitative evaluation relating to the use of resources in correlation with the targets achievement, the overall efficiency rating of the project can be rate satisfactory. 14 An efficiency analysis of ProPAD additional financing with the expected economic indicators had not been conducted. Page 41 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) I. Project Background 5. The Project Development Objective (PDO) of PRoPAD was “to promote the adoption of improved technologies leading to increased productivity and to enhance the climate resilience of agricultural production systems in the areas targeted by the Project”. 1. The PROPAD (US$44.6 million, US$41.0 million of which is IDA Grant, 3.6 million expected from beneficiaries) was approved on April 30, 2018, became effective on November 30, 2018, and closed on December 31, 2023. The project consists of four components: (i) Component A: Institutional Support for Sustainable Agriculture Development and Climate Resilience (IDA US$12.6 million equivalent-US$2.6 million equivalent following CERC Activation): which is aimed at strengthening the agricultural research and development (AR&D) system, the national support services for sustainable agricultural development and climate resilience, and the framework for sectoral strategies and reform preparation and monitoring; (ii) Component B: Supporting Adoption of Demand‐driven Technologies and Climate‐Smart Agriculture (CSA) (IDA US$23.6 million equivalent‐US$18.6 million equivalent following CERC Activation): which aims at improving the efficiency of the agricultural support services in the project’s targeted areas, accelerating the adoption of improved technologies and innovations, and supporting the implementation of CSA‐plans; (iii) Component C: Contingent Emergency Response (IDA US$0 million equivalent- US$15.0 million equivalent following CERC Activation): to provide rapid response to Eligible Crisis or Emergency, as needed; and (iv) Component D: Project Management, Coordination, Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) and Knowledge Management (IDA US4.8 million equivalent) to cover project management and coordination. The CERC component was activated on May 14, 2020. Resources under the CERC were used to finance the distribution of food kits, agricultural inputs, and small equipment for the impacted beneficiaries. 6. Following the amendment due to the activation of Component C related to emergencies linked to the COVID-19 crisis, an additional IDA fund of $15 million was subsequently added, thereby increasing the overall financing amount to $59.6 million. 7. A first restructuration also occurred in May 2020 to integrate the residual activities of the Emergency Project entitled "Support for the Implementation of the Additional Financing of $3 million to the Emergency Project for Food Crisis Response and Livestock" (PURCAE), resulting in adjustments such as: (1) a change in the implementing agency to IOM; (2) an expansion of the project's intervention area to Logone Oriental Province; (3) the addition of a sub-component B4 "Strengthening the resilience of targeted refugees, returnees, and selected host communities"; (4) a revision of the results framework to add three (3) intermediate indicators at the Component B level; (5) the addition of a new disbursement category called "Cash Transfers" and reallocation of funds. 8. Beneficiaries and implementation areas. The beneficiaries of ProPAD's actions are distributed across three provinces in the Sudanese region, namely Moyen-Chari, Mandoul, and Salamat. Initially, the targeted number of beneficiaries is 60,000 households, corresponding to 360,000 individuals (30% percent of women). However, with the restructuring, the number of beneficiaries has increased from 360,000 to 500,000 individuals. The main characteristics of the target group are rural families of small- scale farmers cultivating between 1 to 5 hectares. As part of the cost-sharing financing for sub-projects aimed at sustainable intensification of targeted local production systems (for small-scale farming) and Income Generating Activities (IGAs), the project prioritized groups of women and young people aged between 18 and 35. Page 42 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) II. Methodology and Assumptions of the Efficiency Analysis 9. The methodological approach of this EFA follows the same as used during the ProPAD appraisal, that of Gittinger (1982)15, Belli et al. (2001)16 and recent World Bank guidelines published on economic and financial analysis17. 