Philippines - Agricultural Support Services Project

Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICLAL USE ONLY Report No. 10658 PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SUPPORT SERVICES PROJECT (LOAN 2040-PH) MAY 15, 1992 dxs(s d;a ~o *,t Agriculture Operations Division Country Department I East Asia and Pacific Regional Office This document has a restricted distribution ani may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.  PRINCIPAL ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ASSP = Agricultural Support Services Project BAR Bureau of Agricultural Research DA - Department of Agriculture FNP Food and Nutrition Plar FSSRI - Farming Systems and Soil Resources Institute IPB - Institute of Plant Breeding at UPLB ISNAR - International Service for National Agricultural Research MOA Ministry of Agriculture (later changed to DA) NEP = National Extension Project PCARR = Philippine Council for Agriculture and Resources Research (later renamed PCAARD) PCARRD = Philippine Council for Agriculture and Resources Research and Development RIAR Regional Integrated Agricultural Research Station SCUs - State Colleges and Universities TA Technology Adaptation TG Technology Generation TV = Technology Verification UPLB Un'.versity of the Philippines at Los Banos CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Pesos per US$) Year Exchange Rate 1981 (Appraisal) 7.50 1982 8.99 1983 12.37 1984 18.37 1985 19.28 1986 21.40 1987 20.63 1988 21.27 1989 21.90 1990 (Completion) 27.06 GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES FISCAL YEAR January 1 - December 31 WEIGHTS AND MEASURES (Metric System)  FOR OFCML USE ONLY THE WORLD BANK Washington, D.C. 20433 U.S.A. Oice of Di,ectorCGe al Op.tati.m Evakiatkm May 15, 1992 MEMORANDUM TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS AND THE PRESIDENT SUBJECT: Project Completion Report on PHILIPPINES - Agricultural SupDort Services Proiect (Loan 2040-PH) Attached, for information, is a copy of a report entitled 'Project Completion Report on the Philippines: Agricultural Support Services Project (Loan 2040-PH)" prepared by the East Asia and Pacific Regional Office. No audit of this project has been made by the Operations Evaluation Department at this time. Attachment This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only In the perfofmance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.  PRWET COMPLETIOW RE T FOR OMCIAL USE ONLY PHILIZZUIUf AGRICTWTURAL SUPPORT SERVICES PROJECT (LOAN 2040-PE) TABLB OF CONTENTS Page No. Preface .................................. Basic Data Shoot Ii lvaluataon Suh ry . . . . . . . . . . . . . v OVERVIEW A. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 B. Project Objectives and Description . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 C. Project Implementation ................. . 3 D. Project Reultsand Impact ............... . 4 E. Project Sustainability .. . ... 6 Fo Bank Performance . . ................ . . .. 7 C. Borrower Performance ... - 9 B. Consultilu Servs ce... 9 1. Issues 9 Annexe 1. Project Implementation ............... . 13 2. Bank Loan Disbursements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 3. Status of Covenants . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 17 PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT I* Introduction . . . . . * . 19 II. Project Identification, Preparation and Appraisal 21 III. Project Restructuring. * ....... .. ........ **.. 24 IV. Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 V. Financial Perform.nce *....... ...0 ..o & . 48 VI. Institutional Performance and Development . . . . . . . . . 62 VII. Economic Re-evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 VIII. Conclusions and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Tableo in Text 1. Change. in ASSP Structure . .. .. . . . 29 2. Overall Accomplishment of ASSP By Major Category and Subcomponent and Implementing Agency/Office (1981-90) . . 33 3. Procurment Timetable ... .... .... .... 44 4. Flow of Activities for Civ.l Workes Project.o . . . 47 S. Projections and Actual Expenditures Per Component . . . . . 54 rThis document has a festricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance| |of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.  Pame Po. 6. Projections and Actual Expenditures Per Category . . . . . . 56 7. Loan Allocation and Availments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 8. Actual vs. Estimated IBRD Disbursements . . . . . . . . . . 61 9. Estimated DA Training Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 10. Distribution of Slots (Trained Manpower) . . . . . . . . . 64 11. Revised Targets vs. Actual Accomplisbients (Training) . . . 65 12. Total Local and Foreign Consultants Hired . . . . . . . . . 67 Fitures in Text 1. Average Exchange Rate . ................................. 49 2. RIARs IVs Savings Generated Due to Chan,e in Exchange Rate 51 3. Total Project Cost - Per Category . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 4. Total Project Cost - Per Major Component . . . . . . . . . . 52 5. Total Project Cost - Per Source of Financing . . . . . . . . 53 6. Process Flow Summary - Loan Availment Out of Special Account 60 Map: IBRD 23717  PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SUPPORT SERVICES PROJECT (LOAN 2040-LM . PREFACE This is the Project Completion Report (PCR) of the Agricultural Support Services Project in the Philippines, for which Loan No. 2340-PH in the amount of US$45.0 million was approved on July 14, 1981. The loan closed on December 31, 1990, two years after tle original closing date of December 31, 1988. There were three loan cancellaticns of US$lB.O million on October 24, 1985, U$8.0 million on December 29, 1987, and US$1.4 million on September 3, 1990. The last disbursement was on May 7, 1991. An undisbursed balance of US$698,769.43 remaining after the last disbursement was canceled. The final loan amount was US$19.9 million. The PCR was prepared by the Department of Agriculture (DA), the lead implementing agency for the project. The Preface, Basic Data Sheet, Evaluation Summary and Overview were prepared by the Agriculture Operations Division, Country Department I, East Asia and Pacific Region. The Overview is based, inter alia, on the PCR; the Staff Appraisal Report (No. 3378-PH) dated June 23, 1981; the Loan Agreement dated August 25, 1981; the Bank's Supervision Reports and project files; discusslnns with the Borrower's project staff and World Bank staff associated with the project; a draft Project Brief dated January 23, 1992 on a follow-on project called Agricultural Research, Training and Extension Project, prepared by the PAO/CP identification mission of September/October 1991; and a three-volume Evaluation Report on the project prepared by the Development Academy of the Philippines in December 1988. The East Asia and Pacific Regional Office wishes to express its appreciation to the DA for having prepared a comprehensive PCR. Since the Borrower has prepared a detailed, frank and objective report, the PCR was not returned for comments.  - iii - PRkOJECT COHPLIZTION REPORT PHILIPPINES AGICULTURAL SUPPORT SERVICES PROJECT (LOAN 2040-PB) BASIC DATA SHEET tEY PROJECT DATA Appraisal Actual or Actual As 2 of expectation current estimate appraisal estimate Projact costs (Us$ million) 77.1 40.6 52.7 Loan/Credit mount (US$ million) 45.0 19.9 44.2 Date board approval 06/16/81 07/14/81 - Date effectiveness 10/31/81 11/10/81 Date physical components completed 12/31/87 12/31/90 - Proportion then completed (I) 100.0 90.0 90.0 Closing date 12/31/88 12/31/9Y.. Economic rate of return (2) - Financial rate of return (Z) - Institutional performsnce - Average Agronomic performnce - Number of direct beneficiarie -- SW DATA Speciali- Date No. of Man-days zations Performance Typo of Mission (no/yr) persons in field reprisentedla ratlng,L Trendle proble_s/d Reconnaispance (CP) 03/79 2 10 n.a. Identific. (CP) 07/79 5 75 b,-.g.a,a Preparation (CP) 01/80 5 140 b.b,a,c.d Appraisal 04/80 5 140 a,a,b,c,g Post Appraisal 10/80 4 60 a,a.b.h Subtotal 42" Supervision 1 03/82 2 12 a,d 2 2 F.M Supervision 2 09/82 1 7 a 2 3 F,M Supervision 3 09/83 2 17 *,e 3 1 F,M Supervision 4 03/84 1 6 a 3 3 P,M,0 Supervision St 10/84 3 30 a*f.b (cp) n.r. n.r. n.r. Supervision 6 03/85 1 6 a 2 1 F,O Supervision 7 09/85 1 6 a 2/2/2/2/e - - Supervision 8 06/86 2 12 a.b 3/2/2/2 - - Supervision 9 03/87 1 6 a 3/2/2/2 - - Supervision 10 08/87 1 7 a 3/2/2/3 - - Supervision 11 11/87 1 21 a 2/2/2/2 - - Supervlsion 12 02/88 1 5 a n.r. - - Supervision 13 08/88 1 11 a 2/2/2/2 - - Supervision 14 02/89 1 2 a 2/2/2/2 - - Supervision 15 07/89 1 3 a 2/3/2/2/3A - - Supervision 16 04/90 1 2 a 2/3/2/2/2L& - - PCR 10/91 1 2 a - - - Subtotal TotL 5  - iv - CNJIATIVR DIS3URSXKNIS FY82 FY83 FY84 FYP5 FY86 FY87 FY88 FY89 FY90 FY91 