Document: EB 2021/132/R.

3
Agenda: 4(a)(i)
Date: 29 March 2021
E
Distribution: Public
Original: English

Regular Grants Policy

Note to Executive Board representatives

Focal points:
Technical questions: Dispatch of documentation:
Dominik Ziller Deirdre Mc Grenra
Vice-President of IFAD Chief
Tel.: +39 06 5459 2518 Institutional Governance and
e-mail: [Link]@[Link] Member Relations
Tel.: +39 06 5459 2374
Ashwani K. Muthoo e-mail: gb@[Link]
Director
Quality Assurance Group
Tel.: +39 06 5459 2053
e-mail: [Link]@[Link]

Valeria Smarrini
Quality Assurance Specialist
Tel.: +39 06 5459 2238
e-mail: [Link]@[Link]

Executive Board — 132nd Session

Rome, 19-21 April 2021

For: Approval
 EB 2021/132/R.3

Contents
Abbreviations and acronyms ii
I. Introduction 1
II. Relevance of regular grants and lessons learned 1
III. Rationale for a new policy 3
IV. The Regular Grants Policy 5
A. Overall goal and objectives 5
B. Theory of change 6
C. Key principles 6
D. Risk management 9
V. Implementation of the policy 10

Annexes
I. Summary of findings, lessons learned and examples of successful grant-funded
initiatives
II. Main changes introduced by the new policy
III. Theory of change
IV. Scorecard for the assessment of the strategic relevance of grant-funded proposals
V. Indicative results framework

i
 EB 2021/132/R.3

Abbreviations and acronyms

4Ps public-private-producer partnerships
CLE corporate-level evaluation
COSOP country strategic opportunities programme
CSN country strategy note
DELIVER Driving Delivery of Results in the Agriculture Sector
DSF Debt Sustainability Framework
FOs farmers’ organizations
HHM household methodology
IFAD12 Twelfth Replenishment of IFAD’s Resources
IOE Independent Office of Evaluation of IFAD
LIC low-income country
LMIC lower-middle-income country
M&E monitoring and evaluation
MOPAN Multilateral Organisation Performance Assessment Network
NUS neglected and underutilized species
PBAS performance-based allocation system
PoLG programme of loans and grants
SDG Sustainable Development Goal
SFOAP Support to Farmers’ Organizations in Africa Programme
SO strategic objective
SSTC South-South and Triangular Cooperation

ii
 EB 2021/132/R.3

Recommendation for approval

The Executive Board is invited to approve the Regular Grants Policy.

I. Introduction
1. The grants instrument has been at IFAD’s disposal since it was created as part of
the 1976 Agreement Establishing IFAD.1 The Executive Board approved a dedicated
grants policy in 2003 and a series of refinements have been made to the policy and
its operational framework over the years. Specifically, the policy was revised in
20092 and, after a corporate-level evaluation (CLE) carried out in 2014 by the
Independent Office of Evaluation of IFAD (IOE),3 was replaced by a new policy in
2015.4
2. The three successive policies for grant financing (2003, 2009, and 2015) outline a
series of objectives for the regular grants programme. These have evolved over
time to adapt to the changing context of development assistance in general and to
variations in IFAD’s priorities in particular. Innovation and technical approaches
targeted to the rural poor, along with initiatives to strengthen institutions and
smallholder farmers’ organizations (FOs), were confirmed as among the objectives
of IFAD’s grant funding over the years. The 2015 policy supplemented these with
explicit reference to the use of grants to enhance policy engagement and to
generate and disseminate knowledge for development impact.
3. IFAD is evolving towards offering a broader range of products to better respond to
the different contexts in which it operates and the diverse needs of its developing
Member States. Activities funded through regular grants are an integral component
of IFAD’s enhanced business model, complementing and stimulating other
development instruments and playing a critical role in furthering the Fund’s
mandate. Grant-funded interventions have a number of characteristics that make
them distinct from all the other instruments IFAD has at its disposal. However, as
IFAD’s business model evolves, the need for a revised grants policy responding to a
changing environment has become clear, particularly in view of the COVID-19
situation.
4. This document presents IFAD’s new Regular Grants Policy.5 It supersedes the 2015
grants policy and will contribute to ensuring the overall sustainability of the regular
grants programme, as well as positioning a decentralized IFAD as a partner of
choice in efforts to bring about rural transformation.