10. The project additional benefits (productivity and income gains) are expected from the farmers through the following sources: (i) sustainable production sub-projects with full improved seeds, fertilizers, and extension services, (ii) production of companion crops, (iii) access to partial support i.e. to the improved seed and/or fertilizers and/or extension services, (iv) spillover effect leading to technology adoption in the rest of the sudanian AEZ, (v) small rural enterprises -Income Generating Activities (IGA) support and (vi) climate-smart agriculture micro projects. 11. As in the PAD, a cash flow model is used to assess the ex-post efficiency of the project investment. Annual cash flows are estimated as the difference between without-project and with-project net benefits for direct beneficiaries. The model has been revised to align baseline yields, yield growth and cropping pattern to reflect achieved indicators in the Results Framework, herd projections for small livestock under IGAs, revenue, and costs measured in 2021 currency amounts18 for the targeted crops (Sorghum/millet, corn, berbere, rice, groundnuts, sesame, cowpea, market gardening), IGA (processing, storage as well as small livestock). Note that, the PAD analysis did not include rice and market gardening production which has been added to the current analysis in view of the support provided by the project to those value chains. 12. Quantified net benefits captured in the model include. The project team’s assumptions about the impact of the project interventions on cropping pattern, yield and costs include assessing the effect on incremental net income by improving productivity. To determine the with-project assumptions, the project team considered the baseline situation and improved access to knowledge of better land husbandry practices, improved seeds, planting materials, fertilizer and pest management technology, and access to markets. The net benefits of the IGA such as small livestock production include increased farm level veterinary costs, improved breeds, improved feeding, and manure management practices, and building farm structures such as animal shelters, for storage access to better infrastructure with higher sales prices and improving added value for product processing. As with crop production, some of the increased production may be for home consumption, and this is also valued at farm gate prices. 13. Data Collection and Sources. This Efficiency Analysis is based on a broad range of qualitative and quantitative data sources. The main sources are: (i) the Project Appraisal Document (PAD) and Restructuring report; (ii) the Implementation Status & Results Reports (ISR) and mission Aide-memoires; (iii) the Project Completion Report (December 2023)19, as well as the Economic and Financial analysis of Subs Projects and Microprojects financed by ProPAD), (iv) beneficiaries satisfaction survey, all prepared 15 Gittinger, P. Economic analysis of agricultural projects. 1982 16 Belli, P., J.R. Anderson, H.N. Barnum, J.A. Dixon, and J-P. Tan (2001). Economic Analysis of Investment Operations: Analytical Tools and Practical Applications. WBI Development Studies, World Bank Institute, World Bank, Washington, D.C. 17 IFAD. Economic and Financial analysis of rural investment projects, basic concepts, and rationale . 2015 18 The foreign exchange rate used is US$1 = 572 XAF. Average during 2019-2021 World Development Indicator database). 19 PCU, PrOPAD Project Completion Report. December 2023. Page 43 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) at the request of the Borrower; (iv) impact stories and knowledge products published by the Project. In addition, discussions with the PCU were a much valued and essential source of information. 14. Financial analysis. From the perspective of beneficiaries, positive financial returns on investment are important for the Project to convince farmers and other investors that sufficient incentive exists for their participation. The assumption is that sustainability of the investments requires a financial or commercial profitability. A total of Thirteen (13) models are developed, ten (10) on the crops production and three (3) on the IGA/small rural enterprises. The financial discount rate used is 8 percent (same at the project appraisal); the duration is 10 years for the models. Core financial performance indicators used are the Internal Rate of Return (IRR), Benefit/Cost Ratio (B/C ratio), Net Present Value (NPV), and Return to Family Labour20. 