Apprais6l estimate (US$ mln) O.t0 3.40 11.50 22.60 33.30 42.10 45.00 - - - Actual (US$ mln) 0.06 0.16 0.90 2.83 5.62 7.30 9.36 17.18 18.67 19.90 Actual as Z of estin'Ate 10 5 8 13 17 17 21 38 4: 44 Date of final disbursement 05/07/91 Principal repaid to (mo/day/yr) (US$ mla) US$7.77 million as of February 29, 1992 OTMH PROJECT DATA Total Time (staffweaka) Recorded by Fiscal Year/Activity FY79 FY80 FY81 FY82 FY83 FY84 FY85 FY86 FY87 FY88 FY89 FY90 FY91 FY92 Total LENP 10.2 69.4 - - - - - - - - - - - - 79.6 IN' - 44.5 76.7 - - - - - - - - - - - 121.2 LENN - - 2.8 0.7 - - - - - - - - - - 3.5 SPN - - - 8.7 6.3 15.8 24.2 14.0 9.0 11.4 5.5 3.0 0.1 - 98.0 PCR - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7.0 7.0 Total 10.2 113.9 79.5 9.4 6.3 15.8 24.2 14.0 9.0 11.4 5.5 3.0 0.1 7.0 309.3 Borrower Government of the Philippines Executing Agency Ministry of Agriculture, later Department of Agriculture Fiscal Year of Botrower Calendar Year Name of Currency (abbreviation) Peso (P) Appraisal year average 1981 US$1.00 - P 7.50 Intervening years average US$1.00 - P 18.03 Completion year average 1990 US$1.00 - P 27.06 Follow-on project: None /a a - agriculturist; b - economist; c - soils and laboratory specialist; d - institutions and training specialist; e - architect; f - extension specialist; g - veterinary/livestock specialist; h a nutrition Fpecialist. L I - problem-free or minor problems; 2 - moderate problems; and 3 - major problems /c I - improving; 2 - stationary; 3 - det'riorating /d F - financial; M - managerial; T - technical; P - political; and 0 - other Le From late 1985 the ratings were for available funds/project management/development Impact/overall status. If Redesign mission. Lg Ratings were for overall status/project development objectives/compliance with legal covenants/project management performance/availability of funds. n.a. not available n.r. not rated (no Form 590 was produced) (CP) - PAO Cooperative Program.  -v - PROJECT COFLETITo RzPORT PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SUPPORT SERVICES PROJECT (LOA 2040-PO) EVALUATION SUMNARY Progect Q!i1.ctlves and De*crfttion 1. The Agricultural Support Services Project (ASSP) aimed at enhancing the agricultural research, regulatory and planning capability in the Philippines, principally that of the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA), later renamed the Department of Agriculture (DA). The project supported the national Food and Nutrition Plan (PNP) of December 1980, which, inter alia, aimed to increase and diversify production of food and other agricultural commodities and thus made new demands on the country's agricultural services, including planning and research. The project complemented the National Extension Pro4ect or NEP (Loan 1626-PH, signed on December 21, 1978), which was designed to steengthen MOA's agricultural extension service. 2. Specifically, thei project, over a six-year disbursement period beginning in FY82, was to (a) strengthen the national agricultural research capability by providing BOA with funds, to be channelled through the Philippine Council for Agriculture and Resources Research and Development (PCARRD), which was responsible for coordinating agricultural research in the country, in support of farm technology generation (TG)I and directly supporting the Institute of Plant Breeding (IPF) at the University of the Philippines at Los Banos (UPLB) and the farm systems research program being developed within UPLB's Department of Agronomy; (b) strengthen the applied agricultural research and experimental capability of BOA by providing it with a technology verification (TV) fund; (c) strengthen the new Regional Offices oL the BOA by upgrading nine Regional Integrated Agricultural Research Stations (RIARs) on which appropriate small-farm technology relating to cropd and livestock was to be tested before being released for farmer use through the extension service; (d) strengthen two BOA staff Bureaus responsible for regulatory matters affecting crops and livestock; (e) strengthen MOA Central Office by improving project planning, preparation, implimentation, management, and monitoring capability specifically by funding *.aff training, and special studies on food, nutrition, and the rural economy; and (f) provide for a second national nutrition survey to be conducted by the Food and Nutrition Research Institute (MI). Te achieve the above objectives, the project was to fund civil works, vehicles and equipment, training, consultants, and incremental salaries and operating and maintenance costs (including inpute and chemicals).  - vi - 3. The MOA had the ovarall responuibillity for project implementation. To Implement its own components, a Project Management Office (PMO) was to be established within the Ministry, responsible to a Project Management Committee headed by the Mir,ister of Agricalture. UPLB and FNRI were responsible for implementing their components. IDlementation 3xDerience 4. Project implementation was adversely affected by soma deficiencies in project design, local funding problems from the very early stages, lack of experience of MOA staff in implementing projects of this magnitude a-d complexity (number of subcomponents increased from the original 24 to 35 after the second restructuring in 1987), unfamiliarity of the project staff with Bank procedures, changing government policies and time-consuming rules and regulations on procurement and budget releases, insufficient staff expertise ilt preparing tender documents and technical specifications, delays and deficiencies in construction due to fundin6 -ird contractor capability problems, eaveral changes in MOA/DL top management (particularly after the new Government came to power in 1986) with attendant changes in development approach and management style, change of Project Manager, and several reorganizations of the DA. Project implementation was delayed from the outset due to the non-inclusion of the project in the 1982 government budget. The slow reorganization of the MOA, starting in 1980, also affected ASSP implementation. The MOA was to finalize by January 31, 1982 a staffing plan showing duti.. ! and deployment of personnel in the Ctntral Office, the Bureaus and the Regional Offices. This was done only in 1985 but the new government in 1986 introduced further changes. In the meantime, there was job insecurity at all levels of the MQA and insufficient support to Regional Offices. As a result of the early implementation problems, the project underwent restructuring in 1984185 and 1987 and project completion was delayed by three years to December 1990. The 1984/85 restructuring added an extension component (to continue the extension delivery system of NEP, completed in 1984, based on a modified T&V methodology), the construction of a central soils laboratory, and the use of the Special Account facility to speed up disbursement of loan proceeds. The 1987 restructuring added small components for two RIARs substations, sugar research and develooment, ramie research and development, cropwatch, rubber development, tribal agriculture, post-harvest research and development, additional funds for project preparation, and support to Foreign- Assisted Project Office. At completion, the project cost was estimated at P 835 million, a 44 percent increase over the appraisal estimate of P 578 million. However, due to a steep devaluat'on of the peso from P 7.50 - US$1.00 at appraisal in 1981 to P 27.06 in i990, the project cost in US dollar terns was only US$40.6 million (53 percent of the appraisal estimate of US$ 77.1 million), and the final Bank loan disbursement was US$19.9 million, compared to the original loan amount of US$45.0 million. 5. The 1987 reorganization of the DA particularly affected the research subcomponents relating to TG, TV and technology adaptation (TA). Until 1986, TG funds under the project were warranted to DA (except funds for IPB, small-farm systems, and applied communication, which were directly warranted to the relevant institutions) and then ?assed on to PCARRD for transfer to institutions with  - vii approved TO programa. In 1987, .ne DA'o Agricultiural Research Office was upgraded to a staff Bureau of Agricultural Research (BAR), which wvnted to exert greater influence on -he diroction and scope of TO research and to administer the TG funds itself. The disagreement persisted and PCARRD withdrew from its responsibility of overseeing TG research under the project on July 1, 1988. As a result, there were few achievements in TO research under the project after 1987 (except for the insulated IPR and small-farm systems research). The problem was subsequently realized by the DA. In June 1990, the BAR signed with PCARRD a Memorandum of Agreement, which gives authority to PCARRD for the review of and budgetary recommendations for all TO research, whilu BAR can aliocate funds from its own approved budget to its prioi .y TA end TV activities. The arrangement appears reasonable and has worked so far. Earl4er, in October '988, the BAR kad done a creditable job of formulating a National Agricultural R--v'earch and Extension Agenda (HAREA) for the medium term (i288-92) after extensive interagency consultations. The NAREA sets priorities for research and extension. 