II. Relevance of regular grants and lessons learned

5. Performance of regular grants. An overview of the performance and results of
IFAD activities funded by regular grants may be found in various evaluations and
reviews carried out during the period 2014–2019. Besides the 2014 CLE, these
include the 2013 CLE of IFAD’s Institutional Efficiency and Efficiency of IFAD-
funded Operations,6 the 2019 assessment of the Multilateral Organisation

1
[Link]
2
EB 2009/98/R.9/Rev.1.
3
IOE. IFAD Policy for Grant Financing – Corporate-level evaluation, Rome: IFAD (2014).
4
EB 2015/114/R.2/Rev.1.
5
It is important to highlight that, while both operate on grant terms, regular grants are fundamentally different from the
grants provided by IFAD to Member States under the Debt Sustainability Framework (DSF) initiative. DSF grants
provide grant support to highly indebted countries that are not able to access IFAD lending resources, and support the
implementation of traditional investment projects that would normally be financed through loans. Regular grants operate
in a different space to the core investment activities funded by IFAD. They are not used as a substitute for DSF,
supplementary funds, regular loan resources, non-sovereign operations, reimbursable technical assistance or any other
instrument.
6
[Link]

1
 EB 2021/132/R.3

Performance Assessment Network (MOPAN),7 the 2019 Annual Report on Results

and Impact of IFAD Operations8 and Report on IFAD’s Development Effectiveness,9
and the 2020 CLE on IFAD’s Support to Innovations for Inclusive and Sustainable
Smallholder Agriculture,10as well as a number of dedicated evaluations and reviews
of individual grant-funded activities.
6. The most recent of these, the 2020 CLE, concludes that regular grants have played
a key role in the identification of relevant innovations for smallholder agriculture,
and that they offer a more flexible way of addressing inclusiveness and IFAD’s
mainstreaming priorities. The evaluation also found that all the grant-funded
innovations it reviewed were relevant or very relevant.
7. Unique characteristics. Available evidence points to regular grants having some
specific and unique characteristics:
(i) They provide indispensable support to strengthen the results of
IFAD’s country programme delivery through the loan programme,
including by boosting the capacity of governments and other institutions at
country level.
(ii) They are the only instrument that allows IFAD to have an increased
risk appetite to test and pilot innovative approaches. Such initiatives
can then be scaled up through the loan programme, or other IFAD
instruments, or by other partners.

(iii) They help IFAD to establish or strengthen partnerships beyond

government agencies and leverage cofinancing opportunities. As grant
implementing agencies are selected on the basis of outreach and capacity,
IFAD can leverage expertise and opportunities (including cofinancing) not
normally found in government agencies alone.
(iv) They enable IFAD to provide a rapid response, particularly during crises,
and to engage in situations beyond the availability and remit of the Fund’s
performance-based allocation system (PBAS) resources. IFAD tailors its
support to avoid overlap with the humanitarian efforts of its partners. It adds
value by addressing the relief-to-development process in terms of “building
back better”.
(v) They can promote non-lending activities (in particular policy
engagement) identified through country strategies, allowing for a
seamless integration of such activities in the broader country-level
programme approach.
(vi) They can support IFAD’s participation in relevant global and regional
initiatives, platforms and networks, and advocate for the needs of poor
rural people while contributing to the formulation of global policies,
knowledge, standards and other related aspects.
(vii) Through regular grants IFAD can tackle rural development beyond
the country level, from a regional and global perspective, as they are
the only tool for funding non-lending activities such as policy, South-South
and Triangular Cooperation (SSTC) and knowledge-based initiatives beyond
country level. Grants can also be used to facilitate the implementation and
maximize the impact of other regional initiatives.
8. Over the years, regular grants have achieved tangible results in the above areas.
Grants have provided specific opportunities for policy dialogue and strategic

7
MOPAN 2017-2018 Assessments – International Fund for Agricultural Development, Paris: MOPAN.(2019).
8
EB 2019/127/R.14.
9
EB 2019/127/R.15.
10
EC 2020/110/W.P.5.