15. Economic analysis. The Project’s economic cash flow represents the overall Project aggregation of economic costs and benefits. This economic analysis of ProPAD is based on (a) value chain investments in productive goods; and (b) monetized environmental benefits expected to accrue from reduced GHG emissions and increased carbon sequestration. It includes the net incremental benefits of each crop and IGA model in economic terms, converted with shadow prices, and multiplied by the number of hectares/households/units. The economic costs have then been deducted from the overall economic benefit stream to obtain the Project’s net incremental benefit stream. All transfer payments including taxes, subsidies, grants, loans, interest (already included in the models) are deducted from the economics cost to avoid double counting. Benefits are phased in progressively for all types of interventions. The typical spill-over or leverage effect of economic public goods under Component A was considered using the same multiplier factor as defined at the project design. Financial models have been converted into economic models by applying specific and standard conversion factors (SCFs). A 6 percent discount rate21 reflects the social opportunity cost of capital in Chad. For example, the shadow cost of labor is 0.72 of the unskilled labor rates. A 0.77 conversion factor is applied to the cost of fertilizer, crop chemicals and veterinary costs, 0.85 for tradeable domestic inputs and 1.0 for non-tradeable domestic inputs and domestic outputs. III. Project Achievements, Beneficiaries and Benefits Achievement of PDO Level Results Indicators 16. The key indicators of the Project, as defined in 2018 and updated at the appraisal of the additional financing in 2021 were (i) to increase farmers reached with agricultural assets or services (CRI, Number),(ii) the Surface area under improved technology disseminated by the Project (Hectare), (iii) Surface area under Climate‐smart Agriculture technologies/practices (Hectare); (iv) Percentage increase in average agriculture yield of direct beneficiaries compared to average yields in the Project area (Percentage), (v) Share of targeted beneficiaries with rating ‘Satisfied’ or above on project interventions (Percentage). 17. Overall, the PDO targets of the Project were for most of them achieved with an average of 111.6 percent, an intermediate Results Targets achieved at 98.8 percent. The table below summarized the Achievement of the PDO level results. 20 Presented in the detailed excel sheet. 21 In conformity with the World Bank Technical Note on Discounting Cost and Benefits in Economic Analysis. Page 44 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) Table 1: Summary of PDO Level Results Indicators Indicators Baseline Initial Targets after Achieved at Percentage targets at restructuring completion achieved Appraisal Farmers reached with agricultural assets 0 360,000 500,000 685,286. 137% or services (CRI, Number) Farmers reached with agricultural assets 0 108,000 150,000 189,844 127% or services ‐ Female (CRI, Number) Surface area under improved technology 0 21,400 40,000 68,483 171% disseminated by the Project (Hectare) Surface area under Climate‐smart 0 10,700 ‐3,000 31,545 296%* Agriculture technologies/practices (Hectare) Sorghum 444kg/ha 25% ‐ 592,1kg/ha 33% Percentage increase in Millet 347kg/ha 25% ‐ 664,9kg/ha 92% average agriculture yield Maize 701kg/ha 25% ‐ 793,3kg/ha 13% of direct beneficiaries Berebéré 884kg/ha 25% ‐ 1062,2kg/ha 20% compared to average Rice 594kg/ha 25% ‐ 709,7kg/ha 19% 156% yields in the Project area Groundnut 573kg/ha 25% ‐ 648,1kg/ha 13% (Percentage) Sésame 451kg/ha 25% ‐ 640,0kg/ha 42% Cowpea 329kg/ha 25% ‐ 590,8kg/ha 80% Average 39% Share of targeted beneficiaries with rating ‘Satisfied’ or above on project 80% 80% 78% 98% interventions (Percentage) Share of targeted female beneficiaries 90% 90% 79% 88% with rating ‘Satisfied’ or above on project interventions (Percentage) Source: ProPAD, latest aide memoire, November 2023 (Agreed Between the World Bank and PCU)/ Government completion report, 2024; * compared to initial target as stated in Table 4. IV. Financial Analysis and results 18. Project interventions lead to increased yields and revenue while also reducing the share that is consumed at home on emerging smallholder farms. Subsistence farmers are expected to also increase their home consumption. Tables 2 and 3 show the crop production and IGAs performances per hectare. The analysis is aligned with the Results Framework indicator for baseline crop yield and achieved yield growth. As shown in the Tables 2, project achievements include increased yields by between 13 percent to 92 percent (for mains cereals crop: Sorghum, Millet, Maize, Berebéré, Rice) and by between 13 percent to 80 percent for companion crops (Groundnut, Sesame, Cowpea) after 5 years. As for interventions targeting the supply of market gardening kits, increases in yields is estimated between 15 and 35 percent. 