 |
 |
United States Department of Agriculture Foreign Agricultural Service |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
What are the objectives of the Food for Progress
Program? The Food for Progress program is used in countries that have made commitments to introduce or expand free enterprise elements in their agricultural economies through changes in commodity prices, marketing, input availability, distribution and private sector involvement. Are there any priority projects or activities that FAS
is looking to fund? Food for Progress proposals should focus on private sector
development of agricultural sectors such as improved agricultural techniques,
marketing systems, farmer education and cooperative development, expanded use of
processing capacity, development and introduction of new foods and/or
development of agriculturally related businesses. The following are
examples of activities that might achieve these goals:
What should Food for Progress projects strive to
achieve? USDA reviews each proposal activity for impact and results.
Proposals that provide the greatest impact per beneficiary will receive
preference. USDA considers both the
primary and secondary beneficiaries of the activities.
At a minimum, each proposal must provide the number of beneficiaries
targeted and the planned impact of the program on those beneficiaries.
Applicants should provide outcome or output measures for the estimated
impact. For infrastructure
enhancement activities, the impacts should be measured in both number and impact
to the communities and/or individuals served by the structure.
For financial systems, training, technical assistance, and enhanced
farming technique development projects, sales and income changes should be
measured. Proposals that contain
clear outcomes will be more competitive.
What are the priority countries? USDA will consider proposals for all developing countries and territories that meet the requirements of the Food for Progress Act of 1985. USDA will use Food for Progress to target countries in transition, either politically or economically. This includes supporting countries that are recovering from conflict (such as Afghanistan and Democratic Republic of Congo) or entering into bilateral trade agreements with the United States (such as many Central American countries). Additionally, USDA will give priority consideration to proposals for countries that reflect several economic and trade factors that include: 1) encouragement of private sector development, 2) net food importing country with a greater than 20 percent prevalence of undernourishment as a proportion to the total population (FAO), 3) countries with per capita incomes below $2,000 (World Bank statistics), and 4) positive movement in freedom criteria, including political rights or civil liberties. USDA also coordinates with other U.S. government agencies, including the Millennium Challenge Corporation, U.S. Agency for International Development, and the State Department, to discuss the program’s benefits to complement, not duplicate, the efforts of the other agencies. In line with these definitions, FAS is most likely to fund proposals for the following countries: Afghanistan
Malawi USDA reserves the ability to consider funding projects
outside this guidance due to unforeseen circumstances (e.g. the recent tsunami). The above list does not apply to any approved multi-year
signed agreement where funding and/or commodities are scheduled for FY 2006. What activities are unlikely to be approved? Proposals that target humanitarian assistance through direct feeding as their primary focus are less likely to be funded under Food for Progress. These types of programs should be submitted under either Section 416(b) or, in the case of school feeding, under the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition program. How many proposals should an organization submit? USDA cannot
anticipate the number of proposals received for any given country.
USDA receives an average of 150 proposals each year; however, only about
thirty may be approved due to budget limits.
Since the approval process is expected to be very competitive,
more focused, clearly developed and well-written proposals will fare better.
The proposals that best meet the
proposal review criteria will be more competitive. For organizations
that submit more than one proposal, a written priority list should accompany the
proposals. This is helpful due to
the very competitive nature of the program that makes approval of all proposals
not possible. Are multi-year agreements possible? Proposals for multi-year agreements, up to a maximum of three years, will be considered. Implementation of successive years will be subject to a favorable review of the program’s progress and the availability of funding. USDA will also consider proposals involving the shipment of commodities in one year and the use of monetization proceeds for up to three years. What are the criteria used during the proposal review
process? Food for Progress proposals are analyzed from several perspectives. The commodity requests are reviewed by the analysts in Commodity & Marketing Programs, Foreign Agricultural Service. This review helps minimize commercial market disruptions. The analysts calculate the Usual Marketing Requirement (UMR) and allowable programming levels. All proposals are sent to the appropriate FAS overseas office for their review and insights. Within the Programming Division of Export Credits/FAS each proposal is evaluated using the same criteria: A. Agricultural focus (25 percent). Does the proposal aim to introduce or expand free market activities, focus on private sector development, etc.? B. Country appropriateness (5 percent). Is the country a significant importer or exporter of agricultural commodities? Is there already significant food aid programming going into the country via Title II or other food aid programs? C. Proposal quality (35 percent). Are the ideas in the proposal well developed and articulated? Is the ratio of administrative expenses to program use reasonable? Has the organization identified recipient agents or other partners in county? Are the beneficiaries clearly targeted and defined? D. Commodity management and appropriateness (15 percent). Has the organization identified commodities and tonnages appropriate for the country? Is adequate information about the monetization process, storage and handling of commodities provided? E. Experience and Organization Capacity factors (20 percent). FAS looks at the experience of the organization and evaluates the organization favorably if it has experience in providing food aid with its own resources, or those of other donors. FAS also reviews lists of known terrorists to ensure no organization, nor recipient agency, is participating in or funding terrorist activities. A review of non-profit websites is also conducted to ensure the financial and technical capability of program applicants. FAS ensures that organizations new to USDA have a fair chance in competing for funds. After the initial evaluations, further reviews are undertaken regarding the distribution of programs geographically.
|
||||||||||||||||||
