CLUSA and Washington State University (WSU) received OFDA funding to implement a small-scale irrigation program in the Southern Province of Zambia over the 2003 dry season. The overall goal of the program was to improve short and long-term food security and nutrition amongst vulnerable households in the target areas. This program became known as the Food Security Program (FSP). The original program was scheduled for May 2003 through March 2004 and a three month no-cost extension was given through June of that year.

CLUSA had previous experience in agricultural development and familiarity with the project area. It partnered with a...

The following project objectives, expected results and outputs are based upon a late 2004 final report submitted to USAID by CLUSA/WSU. The objective of the FSP was to increase adoption of small-scale irrigation practices by food insecure households in select areas of the Southern Province of Zambia. This objective was to be achieved by:

supporting 300 households grouped in irrigation clubs of 10-15 members each, to produce irrigated maize and vegetables on 45 ha (0.15 ha/household) of land during the 2003 dry-season.

establishing a revolving fund for each irrigation club for pump maintenance or future investments.

Following a revolving fund...

The following findings and lessons learned are derived from stakeholder interviews in Zambia in September, 2007 and the 2004 CLUSA/WSU/TLC final report to USAID.

Community and participant selection for this project did not always assess availability of adequate water supplies to support agricultural activities. Therefore some families and communities could not take full advantage of the technologies they received from the program. Other participants lacked crucial resources such as fencing to protect crops—the installation of which delayed production activities.

No mention was made in project documentation of gender or particularly targeting women as recipients and beneficiaries of the technology...

Declaration of a national food emergency in Zambia in October 2005 prompted release of $1 million and from OFDA. USAID/OFDA’s response to the food crisis was devoted to on-going development activities under the C-SAFE umbrella, and money went toward activities that fit within on-going C-SAFE initiatives. Given the C-SAFE consortium’s capacity, resources, partner network, infrastructure and existing programs, they were well placed to devote these resources to existing programs.

In the Final Report to USAID/OFDA submitted after 31 August, 2006 (CARE 2006), CARE (as lead partner in the C-SAFE consortium) identified two objectives toward which OFDA monies were devoted: 1)...

Implementation of the 2005/2006 OFDA-funded treadle pump project was bolted onto ongoing water management and nutrition assessment activities in the area, under the direction of CARE. It had previously assessed local water sources for suitability for irrigated agriculture including the type of source and the quantity and duration of water availability. This assessment fed into beneficiary identification as well as which types of technologies (treadle pumps and drip kits) are most appropriate under which settings.

The following findings and lessons learned are derived from stakeholder interviews in Zambia in September, 2007 and the 2006 CARE report to USAID.

Needing coordination...

The following conclusions and associated recommendations summarize the major findings of this research.

The USAID Mission’s involvement with C-SAFE prior to the 2005/6 food emergency facilitated the linkages and pathway for OFDA’s contribution to the project. Mission staff members were aware of and involved in on-going consortium activities and were able to help direct OFDA funds to those well-placed for implementation and dispersal. Due to this, OFDA funds were linked to on-going activities designed to move populations toward recovery once their immediate food needs had been met.

The nature of contracting and dispersement procedures compounded delays in implementation caused by...

Factors for success

1. Bolt relief efforts onto on-going activities of trusted partners; use existing networks, expertise and reach to help get the right technology to the right people at the right time.

2. Collaboration with on-going activities will help meet local preconditions for success and sustainability such as adequate natural and human resource availability.

3. Up-to-date intelligence on best practices and best available technologies for vulnerable populations and environments. Invest in technologies that are most likely to work with an eye toward longer term—recovery—activities when immediate needs have been met.

4. Targeting: be as specific as possible about which needs of...