19. The without (WOP) and with (WP) project parameters in terms of yields are presented in the table below. Across the models, the analysis assumed gradual uptake of improvements over 3 to 5 years. The full specifications including prices and outputs are available in the Excel file. Page 45 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) Table 2: Yields with and without Project included the EFA. Yield Hypotheses (Kg/ha) WOP WP Y1 2 3 4 5 Delta Sorghum Yield 444 534.3 515.2 546.6 563.7 592.1 148.1 Full package Evolution 0% 20% 16% 23% 27% 33% 33% WOP WP Y1 2 3 4 5 Delta Sorghum Yield 444 471.09 465.36 474.78 479.91 488.43 44.43 Partial support Evolution 0% 6% 5% 7% 8% 10% 10% WOP WP Y1 2 3 4 5 Delta Berbéré Yield 884 904 1,093 1,144 1,013 1,062 178.2 Full package Evolution 0% 2% 24% 29% 15% 20% 20% WOP WP Y1 2 3 4 5 Delta Berbéré Yield 884 890 947 962 923 937 53.46 Partial support Evolution 0% 1% 7% 9% 4% 6% 6% WOP WP Y1 2 3 4 5 Delta Maize Yield 701 716.3 821.1 892.4 858.6 793.3 92.3 Full package Evolution 0% 2% 17% 27% 22% 13% 13% WOP WP Y1 2 3 4 5 Delta Maize Yield 701 705.59 737.03 758.42 748.28 728.69 27.69 Partial support Evolution 0% 1% 5% 8% 7% 4% 4% WOP WP Y1 2 3 4 5 Delta Groundnut Yield 573 578.9 646.3 597.9 601.6 648.1 75.1 Partial support Evolution 0% 1% 13% 4% 5% 13% 13% WOP WP Y1 2 3 4 5 Delta Cowpea Yield 329 462.7 571.9 734.1 617.2 590.8 261.8 Improved seed only Evolution 0% 41% 74% 123% 88% 80% 80% WOP WP Y1 2 3 4 5 Delta Rice Yield 594 754.5 698.1 709 728.7 709.7 115.7 Partial support Evolution 0% 27% 18% 19% 23% 19% 19% Mixed vegetable garden WOP WP Y1 2 3 4 5 Delta Tomato Yield 11,000 12,500 13,000 13,500 13,500 13,500 2,500 Partial support Evolution 0% 14% 18% 23% 23% 23% 23% Okra Yield 7,000 8,000 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 1,500 Partial support Evolution 0% 14% 21% 21% 21% 21% 21% Source. PRoPAD Results Framework 20. Financial results. Table 3 summarizes the financial performance of the crop and IGA models, based on a comparison between WP and WOP situation. The standard financial performance indicators are presented, namely IRR, NPV, B/C, Return to Family Labour. This analysis confirms the financial viability Page 46 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) of the sustainable production sub-projects, IGA investments and inputs access support provided by the Project. For most of the crops models the Return to Family Labour is relatively low. The IRR and NPV are attractive, with significant amount of additional revenue and returns on investments. For the production models the additional revenue generated ranged from up 49590 FCFA ($US 87) for dry cereals and from 42403 (74 USD) to 238 000 FCFA (416 $US) for companion crops and market garden crops per hectare. The incomes generating activities have a positive IRR of 22.7-57.7 percent compared to the financial discount rate. Table 3. Financial performance of the Cropping Pattern based on the WO/P and W/P on Representative Farms and IGA by models. 3a. Dry cereals financial performances Financial Models ‐1 ha Dry cereals Sorghum Sorghum Berbéré Berbéré Maize (FM) Maize (SM) (FM) (SM) (FM) (SM) Discount rate 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% NPV @ 0.08 (FCFA) 187,657 109,585 66,798 33,873 25,959 149,139 NPV @ 0.08 (USD) 328 192 117 59 45 261 IRR N/A N/A 71.6% 117.8% 58.7% N/A NPVb 949,149 806,118 1,970,048 1,753,630 1,512,647 1,375,733 NPVc 943,107 758,977 1,251,675 1,068,181 1,332,105 977,934 B/C ratio 1.01 1.06 1.57 1.64 1.14 1.41 Switching values Benefits ‐1% ‐6% ‐36% ‐39% ‐12% ‐29% Switching values Costs 1% 6% 57% 64% 14% 41% FM = Full support package model; SM= Partial support package model 3b. Other crops (ha) and Incomes generating activities financial performances. Mixed Companion crops Income generating activities Rice vegetable Financial Models (SM) Groundnut garden (FM) Cowpea Storage Processing Livestock Discount rate 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% NPV @ 0.08 (FCFA) 328,792 744,566 209,246 592,986 5,139,752 4,741,954 1,348,151 NPV @ 0.08 (USD) 575 1,302 366 1,037 8,986 8,290 2,357 IRR N/A 42.6% N/A 86.7% 57.7% 28.8% 22.7% NPVb 913,347 11,335,818 2,651,769 1,767,118 64,559,883 24,292,630 11,068,897 NPVc 1,134,212 6,789,991 1,476,871 837,585 59,420,132 19,550,676 6,946,100 B/C ratio 0.81 22 1.67 1.80 2.11 1.09 1.24 1.59 Switching values 24% ‐40% ‐44% ‐53% ‐8% ‐20% ‐37% Benefits Switching values ‐19% 67% 80% 111% 9% 24% 59% Costs Source: Own calculations, based on data collected by the Project 22 Even if the incremental results are positive for rice production, considering the cost of family labor, and the additional costs of technology adoption, with an increase in yield of 13%, does not generate an interesting cost-benefit ratio in a project situation. Page 47 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) 2. The combination of change in cropping pattern and improved