2
 EB 2021/132/R.3

positioning on critical themes at the national, regional and global levels;

contributed to important knowledge products and related communities of practice;
funded agriculture research targeting the poor for better food security; helped pilot
innovations that have been scaled up through loan-funded operations; and
supported capacity-building, e.g. by helping improve monitoring and evaluation
(M&E) in IFAD-funded investment projects. Some success stories are presented in
further detail in annex I and in boxes 1, 2 and 3.
Box 1
Results and lessons in promoting policies for inclusive and sustainable rural transformation

The specialized commission for family farming is a grant-funded policy dialogue platform for family farming in
South America. It was originally implemented in Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay and then extended to
most of the region. It contributed to a shared definition of the concept of family farming and created national
registries as the basis for the development of targeted policies. Recommendations issued by the platform were
adopted by several Common Market of the South (MERCOSUR) members and associate countries as the basis
for promoting and strengthening family farmers and their production systems.

9. Lessons learned. A number of important lessons have emerged from available

evaluations and reviews, suggesting that further steps could be taken to ensure
greater value for money from regular grants and to fully capitalize on their
potential to enhance development impact:
 Strategic prioritization could benefit from more focused objectives.
The regular grants programme followed broad thematic areas in the past.
This made it possible to include a wide range of topics and activities, but
undermined focus and strategic prioritization efforts.
 Enhanced integration with country programmes could increase
impact. This has been flagged in particular by IOE, which noted that more
systematic integration would significantly enhance opportunities to leverage
the grants programme for greater results and impact on the ground.
 The knowledge generated could be leveraged more consistently. The
knowledge generated and disseminated by grant-funded activities has often
remained untapped. This may have resulted in the design and approval of
grants that had overlapping objectives and failed to capitalize on available
knowledge and results.
 M&E, reporting and learning could be consolidated at the corporate
level. Though individual grant-funded projects generally have adequate
provisions for M&E and supervision, less attention has been paid to
consolidated reporting and learning at the programme level.
 Further streamlining of design and approval procedures might foster
even swifter implementation. Although regular grants are already faster
to design, approve and implement than investment projects, the related
internal procedures could be further simplified to ensure flexibility and
responsiveness to evolving priorities.

III. Rationale for a new policy

10. While the grants programme continues to be a highly relevant and strategic
instrument with unique scope, the lessons learned and the current evolution of
IFAD’s business and operating models and financial architecture call for the
adoption of a new policy to govern this programme. A new policy is also needed to
provide a framework for the fundamental changes that are proposed to the
programme, including in resource allocation mechanisms, as further detailed below.
Annex II also provides an overview of the main changes introduced under this
policy.

3
 EB 2021/132/R.3

11. It is important that the new policy be adopted in good time in order to ensure
alignment with the programmes being established in the transition towards the
Twelfth Replenishment of IFAD’s Resources (IFAD12) and beyond.
12. The new policy11 ensures that the regular grants programme reflects IFAD’s vision
for the future and commitment to expand and deepen its impact by 2030. The
rationale for proposing a new policy at this stage rests on the following pillars:
 Attaining an affordable programme and allocating resources where
they are most needed. The overall allocation to regular grants will be
adjusted in support of IFAD’s financial sustainability. The sustainable
replenishment baseline concept will be used to determine the maximum level
of grant resources allocated in any replenishment cycle, linked to the level of
core replenishment contributions. The notion of a fixed percentage allocation
is discontinued and, within each replenishment scenario, the allocation to
regular grants will be commensurate with the broad level of resources
available on grant terms (DSF and regular grants). This will ensure that
funding regular grants does not hinder the availability of DSF financing for
countries eligible for debt sustainability support. Moreover, the notion of sub-
allocations for country-specific and global/regional grants is also discontinued
and regular grant resources are delinked from PBAS allocations. This will
allow IFAD to direct grant resources towards activities with the greatest
potential for impact (i.e. activities aimed at enhancing the broader impact of
IFAD’s operations).
 Deeper integration into IFAD’s business model. The introduction of new
instruments and initiatives such as the Rural Resilience Programme and non-
sovereign operations (NSOs) with the private sector will allow IFAD to
establish strong synergies between these programmes and regular grants.
Country strategic opportunities programmes (COSOPs) and country strategy
notes (CSNs) will provide the overarching framework for interventions funded
by regular grants at the country level, and will also clarify how different
instruments, including regular grants, will interact to achieve common long-
term objectives. Innovations will be pursued in a broad range of topics,
including not only new technologies but also institutional and knowledge
approaches. Internal procedures will be put in place to ensure
complementarity and avoid duplication.
 Capitalizing on lessons learned. The revision of the policy to
institutionalize the important changes highlighted above also provides a
valuable opportunity to address lessons learned through previous evaluations
and assessments. Increased focus will be placed on the areas in which grants
have shown stronger relevance, better results and greater leverage (e.g.
capacity-building of in-country stakeholders for improved portfolio delivery).
At the same time, areas requiring further attention will be tackled and robust
mechanisms will be introduced to manage and share knowledge and make
lessons learned accessible, thus maximizing effectiveness.

