1. Discussion on The Bangladesh Country Investment Plan: A Roadmap toward investment in Agriculture, Food Security and Nutrition (2010-2015) by The Food Policy Monitoring Unit Team 12 February 2015

2. Table of Content 0. CIP and FPMU role 1. Institutional capacity and give motivation to officers in partners ministries 2. Progress, issues, bottleneck, and successful strategies 3. Capacity development within financing, human resources, knowledge, processes needed to deliver the discussed products and services 4. Methodology of setting investment portfolio framework 5. CIP related products and services

3. The Bangladesh Country Investment Plan: A Roadmap toward investment in Agriculture, Food Security and Nutrition (2010-2015) - The role of FPMU 0.

4. Objectives: Plan and invest resources in a coordinated way Increase convergence of GoB and DPs funding Mobilize additional resources from GoB and DPs Monitor and evaluate investment, prioritization and financing gap Aligned with policy/institutional framework, CIP is a strategic and coherent set of 12 priority investment programs to improve food security and nutrition in an integrated way, through a participatory consultation process CIP

6. Institutional setting for monitoring CIP - FPMU role Food Planning Monitoring Committee (FPMC) National Committee (NC) Food Policy Working Group (FPWG) Thematic Teams (TTs, 4) Ensures high level guidance & links with the Cabinet level, FPMC, including representatives from Civil Society & DPs Coordinates the monitoring process through the TTs, involving all relevant GoB Agencies Provides strategic orientation on food security; establishes high level commitment to inter-sectoral collaboration among 8 Ministries Provides support to FPMC, NC, FPWG & TTs Carry out the monitoring process

7. What type of Institutional capacity needed to develop and implement a CIP? FS-CIP team’s Lessons learnt on how to motivate staff and other ministries/agencies (e.g. TT members) to actively engage them in the CIP preparation/ implementation/ monitoring practices? 1.

8. Institutional capacity to develop/implement CIP  Capacity strengthening to formulate food policies GoB Implementation/coordination monitoring functions GoB Design, management and operation of CIP Civil society contribution to the CIP development  Data management  Integrate the work on CIP and its outputs in the business-as-usual tasks

9. FPMU lessons learnt in motivating TT members to actively engage them in CIP STRENGHTSWEAKNESSES Professional linkages within TT members developed TT mechanism already tested and functioning Actively contribution of GoB partners in organizing the‘Food Security Investment Forum’and in preparing technical papers on six thematic areas Initial TT’s capacity to collect data lower than expected Alignment with GoB data availability Changes in non-FPMU TT members TT members often time constrained OPPORTUNITIESTHREATS Improved linkages with TT members Established TT mechanism improved ownership by TT members Involvement of key TT members to broaden participation among others Newly non-FPMU TT members not fully briefed on Monitoring Reports

10. Capacities in terms of financing, human resources, knowledge, processes, etc. needed to deliver the above products and services 2.

11. GoalOutcomeOutputInput Objective Purpose Result Activity Results based framework ActivitiesResults Purpose Objective Activities (e.g. Projects) to reach Results (e.g. Output) for a certain Purpose (e.g. Outcome) & contribute to an overall Objective (e.g. Goal) Log-frame CIP Theory Practice PLANNING MONITORING Monitoring… Indicators

12. CIP Database Data collection Output tables Primary Database Data collection Format Screening, find missing data, logical check Compile and merge with previous data Collection from TT Validation, Logical checking Final validation with ADP book CIP Financial Data: Process Update CollectionProcessingAnalysis Some key words: Budget, financed budget, financing gap, delivery rate, cumulative delivery, ADP vs non-ADP projects, DP vs. GoB financial reporting, etc.

13. Result Indicators: Goal(s) – Structure MR 2014 Table 2: NFP goals & SFYP indicators food security ( MR 2014 ) 2007/08 PoA baseline 2009/10 CIP/SFYP baseline 2011/122012/13 Target 2013 Target 2015 Source NFP & CIP Goal Undernourishment (3-year average) 15.4%15.5% 15.7% (R) 16.3%na 17% (MDG -1) FAO SOFI Underweight (0 to 59 months) 41.0% BDHS na 36.4% BDHS 35.1% UESD na 33% (MDG -1) BDHS & UESD Stunting (0 to 59 months) 43.2% BDHS na 41.3% BDHS 38.7% UESD na38% BDHS & UESD Sixth Five Year Plan Agri GDP growth rate (constant prices) 3.00%5.22%2.99%2.17%4.4%4.3% BBS Yearbook of Agri Stat GoB spending on social protection (% of GDP) na2.42%2.40%2.23%2.18%3.0% Finance Division, MoF Poverty headcount index (CBN upper poverty line) 40.1% (2005) 31.5% (2010) na 29% (MDG-1) BBS, HIES Report Change in Rice wages (3y moving average) -8.11%5.71%4.27%5.84%5.07% ≥ real GDP /cap growth + 0.5 BBS Statistical Yearbook (wages) & DAM (prices) What…Where… from…

14. Problems, issues and bottlenecks encountered in the CIP process and successful strategies utilised 3.

15. Problems, issues and bottlenecks encountered in the CIP process and successful strategies utilised STRENGHTSWEAKNESSES Consultation process involving 13 ministries, academia, farmers’ organizations, NGOs and DPs Regular inter-ministerial consultations improved ownership and responsibility Consolidated previous experience and know-how Time constrained to work on CIP and CIP related products/activities Staff rotation and selection Taking responsibility/risks Involvement of Private sector/civil society OPPORTUNITIESTHREATS Involvement of other GoB partners create an institutional memory Involvement ‘champions’ to broaden participation among others Potential for scope economies between CIP related activities and business as usual (e.g. in data collection/management) Staff rotations Sustainability issues

16. Methodology of setting investment portfolio framework 4.

17. Methodology of setting investment portfolio framework  Inter-Ministerial and Multi-sectoral Coordination Mechanism  6 background papers prepared for the CIP  Within the 3 NFP objectives, 12 Investment programs derived from the 26 area of action in NFP PoA, by aggregating and prioritizing those requiring investment  High level Bangladesh Investment Forum organized to present the draft CIP CIP 2010

18. Methodology of setting investment portfolio framework  CIP guiding principles CIP as a living document (GoB) Enhanced partnership (private sector/NGOs) Scaling up nutrition and access (GoB/DPs) Institutional and technical Innovation in implementing the CIP (Private sector/NGOs/DPs)  Policy Issues (IFPRI) Access to and tenure of Water Resources Lack of access to credit and other financial resources Integrating private sector involvement  Key Broad programmatic issues Stable good quality of agricultural inputs Farmers’ organizations Water resource management and irrigation Nutrition Extension services Revision of CIP through a participatory consultation process: 3 outcomes Revision of CIP through a participatory consultation process: 3 outcomes REVISED CIP 2011

19. What are the products and services (e.g., preparation of main CIP document, monitoring reports, data sharing agreements with other agencies, coordination services, etc.) that MoEf/SEFOCS needs to consider 5.

20.  CIP (2011-15)  CIP background papers  Monitoring Reports (2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 –ongoing)  Roadmap for producing the MR (2013, 2014, 2015)  CIP financial database (access)  Data sharing with other initiatives, e.g. SUN, to provide nutrition specific/sensitive financial data CIP related products and services

21. THANK YOU !