yields, technology has the potential to improve farm income compared to the national poverty line. The financial results show that farm-level income can grow by 30 percent up to respectively a 3 to 9-fold increase on farms with small livestock production and agricultural products processing. The increase ranges between US$74-3459 per farm per year or US$12-576 per household member (assuming an average of 6 members per farm household). This is between 2 and 75 percent of the Chad poverty line estimated at US$2.15 per person per day in 2017 amounts.23 V. Economic Analysis and results 3. This economic analysis of PRoPAD is based on the key value chains investments and activities in productive goods and services; and (b) monetized environmental benefits expected to accrue from reduced GHG emissions and increased carbon sequestration. Conservative assumptions and parameters have been applied, to avoid overestimation of benefits and provide realistic results. As explained earlier, prices and costs used in the financial analysis are adjusted to value the economic impact of the project. Investments in productive goods and services. 4. The core economic benefit flow is based on farmers that benefitted from the (i) 2080 sustainable production sub-projects with full improved seeds, fertilizers, and extension services on 10400 ha, (ii) 16863 ha under improved seed and/other inputs, (iii) support on companion crops for 5200 ha (iv) 602 tons of improved seeds produced, (v) 45 Climate Smart Agricultural sub-project promoted (vi) 179 Income generating activities (AGR) supported under Component B , (vii) Impact on dry cereal production in the rest of the Sudanian zone (derived mostly from Component A activities) for 7062 ha, ( iv) 100,000 market gardening kits and 16 tons of market gardening improved seeds distributed, 111 means of irrigation under the CERC component. This led to a total area under improved technologies of 39 525 ha. Calculation of environmental benefits 5. The carbon balance is defined as the net balance across all GHGs expressed in CO2 equivalents (CO2e) that will be emitted or sequestered due to the Projects (WP), as compared to a business-as-usual scenario (WOP). A 20-year period is being considered. 6. The environmental externalities were calculated by using EX-ACT, a tool developed by the FAO, to quantify the volume GHGs mitigated by the Project. This allowed to estimate its economic value of this GHG mitigation, which was included in the economic analysis. EX-ACT is a land-based accounting system, estimating CO2e stock changes (i.e. emissions or sinks of CO2) expressed in equivalent tons of CO2 per hectare and year. 7. For the PrOPAD Completion, the GHG accounting as for the appraisal, is based on characteristics in the sudanian AEZ Chad (sub-humid tropical climatic conditions with sandy soil. The land use and crop production management practices reflets in the WOP and WP and fully aligned with the EFA analysis and 23Poverty and vulnerability are pervasive in Chad, with 42.3% of the population living below the national poverty line. Extreme poverty ($2.15/day per capita [PPP 2017]) also remains high in the country and has risen significantly, from 31.2% in 2018 to 34.9% in 2021 and 35.4% in 2023 (World data bank Indicator) Page 48 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) include: (i) improved crop productivity and production with less GHG emissions on a total of 59,410 ha under different crops Including land use rate, (ii) gradual land use change, given that the calculations indicate that without the project a total of 399 759 ha of tropical shrub land would be deforested, while with project a total of 378209 ha would be cut, resulting in a positive balance of 21 550 ha of forest; (iii) a small increase in livestock population; and (iv) the additional use of fertilizer and other investments and inputs. 8. The carbon balance results are positive and significant, with ProPAD’s activities leading to a total of -2.63 million tons of CO2e that are mitigated over a period of 20 years starting from project implementation. Per year, the average mitigation potential is roughly -131,824 tons of CO2-e, or -0.3 tons of CO2e per hectare (the summary table of results is attached at the end of this analysis and Excel results are made available together with the EFA). 