6. The 1987 reorganization also resulted in the removal of all core staff of researchers from RIMs to the provincial offices and halting of the very active Provincial Technology Verification Teams (PTmV) program. The PTVT consisted of extension workers trained and guided in conducting on-farm trials for verification of technologies generated by TG and TA activities. After 1987, the whole RIARs program virtually collapsed and very few on-farm trials were uonducted. Once again the DA realized the problem and plans were drawn up in 1991 for 13 RIARs (now named Regional Integrated Agriculture.1 Research Centers or RIARCs) to become the DA's regional facilities for research end development, administered directly by the BAR. 7. Despite the earlier implementation problems, the three-year delay, end setbacks under the 1987 reorganization of the DA, the project at completion had largely achieved the appraisal physical targets for infrastructure, vehicles and equipment, training, and consultancies end had funded the incremental operating costs. Results 8. Overall, the project was marginally successful at completion and had a partial institutional impact. Had the setbacks to the rese.tch component not occurred in 1987-90, the project results and impact would have been more significant. The quantitative accomplishments of the project are significant in terms oE infrastructure facilIties established, vehicles and equipment procured, trainin-/workshops conducteC plant and livestock regulatory services and soils laborat,wry services performed, extension-related instructional materials producei', TG, TA and TV-related studies and trials undertaken, regional agricultiral data collection and delivery systems operationalized, projects prepared, end national nu.rition surveys conducted. In totality, these accomplisements were in line with the objectives of the project. For a project of this nature, which deals with institutional capability for research end technology development, provision of regulatory services, and project planning and preparation, quantitattve measurements of impact are extremely difficult end the judgement has to be largely subjective.  - vii - 9. At project completion in 1990, the research subcomponents relating to plant breeding, small-farm systems research, and applied communications were succeseftul. Two national nutrition surveys were successfully conducted. The cc.aponents relating to plant and regulatory services and project planning, preparation and management were also largely suc^essful. The subcomponents implemented by UPLB (plant breeding and small-farm systems research) achieved particularly significant results. The strengthening of the IPB was successful in increasing considerably the production of improved seeds and quality was obviously reliable since sales increased significantly and the operation was financially viable at the end of the project. IPB now has one of the best agricultural research facilities in the Philippines. The expansion of small-farm systems research was also visibly successful' A new Farming Systems and Soil Resources Institute (FSSRI) was created under the project in 1982. In 1986, the FSSRI was designated by PCARRD as the Nationa7 Center for farming systems research and extension. The Institute, which had a community-based, demend- driven approach, was able to establish its credibility on the basis of its accomplishments by the end of the project. However, the research subcomponents relating to TG and TA/TV largely failed after 1987, for reasons described in paras. v and vi. The subcomponent for an extension delivery system, added after the 1984/85 project restructuring, was also largely unsuccessful, as no serious attempt wae made to evolve a modified T&V or other suitable extension methodology for nationwide implementation, though the ASSP tatiined extenrion staff and contact farmers and made extension services more accessible vo farmers by augmenting the operating budget of the DA's field units. Sustainabilitv 10. Overal.l, the sustainability of the project is uncertain. All staff positions established for project implementation were contractual and co-terminal with the project, so continuity is now primarily in the hands of DA's regular staff. The facilities created and regulatory services strengthened by the project can be utilized only if adequate oporating and maintenance funds are available, which is not the case so far. The TA and TV capability strengthened under the project has been largely nonfun^tional since 1988 and, despite the DA's recent decision to reactivate the RIARCs, its sustainability is uncertain after tl implementation in January 1992 of the Local Government Code, which gives the provincial and municipal authorities considerable discretion in determining the levels and types of services to be provided to farmers. The two clearly sustainable components of the project are the IPB and FSSRI comporints. To sustain the accomplishments of a project like ASSP, which can have a significant institutional impact only in the long-term, it would be desirable to develop a comprehensive follow-on operation which fully takes into account the strengths and weaknesses of ASSP. Findings and Lessons Learned 11. For institution-building projects like ASSP, a clear analysis of design issues needs to be done at appraisal: the project design focussed more on institutional structure and provision of facilities rather than institutional processes of identifying needs as perceived by farmers, setting priorities,  - ix - rese,arch/extension linkages, coordination among agencies, and decision-making, firnanc2tl management and procurement in MOA. The project design did not include specific actions for improvement and monitorable indicators of progress in these intangibles. The implementation capacity of the Borrower was also not analyzed carefully: the project vas too complex and ambitious in terms of the time frame, territorial coverage and range of components. Moreover, the budgetary implications of numerous activities in far flung areas were not analyzed. In particular, since the RIARs model had not been sufficiently tested, a more gradual phasing of '.plementation should have been considered. The complex and time-consuming nature of the processes of reorganization and decentralization was also not adequately analyzed: the project designers overestimated the commitment of DA senior management to these processes (Overview, para. 23, 24 and 27, and PCR, paras. 4.6, 4.8, 4.10, 4.13, 8.2, 8.3 and 8.10). 12. The design of training components in institution-building projects like ASSP should be based on a staff/manpower development plan. This was not done for ASSP and 4isufficient attention was paid to the policies and administrative measures which limited promotion or reassignment to permit use of acquired skills (Overview, para. 25, and PCR, para. 6.16). 13. To ensure smooth implementation, it is necessary to train project staff in government and Bank procedures for procurement, disbursement, accounting, budgeting and budget releases (Overview, para. 26, and PCR, paras. 4.1, 4.6, 4.8, 4.10, 4.13, 6.20 and 8.5).  PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SUPPORT SERVICES PROJECT (LOAN 2040-PH) OVERVIEW 1. This overview utilizes information from documents (listed in the Preface) other than the PCR and supplements parts of the PCR relating to project implementation, project results and impact, sustainability, and Bank and Borrower performance. In particular, the overview attempts to analyze the issues relating to the design, implementation, results and sustainability of the research component of the project in much greater detail than the PCR. A. Backaround 2. In 1980/81 when the project was appraised, the incidence of poverty in the Philippines was about 40-45 percent, despite satisfactory economic growth during the 1970s. Income distribution was highly skewed and regional disparities pronounced, with the incidence of poverty reaching 60-70 percent in the least developed regions. Large numbers of people, especially in the rural areas which accounted for 80 percent of the poor, suffered from malnutrition and lacked basic facilities. Real incomes were under heavy downward pressures due to increasingly unfavorable man/land ratios, expansion of cultivation into marginal lands, limited employment opportunities in the industrial sector, and a sharp deterioration in the external terms of trade. 