VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 3 POSTED ON: 10/1/2012
AGENT- OPR……… ANNEX 2: SUMMARY TABLE OF ACTION POINTS Section Action Point By Whom By Whe 3.1. The scope of Agents’ training should incorporate issues of inventory control and purchasing within CARE an inflationary environment. 3.1. Inventory Risk as a threat to the project needs to be further analysed by CARE as to scale and CARE effects. 3.1. CARE to review credit limit procedures with MASHCO and other clients to avoid excess liabilities, CARE and potential defaults, building up. 3.1. CARE to keep DFID informed of progress on the Court case, as well as its management burdens CARE & for the total AGENT programme in other areas. DFID 3.2. CARE to analyse and review the impact of the proposed plans in consultation with GoZ and GMB, CARE & and report to DFID on a quarterly basis. DFID 3.3. CARE to present inflation adjusted Agents’ turnover figures, either deflated by the inflation rate or CARE by conversion into U$ (to be agreed between CARE and DFID). CARE must also give figures for volumes of sales. 4.1. Project Officer to apply for project extension on the basis of CARE forecasts of residual budget DFID amounts. 4.1. It was agreed that CARE can encourage suppliers to produce and distribute more product CARE materials. It can also facilitate linkages between manufacturers and farmers (such as through ‘Seed Fairs’). These events may also be a useful venue for gauging demand for a wider number of products to be sold through the Agent network (such as tools and vet goods). 4.1. DFID & CARE need to define how the demonstration effect should be quantified and measured CARE & prior to amending the LogFrame. DFID 4.2. CARE to improve database of Agents in line with measures in section 4.2. and integrating recommendations from section 10.2. 4.2. These figures will, however, need to be carefully monitored to ensure that the trends in ‘wastage CARE rate’ improve with CARE’s new selection and training procedures. 4.3. CARE is to finalise a fixed definition of graduation of an agents and to consistently report CARE graduation rates in future. 4.3. CARE’s facilitation should be seen as part of an overall process with defined milestones towards CARE graduation. This would make measurement of graduation, or progress towards it, more quantifiable. 4.5. The potential for a greater diversity of products traded through the Agent network should be explored, based on the needs of rural people, gauged by Agents and CARE. 5.1. DFID & CARE need to quantify how long the project funds will allow the project to continue its CARE & operations, and reallocations made in the light of funds required for research. DFID 5.1. DFID to resolve status and ownership of ISF, and how it will be incorporated into a second phase, DFID if there is one. Secondly CARE will clarify the status of the £45, 000 sterling deposit with indications of its medium term use. 5.2. CARE should keep DFID abreast of the legal proceedings, and costs associated with them. CARE 5.2. In the case of bad debt which is past 6 months due, CARE could look to ‘sell’ its bad debts to CARE recovery companies for a percentage of the liability. 5.3. Improved Agent selection and the shift from full guarantees, and clear milestones of graduation CARE from guarantees, should further protect the ISF from further erosion. 6.2. CARE to ensure that each Agent carries a minimum range of stock which correlates with farmers’ CARE needs in the region. CARE could also act as an intermediary to at least maintain, but preferably, extend consignment terms to Agents. 6.2. The variety of products should respond flexibly to new potential areas for farmers, and needs of CARE the market. 7.1. CARE to undertake an impact assessment of the Agent programme utilising techniques outlined CARE above (7.1.). 7.2. The Impact Assessment (IA) should analyse the affordability of farm inputs by poorer farmers. If CARE & access is a genuine issue, then CARE and DFID should review how this constraint might be DFID addressed in any next phase. 7.3. CARE to include activities which tackle the AIDS/HIV problem for rural households, and co- CARE & ordinate where possible on condom distribution, in co-ordination with DFIDCA policy initiatives in DFID this area. 8.1. The proposed research could be used to generate different customer profiles, as the impact will CARE & vary considerably with the managerial ability and technical skills of the different ‘classes’ of DFID farmer. 8.1. The impact assessment should carry out an analysis of the “without case” scenario, looking at DFID sample farmers’ costs across several locations 9.1. The AGENT programme should attempt to influence the decision makers within the supplier sector to upscale and increase the effects of the programme, as advised by the private sector middle management consulted during the OPR. 9.1 CARE to review incentives for graduation alongside formalisation of the graduation process. CARE These incentives will need to be negotiated with the private sector suppliers. 9.1 CARE to investigate ways of reducing erosion of ISF by inflation, including foreign currency CARE holdings and high interest accounts. The size of the ISF should also be reviewed in the light of any follow-on phase. 9.1. CARE needs to institute charges for Training services based on an analysis of Agents’ ability to CARE repay, and benefits to the trainees, and increased delivery efficiency. 9.1. CARE to integrate training modules on inventory control where feasible, and where appropriate to CARE the clients’ needs. 9.1. CARE to undertake a feasibility analysis of including output sales in a subsequent phase of CARE AGENT. CARE will need to investigate the risks to open pricing as part of this work 10.1. CARE to put into effect a study looking at the distribution and coverage of Agents in existing CARE areas; set up regular data collection on Agent (and their client) characteristics, financial profitability, and client satisfaction with CARE services. 11.1 Based upon the results of the CARE study, DFID will investigate the likelihood of further project DFID finance. 12.4 DFID reviews the results of both the Agent density and Impact Assessment studies, as well as the DFID existing CIDA project memorandum, with a view to making a decision by the end of February 2000 as to a possible extension of the project.
Pages to are hidden for
"AGENT OPR Annex2"Please download to view full document