9. The monetary value of the GHG balance has been estimated in full alignment with the recent World Bank recent Guidance Note on the Social Value of Carbon (2024) and considered as economic benefit of the Project in the EFA. This recent Guidance Note on Shadow Price of Carbon in Economic Analysis recommends “projects’ economic analysis used a low and high estimate for carbon pricing. In the case of PRoPAD carbon prices increase from 50 US$/tCO2eq in 2020 to 74 US$/tCO2eq in 2038, and high estimate of the carbon price increasing from 99 US$/tCO2eq in 2020 to 149 US$/tCO2e in 2038. Results of Economic Analysis and Sensitivity Analysis 10. Economic results. Based on the economic analysis, the Project is profitable under all scenarios, without and with valuation of environmental benefits. The scenario without the valuation of environmental benefits is considered the baseline scenario. Under this scenario, the NPV is estimated to be US$ 13.1 million, and the economic rate of return (ERR) is 13.9 percent. Including the GHG mitigation valued at the low carbon price estimate range, the Project could generate a ENPV of US$ 97.2 million and an ERR of 61.6 percent. When using the high market price estimate range for carbon, the Project could generate a ENPV of USD 177.1 million and an ERR 134.3 percent. These scenarios are summarized in the table below. Table 4: Scenarios for Valuation of Environmental Benefits Results incl. Results incl. Results excl. Environmental benefits, Environmental benefits, Indicators Environmental benefits valued @ low price valued @ high price estimate range estimate range ENPV (USD, @6%) 13,053,376 95,211,803 177,139,416 ERR 13.9% 61.6% 134.3% ENPVb (USD, @6%) 35,099,947 117,258,374 199,185,987 ENPVc (USD, @6%) 22,046,571 22,046,571 22,046,571 B/C ratio 1.59 5.32 9.03 11. Sensitivity analysis. Results of the baseline scenario were tested for sensitivity to variations in benefits and costs and for various lags in the realization of benefits. Individually taken, all scenarios (decrease and delay of benefits due to the reduction in the adoption rate and price reduction after the closure of the project, increase on the costs) show robust results under all hypothetical situations. Page 49 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) Table 5. Results of the Sensitivity Analysis Modelling Scenario ERR (%) NPV (US$, million) Base scenario 13.88% 13.1 costs +10% 12.11% 10.8 costs +20% 10.57% 8.6 costs +30% 6.91% 2.0 benefits +10% 15.75% 16.6 benefits +20% 17.56% 20.1 benefits ‐10% 19.31% 23.6 benefits ‐20% 11.92% 9.5 benefits ‐30% 9.87% 6.0 benefits delayed 1 year 11.42% 9.8 benefits delayed 2 years 9.50% 6.7 VI. Project Efficiency 12. Efficiency is a measure of how economically project resources are converted into results. It is therefore also related directly to economic analysis. 13. Disbursements performances and PDO indicators achievements-rated substantial. As suggested by the World Bank ICR guidelines, the Efficiency Analysis goes beyond the economic results and looks also at the allocation and use of Project resources. The overall disbursement of ProPAD is considered moderately satisfactory with a global disbursement rate of 90.07 Percent. The project expenditures and data on the achievements of PDO indicators data provided per components as per the results frameworks show overall better rationality in the expenditure incurred for the achievement of PDO and intermediate results rated in average at 105.2%. The efficiency ratio related to the Physical achievement and financial disbursement can be rated substantial. Cost per Direct Beneficiary 14. Given a cost of 46.58 million and 684 399 direct beneficiaries, the Project cost amounts to US$ 68.1 per direct beneficiary. This can be considered as good, as most beneficiaries are generally households. The precursor project (West Africa Agricultural Productivity Program) of ProPAD having had a cost per beneficiary of to US$ 46 per direct beneficiary. 15. Overall, the ProPAD implementation structures were largely effective in carrying out their intended functions. Also, the Project implementation strategies were largely followed, although putting in place the required decentralized-level implementation capacity and building their capacity took more time than initially planned. Also, the COVID-19 pandemic and national socio-political context caused additional delays. On the other hand, the component of support for the adoption of demand-driven technologies and climate-smart agriculture, in which several partners such as ANADER, ANAM, CNCPRT, DPVC, and ODP intervened, was central and shows the efficiency of the approach. 