3. Government's strategy in the 1970. had focussed on self sufficiency in rice and corn production principally through credit, irrigation and improved inputs. The strategy did achieve some measure of success. The country became a net exporter of rice and agricultural production had an annual growth of 5.3 percent over the decade. Rural development programs were also initiated but the overriding problems of poverty and regional disparities remained. 4. Government then decided to expand its approach to an integrated agricultural strategy. A Food and Nutrition Plan (FNP) was prepared by the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) with technical assistance from the Bank. The FNP was aimed at increased and diversified food production and improvements in land and labor productivity. The strategy called for substantial investments in various activities, including agricultural research, as means of removing the technical, economic, and social constraints on production and productivity. 5. Institutional arrangements in the agricultural sector were diverse and complex with corresponding problems of coordination and overlapping responsibilities. The MOA was responsible for crop and livestock related research, planning, regulation and promotion. The National Irrigation Authority (NIA), an agency of the Ministry of Public Works, was responsible for all  -2- national irrigation programs. The Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) was responsible for fisheries, forestry, land classification, and some soil conservation activities. There were also several other autonomous and semi- autonomous agencies and crop specific institutions. 6. Agricultural research was conducted by several agencies and coordinated by the Philippine Council for Agriculture and Resources Research (PCARR), later renamed the Philippine Council for Agriculture and Resources Research and Development (PCARRD), which allocated all research funds, including foreign aid, to the agencies. Foremost among the national institutions was the University of the Philippines at Los Banos (UPLB) with reputable programs in the Institute of Plant Breading (IPB) and in the Department of Agronomy. Regional research programs were also carried out by the State Colleges and Universities (SCUs). B. Project Obiectives and DescriRtion 7. Proiect Obiectives. The project's broad objective was to improve support services in the agricultural sector in order to raise productivity and improve nutrition. Specific project objectives included: (i) improvement and expansion of agricultural research and regulatory services through the strengthening of MOA's network of agencies and svpport to two other associated organizations; (ii) strengthening of the regional structure of the MOA especially in research testing capability; and (iii) strengthening of planning and management capacity within HOA. The project complemented the National Extension Project or NEP (Loan 1626-PH, signed on December 21, 1978), which was designed to strengthen MOA's agricultural extension service. 8. Project Components. The original main project components weres (a) Strengthening of Agricultural Research through: (i) a technology generation fund provided to MOA, but to be channelled through PCARRD, to support basic research at the national centers; (ii) support for technology adaptation and verification through applied research by MOA on its own stations and in farmers' fields; (iii) development of Regional Integrated Agricultural Research Stations (RlARs) to support small-farm system research in nine of the twelve administrative regions; (iv) development of the applied communications facilities of PCARRD to improve the flow of technical information from the research centers to extension and other users; (v) expansion of capacity and activities at the IPB, especially in improved seed production; and (vi) expansion of small-farm systems research at UPLB; (b) Strengthening of Plant Regulatory Services through support to the Bureau of Plant Industry of MOA for: (i) expansion of analytical capacity in the central laboratory; (ii) development of plant certification capacity; and (iii) improvement of plant quarantine facilities$  a - 3- (c) Strengthening of Livestock Regulatory Services through support to the Bureau of Animal Industry cf MOA fort (i) expansion of laboratory facilities for feed analysis; (ii) completion of facilities for livestock quarantine; (iii) transfer of livestock field services to the regions; (iv) improvement of livestock disease diagnostic capacity at the central and regional levels; and (v) upgrading of facilities for vaccine production; (d) Strengthening of Agricultural Planning and Management Capacity in MOA through support for: (i) expansion of project preparation services; (ii) streamlining and development of central and regional data and management information systems; (iii) a national nutrition survey; (iv) establishment of implementation arrangements for the project; and (v) improved transportation. 9. Restructuring. The project was restructured in 1984/85, components added for extension activities (to continue the extension delivery system of the NEP, completed in 1984, based on a modified T&V methodology) and construction of a central Soils Laboratory and it was agreed to cancel $15.0 million from the original loan amount of $45.0 million because of devaluation of the peso and delays in construction and procurement. A subsequent restructuring in late 1987 led to another reduction of US$8.0 million in the loan amount but added nine new components including tribal agriculture, and research on sugar, ramie and rubber. The components and achievements are summarized at Annex 1 and detailed in Table 2 of the PCR. The final Bank loan amount disbursed was US$19.9 million (Annex 2). C. Project Implementation 10. The PCR provides adequate details on project implementation, which was adversely affected by some deficiencies in project design, funding problems from the very early stages, unfamiliarity of the project staff with Bank procedures, changing government policies and time-consuming rules and regulations governing procurement and budget releases, project complexity with 35 components to be implemented after the second restructuring in 1987, lack of staff expertise in preparing tender documents and technical specifications, several changes in DA top management with attendant changes in development approach and management style, and several reorganizations of the DA. The impact of the last factor, particularly the 1987 reorganization of the DA, on the project was very significant which, though discussed in the PCR, deserves some elaboration. 11. The 1987 reorganization of the DA (under Executive Order No. 116 of January 1987) had important consequences for the technology generation (TG) as well as technology adaptation (TA) and technology verification (TV) components. The Agricultural Research Office (ARO) of the DA was upgraded and expanded to a staff Bureau of Agricultural Research (BAR) with a new Director and mostly new staff. The BAR was mandated to coordinate, integrate, plan, monitor, and evaluate the research programs of the DA and its attached agencies. It was also mandated to source and allocate funds for the DA's research programs.  -4- 12. Until 1986, TG funds under the project were warranted to DA (except funds for IPB, small-farm systems, and applied communication, which were directly warranted to the relevant institutions) and then passed or to PCARRD for transfer to institutions with approved TG programs. These annual TG approvals for funding were made on the basis of periodic evaluations and reviews of ongoing TG research. With a new DA managemert in place in 1986, a disagreement developed between DA and PCARRD with DA wishing to exert greater influence cn the direction and scope of TG research since it felt that PCARRD had not done an adequate job in setting research priorities and in focussing the research on farmer needs. DA's ARO was clearly not staffed to handle more than its originally assigned coordinating role for TA at regional and provincial research centers/stations and TV through on-farm trials. With the 1987 upgrading of the ARO into BAR, TG funds were no longer transferred to SCUs and single commodity institutions, since the DA wanted to have TG funds administered by the BAR. 13. Bank missions were not successful in obtaining DA approval to follow direct warranting procedures through PCARRD. PCARRD withdrew on July 1, 1988 from its responsibility of overseeing TG research under the project. This resulted in few achievements in TG research under the project since 1987. However, the DA subsequently realized the problem and, in June 1990, BAR signed with PCARRD a memorandum of agreement, which allocates responsibility to PCARRD for the review of and budgetary recommendations for all TG research, while BAR can allocate funds in its internal budget for its own priority TA and TV activities. 14. The 1987 reorganization also resulted in the removal of all core staff of researchers from RIARs to the provincial offices and halting of the very active Provincial Technology Verification Teams (PTVT) program. The PTVT was an innovaAion of the RIARs system. It facilitated the involvement of extension workers in the much-needed on-farm trials for verification and packaging of production technologies in specific agro-climatic zones in the country. One PTVT, composed of 2 and 3 members, had been established in each of the 78 provinces of the country. The PTVT, whose members were selected from among the existing DA extension workers in the area, were mainly responsible for technology verification and promotion in each of the identified outreach sites. These PTVT members were trained in technology verification procedures and were closely supervised by a regional technical team under the RIARs Manager, as well as the scientists and technical personnel of the Agricultural Research Office (now the Bureau of Agricultural Research) of the department. After 1987, the whole RIARs program virtually collapsed and very few on-farm trials were conducted. Once again the BAR realized the problem and plans were drawn up in 1991 for 13 RIARs (now named Regional Integrated Agricultural Research Centers or RIARCs) to become DA's regional facilities for research and development, administered directly by BAR. RIARC's staffing is planned at 50, while Regional Outreach Stations (ROS), a maximum of six per region, will have 20 staff each. D. Proiect Results and Impact 15. Overall, the project up.s marginally successful at completion. Had the setbacks to the research component not occurred in 1987-90 (paras. 12-14), the  -5- project results and impact would have been more significant. For a project of this nature, which deals with institutional capability for research and technology development, provision of regulatory services, and project planning and preparation, quantitative measurements of impact are extremely difficult and the judgement has to be largely subjective. The quantitative accomplishments of the project (detailed in Table 2 of the PCR) are significant in terms of infrastructure facilities established, vehicles and equipment procured, training/workshops conducted, plant and livestock regulatory services and soils laboratory se-vices performed, extension-related instructional materials produced, TG, TA and TV-related studies and trials undertaken, regional agricultural data collection and delivery systems operationalized, projects prepared, and national nutrition surveys conducted. A significant achievement of ASSP as an institutional development project was in the area of manpower development. Through ASSP, about 300 DA personnel were sent to various degree courses. This has increased the DA's potential for carrying out its research, management, and regulatory functions more effectively. Furthermore, ASSP's support for additional manpower and operating costs enabled the DA to increase its activities in the areas of data and agribusiness development project was in the area of manpower development. With the creation of the Agribusiness group, the National Nutrition Committee, the Foreign Assisted Projects Office, and the Regional Agriculture and Fisheries Councils, the planning, project preparation, and policy development capabilities of the DA were enhanced. In totality, the above accomplishments were in line with the objectives of the project, which had been laid down in the SAR as strengthening of the agricultural research capability in the Philippines; strengthening of the capability of the MOA (now DA) in plant and livestock regulatory services, and project planning, preparation, implementation and monitoring; and carrying out of a second national nutrition survey. 16. At project completion in 1990, the research subcomponents relating to plant breeding, small-farm systems research, and applied communications were successful. Two national nutrition surveys were successfully conducted. The components relating to plant and regulatory services and project planning, preparation and management were also largely successful. The subcomponents implemented by UPLB (plant breeding and small-farm systems research) achieved particularly significant results. The strengthening of the IPB was successful in increasing considerably the production of improved seeds and quality was obviously reliable since sales increased significa. ".y and the operation was financially viable at the end of the project. Statioi. development at the IPB, with an excellent seed storage facility, screen houses, roads, some irrigation, and lots of equipment, have made this one of the best agricultural research facilities in the Philippines. IPB also got many Ph.D. scholarships under the project and has built up considerable staff capability. The expansion of small- farm systems research was also visibly successful. A new Farming Systems and Soil Resources Institute (FSSRI) was created under the project in 1982. The Institute was able to establish its credibility on the basis of its accomplishments by the end of the project. A major factor in the succes@ of the Institute was its flexibility in carving out its role as it evolved. The Institute focuses not only on -3search but also on adoption by farmers and was able to establish a research and development process which involves the small  -6- farmere and takes into consideration their conditions and aspirations. A major achievement of the FSSRI was the refinement of the Rapid Rural Appraisal technique as a practical mechanism for research-extension integration at the farm level. Another factor in the success of the Institute was the effort put into building close linkages with the various agencies in the sector: DA and its regional offices, SCUs, and other research agencies. These linkages are of various forms such as close contact and exchange of information, collaborative research, joint symposiums, and training of staff. 17. While the project's contribution to the expansion of basic research capability in plant breeding and small-farm systems is visible, the research subcomponents relating to TG and TA/TV largely failed after 1987 (paras. 12-14). The upgrading of potential capability for TA and TV at the regional and farm levels is yet to show credible results. Translating this potential into reality depends on the provision of sustained support to the RIARs (now RIARCs) and proper research prioritization and policy articulation (see paras. 38-41). The subcomponent for an extension delivery system, added after the 1984/85 project restructuring, was also largely unsuccessful, as no serious attempt was made to evolve a modified T&V or other suitable extension methodology for nationwide implementation, though the ASSP trained extension staff and contact farmers in 13 "model" provinces and made extension service more accessible to farmers by augmenting the operating budget of the DA's field units. E. Prolect Sustainabilitv 18. Overall, the sustainability of the project is uncertain. All staff positions established for project implementation were contractual and co-terminal with the project. Few staff positions have been regularized. The facilities created and regulatory services strengthened by the project can be utilized only if adequate operating and maintenance funds are available, which is not the case so far. The TA and TV capability strengthened under the project has been largely non-functional since 1988 and, despite the DA's recent decision to reactivate the RlARCs, its eustainability is uncertain after the implementation in January 1992 of the Local Government Code. 19. The Local Government Code places agricultural extension and most regulatory functions under the management of the Provincial and Municipal authorities. The Local Government Units (LGUs) will have considerable discretion in determining the levels and types of services which they provide to farmers. The DA has still to decide how to redefine its role in the light of the Code and what adjustments in institutional arrangements and staffing are required. Although the Code calls for the closure of Regional Offices, the DA sees these as being the principal units through which to provide technical (and possibly funding) support to the Provinces and will argue before the "oversight commission" for their retention. The future role of Regional Offices (or Field Stations as DA is proposing they be called) has still to be defined but is likely to include at least research, subject matter specialist support for extension% planning assistance and program monitoring.  -7- 20. The implementation of the Local Government Code, the underlying principles of which coincide with the DA's policies as set out in the Agricultural Development Plan, will make the agricultural services more accountable to farmers and more respionsive to local needs. In the short term, however, the introduction of the Code is having negative effects on the performance of the DA at regional and provincial levels. There are understandable apprehensions amongst DA staff about their career prospects, the possible "de-professionalization" of the service and, above all, the danger of excessive politicization. There is also a danger that the reallocation of staff and equipment between regional and provincial levels, which has already started to take place, could lead to problems; for instance, if regional slots for researchers are to be filled on grounds of seniority rather than expertise, the prospects for improving DA's research capability would be bleak. 21. The two clearly sustainable components of the project are the IPB and FSSRI components. As discussed above (para. 16), the IPB component was financially viable and is expected to be sustained. Breeder seed produced by the IPB is purchased by a network of outgrowers involving both the private sector and the Bureau of Plant Industry of the DA. The system appears to function to the satisfaction of all parties and no major threat to its sustainability is foreseen. 22. The FSSRI, even though a new institute set up under the project, appears soundly established and sustainable. The factors in its success, flexibility and close linkages (para. 16), also augur well for its sustainability. It has demonstrated the capacity to adapt to external conditions and perceived needs and should be able to continue to do so, given its location within the institutional framework of UPLB. Its close linkages with other agencies ensures a demand for its services in training and for its collaboration in research and symposiums. F. Bank Performance 23. In retrospect, the Bank should have analyzed the project design more carefully. At the identification and preparation stages, several issues had been raised by FAO/CP and by Bank reviewers. Among these issues were the differences in opinion and resistance of some of the senior staff of the MOA to its reorganization (which was one of the covenants under the NEP) and lack of progress on reorganization; institutional arrangements in the agricultural sector, particularly lack of agreement between MOA and other agencies; limited capacity of the MOA for project implementation, as evidenced by the problems of NEP implementation; and high expenditure levels of ASSP compared to the funding capability of the government. The opposition of some of the powerful Directors of MOA's Bureaus to the project's objective of strengthening MOA's regional services was particularly noteworthy. In a situation such as this, it may have been useful to employ experienced Institutional Specialists to carry out stakeholder and institutional risk analyses and develop measures for influencing opponents and reducing risks. However, these issues were not adequately taken into account in the designing of ASP and the project was clearly too complex and ambitious in terms of the timeframe, territorial coverage, range of components,  and local funding capability. These factors caused delays in implementation and necessitated project restructuring. However, each restructuring added components for which the priority in the overall strategy was not always clear. 24. The reviewers within the Bank also raised the issue that the Staff Appraieal Report (SAR) did not present a convincing case of why the particular series of interventions were necessary and how they were linkcd to specific problems and constraints which were to be resolved. The project design focused more on institutional structure and provision of facilities rather than institutional processes of identifying needs as perceived by farmers, setting priorities, research/extension linkages, coordination among agencies, and decision-making, financial management and procurement in MOA. The project design did not include specific actions for improvement and monitorable indicators of progress in these intangibles. This created Droblems during implementation and difficulties ir assessing project impact. 25. The training component was also inadequately designed. It was not based on a staff/manpower development plan for the MOA/DA. Insufficient attention was paid to the policies and administrative measures which limited promotion or reassignment to permit use of acquired skills. As a result, the expectations of the trained staff were not met and a large number of them left the MOA/DA upon completion of their studies or did not return. The Central Training Unit limited its role to administering the training funds. In 1985, the consultants from the International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR) observed that in the absence of a needs assessment and a master plan, the training programs being pursued were more the choice of individual students rather than what the DA required. 26. The Bank can also be criticized for NOA's unfamiliarity with Bank procedures for procurement and loan withdrawal which were cited as problems in the NEP and continued on under the ASSP. It is not clear whether training in these procedures was provided to MOA staff. Moreover, given the magnitude of procurement under the project, a review of Government procurement procedures should have been carried out in order to fit Bank procedures as smoothly as possible or provide sufficient lead time. The supervision reports describe the effects of bureaucratic bottlenecks on the project but not the effects of the project (given its size and complexity) on the administrative capacity of the MOA/DA and its activities outside the project with respect to processing, funding etc. 27. Given thu delays experienced in the regionalization of MOA's activities, known weaknesses in research coordination, and the fact that the RIARs model had not been sufficiently tested, the Bank should have considered the implementation of the RIARs on a pilot scale before full-scale implementation or, alternatively, according to some prioritization of implementation.  _9- G. Borrower Performance 28. While it is recognized that the project design was too complex for the implementation capacity of the MOA/DA, borrower performance in certain areas also contributed to the problems of the project (Annex 3 shows the status of covenants under the Loan Agreement). There appears to have been a lack of consensus cn the part of Government about the project. With respect to MOA, the preparation and appraisal teams both reported lack of agreement and even opposition from some departmental heads to decentralization and strengthening of MOA's regional services. It was only in 1987 (under the General Memorandum Order No. 2, Series of 1987) that the DA instituted a program of decentralization giving its 12 regional offices a measure of autonomy in carrying out rural development activities in their respective regions. 29. The project's implementation was affected from the very beginning by inadequate levels of funding--no provision was made in the budget for effectiveness as agreed. Throughout the history of the project there were recurring problems of funding, release of funds and bureaucratic bottlenecks and slow action in addressing these problems. 30. The project's impact was considerably reduced due to the disagreement between the DA and PCARRD in 1987-90 (para. 12) and halting of the RIARs program after 1987 (para. 14). H. Consultina Services 31. There was one major international consulting contract and it was carried out by the International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR) which performed satisfactorily in carrying out a review of some of the major issues in the organization and coordination of agricultural research. An expatriate communications specialist also performed satisfactorily. The Development Academy of the Philippines (DAP) tid an excellent overall review of the project in December 1988. The DAP was commissioned by the DA to evaluate ASSP as a part of preparation of a Phase ;, proposal. I. Issues!/ 32. The implementation of the ASSP has brought to the fore some issues which have to be faced in designing any follow-on project or other interventions to improve the research and extension system in the Philippines. 33. Organization and Management of AMricultural Research. The PCARRD network provides the institutional structure for basic agricultural research. It has a proven track record of competence in agricultural research and has been considered to be quite capable in the performance of its function. The BAR is responsible for the research activities of the DA. Being new, the BAR still has 1/ This section draws heavily on the three-volume Evaluation Report on the project by the Development Academy of the Philippines in December 1988.  - 10 - to build up its capability in applied agricultural research and match the stature of PCARRD as a research institution. 34. The delineation of roles and respensibilities among the various institutions engaged in agricultural research deserves priority attention. There is no institutional conflict in k-aving PCARPD specialize in basic research geared toward technology generation while BAR specializes in applied research geared toward technology adaptation and verification. Nonutheless, the two functions, and consequently, the two institutions, have to be closely coordinated. PCARRD could provide basic research inputs to BAR and enrich the technology arsenal of the DA. BAR, on the other hand, could guide PCARRD toward becoming more responsive to the technology needs of farmers. In fact, BAR could serve as an effective link between the scientists of PCARRD and the extension workers of DA. As an institution, BAR could be an important source of ideas and policies on agricultural priorities. It is in a suitable position to define both national and regional priorities in agriculture and to direct research efforts to support these priorities. 35. PCARRD. on the other hand, is well suited for its role as coordinator of basic research activities because it is an institution linked with the science community. Both PCARRD and BAR are, therefore, key institutions in the field of agricultural research and should be supported as such. After the June 1990 Memorandum of Agreement between the BAR and PCARRD, the two instit.itions are complementary rather than adversary and a more conducive climate for agricultural research could be expected. 36. The other institution whose role needs to be clarified is the project- created RIARs. As an institution, RIARs provide an effective and efficient mechanism for integrated and applied agricultural research. RIARs are particularly suited for technology adaptation and verification work involving small farm systems and have good potential for providing sustained support services for the small farmer. 37. The effectiveness of RIARs (or RIARCs after 1991) hinges on the continued deployment of their multidisciplinary team of trained agricultural researchers. The physical facilities of RIARs were designed to support an integrated rather than a specialized system. The 1987 DA reorganization stripped RIARs of their coi1 staff of multi-disciplinary agriculture specialists and placed the institut.Lon's structural identity in a limbo. What is clear is that without their core staff, RIARs or RIARCs would be unable to maximally function as an integrated research station and their facilities would be grossly underutilized. 38. Svstem of Prioritization in Agricultural Research. As a support service to agricultural development, research priorities should be defined by national policies concerning agriculture. Agricultural commodities and supportive factors of national significance should be identified. Critical technology gaps obstructing the full and maximum development of these commodities/factors should be the basis for defining research priorities. The ASSP was originally tied to the Food and Nutrition Plan formulated in the late  - 11 - 1970s. This Plan attempted to bring about food sufficiency to small farmers in order to protect their children from malnutrition. The idea then was to use technology to help make the small farmer produce enough food for home consumption and at the same time earn some income to provide for the family's other basic needs. The project was supposed to set up a broad range of services to support the small farmer in his efforts towards food self-reliance. Food commodities and feed crops were highlighted because of the nutritional objectives. These could have been a good starting point for determining research priorities. 39. The original concerns of ASSP may have been overlooked as the project went through several revisions and restructuring to reflect changing priorities of the new DA management. In the absence of explicit directions form the DA, PCARRD, together with its inter-agency partners which include DA representatives, undertook the task of defining research priorities. This was a case where research priorities were defined by researchers rather than by prospective technology users. 40. With the creation of BAR, an institutional mechanism for correccing the situation has been put in place. Through the efforts of the BAR, a National Agriculture Research and Extension Agenda (NAREA) for the medium-term (1988-92) was formulated. The NAREA sets priorities in agricultural research and extension. Its main objective is to focus research and extension programs to where they are mostly needed in order to maximize the use of scarce resources as well as to answer farmers' problems and concerns. As a strategy, the NAREA ranks R&D priorities by development zone which is a major shift from the traditional manner of determining priorities by sector or by commodity. 41. Through the ASSP, a sound framework for undertaking a holistic research approach geared towards farm systems technology rather than just the usual varietal types of studies was established. To be truly useful, however, technology packages should cover the whole range of production, processing, packaging, marketing and post-harvest management concerns. The RIARs network was structurally designed to achieve this integration and RIARs could be fully activated to enable them to perform this vital function. However, it has to be realized that the DA, which assumed a lead responsibility for TA and TV research work after the creation of BAR, is having some difficulty in fulfilling this mandate as it is unable to attract and retain an adequate cadre of qualified, experienced staff in the absence of an attractive career path for scientific and technical staff. Such a scheme has been proposed but it may take time to clear all the bureaucratic obstacles to its implementation, and still more time before capable researchers are attracted by it. However, there could be other limiting factors even if a career stream for scientific and technical staff could be introduced in BAR. The DA has to decide whether to continue to try to build up its own research team or whether to concentrate its efforts on developing a stronger research management capacity and mobilize the SCUs, NGOs and private sector (very much as the Agricultural Training Institute has done for the delivery of its training programs) to carry out research in the TA and TV fields on its behalf. In this case, BAR would take the lead in updating the NAREA and giving it more specificity, refine research methodologies, commission and monitor research projects, equip and maintain selected research sites (e.g., RIARCs and  -12 - ROS) for use by contracted parties and package findings for use in extension and training. These are areas in which BAR has already demonstrated its capacity. Moreover incremental staff requirements would be relatively small, reducing direct costs and administrative overheads and freeing resources to fund priority projects. 42. Linkages Between Technololv Generation. Verificati*n and Extension. There was a logical web under ASSP that linked technology generation to verification and extension work. Basic research undertaken by scientists in the PCARRD network served as the take-off point of generating useful technology packages. These were then adapted and verified in the RIARs stations through field trials under varying soil and socio-cultural conditions. Adapted and verified technology packages were then transmitted to farmer end-users through PTVT extension services. The flow could also go the other way, i.e., farmers expressed their needs through the PTVT, and these needs could be communicated through the research/technology channels for purposes of incorporating into a regional or national research agenda. Researchers could then respond by developing appropriate technology packages which were filtered down to the farmer end-user through the RTARs and PTVTs. 43. The ASSP experience, however, did not provide convincing evidence of this linkage. The mechanisms for transmitting technologies generated to RIARs for verification and adaptation were weak. What could probably pass as a linking mechanism was the annual regional reviews conducted by PCARRD to inform the RIARs and DA staff of the status of technology generation work. In 1986, PCARRD also produced a list of technologies recommended for verification by the DA and RIARs. However, there is no definitive evidence to show that technologies generated and recommended by PCARRD for verification were the same ones that RIARs adapted for verification trials and passed on to the PTVTs for extension to farmers. What seemed to be evident was that PCARRD developed its own priorities for TG and each RIARs also went through its own priority-setting process for determining the TA/TV work to be pursued. 