16. Overall Efficiency Rating: Substantial. CHAD ProPAD has shown substantial efficiency based on estimated ENPV, EIRR and other economic results combined to the qualitative assessment in terms of the use of the project resources and PDO achievements. This conclusion is valid for the project as a whole Page 50 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) including the additional financing. With an estimated ENPV of US$13.1 million (at 6 percent discount rate, over 20 years period), an EIRR of 13.9 percent and the additional potential net benefits that could not be quantified, the project investment has yielded significant returns in an efficient manner even when considering key risk factors such as reduction in technology adoption rate and benefits up to 30% after project closure. When environmental benefits are considered, the EIRR is estimated at 61.6 percent for low carbon price estimate range with an ENPV of US$ 95.2 million and 134.3 percent at high carbon price estimate range with a NPV of US$177,1 million. 17. Indeed, it was expected from the Project at the appraisal to respectively generate an ENPV of US$14.7 million (at 6 percent discount rate) and an EIRR of 14.2 percent over 20 years period not accounting for environmental externalities. The expected results of the overall project could have been higher considering the various restructurings, mainly the additional financing of July 2021. However, the economic indicators obtained at completion, even though slightly lower (deemed moderately satisfactory), remain strongly justified by the significant delay in achieving the expected annual targets (due to the socio-political context, the COVID-19 crisis during implementation, etc.). Considering the qualitative evaluation relating to the use of resources in correlation with the target achievement, the overall efficiency rating of the project can be rate Satisfactory. Page 51 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) ANNEX 5. BORROWER, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS Abdoulaye Ibrahim Siam, Gouverneur de la Province du Salamat Nous tenons à remercier la Banque mondiale qui a financé le projet ProPAD dont les résultats tangibles et les impacts sont visibles au sein des populations ciblées et particulièrement celle du Salamat, sans oublier le ministère en charge de l’Agriculture pour ses appuis à travers ses services techniques et les partenaires institutionnels, les organisations paysannes, les autorités locales et chefferies traditionnelles qui ont contribué à ces succès du projet PrOPAD. https://tchadinfos.com/salamat-le-propad-clot-ses-activites/ Brahim Ali Ranga, coordonnateur local par intérim du projet ProPAD. Le projet ProPAD est une initiative du gouvernement de la République du Tchad avec l’appui financier et technique de la Banque Mondiale. C’est un projet de développement durable dont l’objectif est de lutter contre l’insécurité alimentaire tout en relevant les défis climatiques. Il vise à intensifier les revenus à travers le financement des activités génératrices de revenus ainsi que l’adoption et la promotion des technologies innovantes et résilientes face au climat sur le plan communautaire. C’est dans ce cadre que le projet ProPAD à travers le CORAF a mis en place trois (03) villages climato-intelligent dans le village de Maibessé dans le Moyen- Chari; de Bédogo 2 dans le Mandoul et d’Amsinéné dans le Salamat au Tchad. Les présents ouvrages réalisés permettront aux bénéficiaires de tester et de promouvoir l’adoption des technologies améliorées pour augmenter la productivité agricole et renforcer la résilience des systèmes de production agricole dans les zones ciblées. https://www.coraf.org/actualite/tchad-le-village-climato-intelligent-damsinene-cree-par-le-propad-est- inaugure Abdelkhadir Kiboiro, Secrétaire général du ministère de la Production et de la transformation agricole L’adoption des technologies améliorées par les producteurs leur permettant d’augmenter les productions agricoles, passe nécessairement par une mise en place d’une stratégie nationale de vulgarisation adaptée aux systèmes de production dans les trois zones agroécologiques du Tchad. Malgré les mesures prises par l’État, pour rationaliser les services de vulgarisation ces dernières années, le secteur agricole est confronté à plusieurs défis : “une faible capacité humaine et infrastructurelle, un faible taux d’accès aux technologies, une faible adoption des technologies améliorées et innovations durables, etc.”. Cependant, la validation de la stratégie permettra au gouvernement de disposer d’une stratégie nationale de vulgarisation et appui-conseil devant permettre aux producteurs d’accroître la production dont les retombés devront améliorer leurs conditions de vie. https://ndjamenahebdo.net/vulgarisation-et-appui-conseil-agricole/ Page 52 of 53 The World Bank Climate Resilient Agriculture and Productivity Enhancement Project (P162956) ANNEX 6. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS (IF ANY) 1. Project Appraisal Document 2. Project Financing Agreement 3. Aide-Memoirs of the Implementation Support Missions 4. Project ISRs (Implementation Status and Results Reports) 5. Borrower’s Project Completion Report 6. Project’s Annual Reports Page 53 of 53