44. As regards the link between TV/TA and extension, it could be surmised that since the PTVTs were attached to the RIARs, the mechanisms for such linkages were in place. It was noted, however, that PTVTs seemed to be operating on an ad-hoc arrangement involving part time seconded personnel. The continuity of such an arrangement after ASSP support for honoraria and maintenance and operating expenditures was phased out was questionable and these doubts were later confirmed. 45. Also, it was observed that despite their attendance i- a number of short-term courses, the PTVT8 seemed poorly trained for the integrated research cum extension role in which they were cast. The fact that those PTVTs, being part-time, were probably overloaded with other work, explained their inability to master and internalize their new role a8 integrated workers. Problems of mobility also hampered extension effectiveness since the motorcycle loan arrangements proved to be beyon4 the affordability level of many PTVTs.  - 13 - nweA It PROJECT IMPLE1ENTATION Plan Achlevmerts Agriouilural Resroh Teohnoloav Gaenration rTGl. Funds to provide PCARRD- A number of good reoarch program were oarred out approved reearh for food and feed crops, mail frm ystems but coverage of to targetd crops wa e than Inclusive of backyard livestok, expoted. This oomponent ceased In 198 when BAR attempted to tako oontrol of the funds but ran Into prooedural constraints TJchnoloav Verifioation 1V. Funds to provide for tesding Numerous rearch trials were orried out but impat not technology paokages on-stion and onrrfm through DA's ARO apparent and activitles have virtuly cased sinoe 1968 (now Bl. due to lack of funding and roesignment of staf back to their pr-project acvities. Estbishment RiMS vstdem. Upgrade and operate exing DA 12 Regional ations ware constructed, and 72 provinocI resroh statlons to fulsoae Regional Integraed Agriouitural stions were upgraded. Equipment and vehleWs were Resrch Stadions (AR) with sb and utility development, also provided. procurement of buildings, mchinery, equipment, supplies, eto. Insitut for Plant Breedina IIPBi. Experimenta farm and Now roads and bridges made previously inaooessible laboratory development with bulidings, greenhouses, roads, lands available for reserch work. Support was also equipment, tc. provided to IPB's seed program which has been successful. Small Farrn Sstems Edablishment of new Farming System and The Institut s well established and has done good work Soil Resource Institu (FSSRI with support for xpoeimenta in developing a methodology for farming sytems supplies, lal;atory and field sttion equlpment, and Incrementa research whloh Is colely linked to farmer. Close operating osbt. collaboration was edablished with the RIARS, but In iater years there were serious fnding constraints for the RIAR. Agricultural Extension Pilote were carried out but there was not much follow Introduotion of method of exension oountywide on tho basis of through because of lak of Interest In the DA. a model In Region 3 and In pilot provinoes. Completion of DA radlo oommunication network. All equipment procurement and indsalation almost completed, although now outdated. Preparfilor/mutpiioation of visual aid and publications. An Audiovieual Building was oompleted and extension training material produoed. M nt aulatorv Sevies Commodilv Anais. Procurement of laboratory, equipment, Building completed and oocupled, most equipment hiring staff and provbion of Incremental operating costs. procured. Central Commodity Analysis Laboratory oompleted. Piant Ceitification. Evaluation and regitation of plant materials, Thre buildings in Regions 4,7 and 11 completed (P 2.5 oeablishment of foundation groves, regitrtion of nureryman. million) Procurement of equipment Renovaton of offie and screen hous, procurement of completed. Citrus program completed. equipment, incremental operating costs. Rubber and cocoa programs In Findanao. Plant Quarantin. Provide infrastructure and Completed 10 facilities. Equpoment equipment in 12 major ports and a post-entry procured. Post-entry screen houses have facility near Manila. been completed in Los BDeoe  - 14 - Pla Achievements Livestock ReulatcTv Servlices Food Anale. Construction of 7 regional labs, Program revised and 6 regional and I equipment for the central lab and 11 regional Central laboratories were renovated. labs, additional staff and technical assistance. Equipment was procured and staff were trained. Consultancy completed. Livestock OuarantIne. Completion of Alabang Facility completed but delayed and under facility-waste treatment plant access roads, utilization. Alabang facilities need to be fencing. relocated. Livegtock Field Services. Livestock dispersal Component not implemented under the facilities, trucks and equipment. Project. Livestock Diease Dalsnosis. Upgrading and Completed Central lab (P 2.4 million) and equipping of Central Laboratory at Dili an and rehabilitated 11 regional labs (P 1 *33 establishing and equipping 7 regional labs, million). Equipment procured. Vaccine Production. Modification to existing Facilities completed . equipment procured, facilities, procurement of equipment, technical consultancy completed. Production improved assistance. considerably but long term viability constrained by public sector ownership. Vaccine Ouallty Control. Renovation of existing Construction and renovations completed. anlmal housing at DIliman and construction, Equipment procured. ALqbang facilities equipping animal breeding facility at Alabang. have to be relocated. Soils Laboratory, Strengthening New building constructed under Japanese Aid. Agricultural PlanAlnn Project Preparation Service. Continued support Support provided after DA reorganization, (incremental salaries, technical assistance, for project preparation under the Assistant incremental operating costs) for the Agricultural Secretary for Foreign-Assisted Project Project Preparation Unit. Office (PAPO). Data "Vol nt. Support for the Bureau of 10 Regional data collection and delivery Agricultural Econmics (special studies, data systems operationalized; an MIS was processing, equipment and incremental operating developed. Equipment and 152 vehicles were costs). provided. Lational Nutrition Survey foflow up and support Second and third national surveys were to nutrition planning. funded. Pilot programs were implemented to test new approaches to addressing nutrition problems. Staff were trained and vehicles and equipment provided.  - 15 - Plan Achievements Proiect Manatement Establishment and maintenance of Project Project Management Office was effectively Management Office with accounting, construction, established. Project Director changed in procurement, monitoring and training units. February 1986 and August 1988. Procurement Support for Food and Nutrition and Agrobusiness and construction handled slowly, mainly due studies and pilot schemes. to late budget releases and Insufficient qualified staff. Establish 442 incremental staff positions. All positions were contractual and were co- terminal with the project. Few were given permanency. Staff training - Overseas 26 PhD Staff trainingt Overseas 27 PhD (and 1 tert'mated) 45 MSc 32 Mac /a 239 nondegree 115 nondegree La Local 60 usc Local 60 MSe 708 nondegree 125 nondegree La New Comnonents Tribal agriculture. Four regions in Luzon and Implemented as envisaged. Farmer were whole lindanao. Training APTq and tribal leaders trained and seed and seedlings were In micro-watershed management, sloping distributed and other assistance provided. agricultural land technologies, etc. Free distribution of tree crop seedlings. Assistance in land tenure problems. Rubber. Training Mindanao APTS In basic Staff and farzers were tralned, trials and production and processing technologies. demonstrations were conducted. Establishment of budwood nurseries and demonstration plots. Ramis. Research program and procurement of Research and development studies were decorticators. carried out. Sugar. Research program and procurement of Research on improved yield conducted; sugar equipment. technicians trained; equipment procured. Crop watch. Establishing and testing methodology Pllot system wa etplemented In Region 2. for more accurate projections of regional food Workshops were conducted and computers supplies In pilot areas (Region 2). procured. Post harvest Research and Develoament Extension materials were produced and launching program for the Corn Sheller were conducted. La Other funding was availble.  - 16 - Annex 2: BANK LOAN DI?SURSEMENTS (In US$ thousands) Original Loan Category Agreement Revised /a Revised /b Final /