11
This policy solely applies to IFAD-funded grant resources that are not part of the DSF initiative. Nor does the policy
cover grants provided through the enhanced Adaptation for Smallholder Agriculture Programme (ASAP+) and the
Private Sector Financing Programme, with which regular grants will establish mutually reinforcing synergies.
Supplementary contributions provided by donors for grants beyond the regular programme of loans and grants (PoLG)
are also excluded from this policy, as their objectives, use and administration are defined through specific terms agreed
with the respective donors.

4
 EB 2021/132/R.3

Box 2
Results and lessons in promoting partnerships
Implemented between 2013 and 2018, the Support to Farmers’ Organizations in Africa Programme (SFOAP) is a
successful example of partnership and resource mobilization through grant-funded resources. An IFAD-funded
grant of EUR 1.9 million resulted in a total investment of almost EUR 20 million in support of stronger FOs,
including through access to economic services and increased farmers’ participation in policymaking at the
national and subregional level. Among the chief results achieved at farm level, SFOAP resulted in increased
productivity and higher incomes and revenues.
At the end of the implementation period, FOs supported by SFOAP were able to mobilize EUR 12 million from
public sources and over EUR 4 million through partnership agreements or contract sales.

IV. The Regular Grants Policy

A. Overall goal and objectives
13. The overall goal of the regular grants programme is to contribute to further IFAD’s
mandate of sustainable and inclusive rural transformation, and help achieve the
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The programme will have two mutually
reinforcing strategic objectives (SOs), outlined below in order of priority and
expected resource allocations. SO1 will receive a significantly larger amount of
regular grant funding in any replenishment period.
(i) SO1: Leverage better impact on the ground for IFAD’s programme of work,
including through improvement of in-country capacity for greater
sustainability of benefits; and
(ii) SO2: Foster a more conducive policy and investment environment for
smallholder agriculture and rural development, including at the regional and
global level.
14. The SOs will be achieved through the following pathways, with which both SOs will
be equally aligned:
 Improving the policy and investment environment. At the country level,
this will include analytical work supporting non-lending activities, including
those identified in country strategies, and alignment with the United Nations
Sustainable Development Cooperation Framework and the work of United
Nations Country Teams. At the regional and global level, this pathway will
include support to higher-level policies for inclusive and sustainable rural and
food systems transformation, fostering an enabling environment for investing
in smallholder agriculture.
 Leveraging strategic and operational partners’ expertise and
resources to deepen the impact of IFAD’s programme of work.
Partnerships supported by regular grants will seek to empower the most
vulnerable while strengthening local food supply systems/chains and local
economies to maximize sustainable results. Through this pathway, regular
grants will also build the capacities of institutions and organizations in
developing countries to improve ownership, efficiency and sustainability of
IFAD-funded operations. IFAD will also leverage financial resources from
relevant partners through regular grants under this pathway. Operational
partnerships with development organizations that have a comparative
advantage in emergency response can be established in situations of crisis or
fragility, when rapid response is required. Complementing the efforts of
partners such as the Rome-based agencies with IFAD’s own expertise with
smallholder farmers can enhance the impact of post-emergency and longer-
term development interventions.
 Improving the availability and uptake of relevant knowledge and
innovation for enhanced impact and sustainability. Relevant knowledge
will include innovative pro-poor research and technology, and will focus in
particular on testing, piloting and adapting innovations targeting the poor,

5
 EB 2021/132/R.3

including for future scaling up by the concerned governments, through the

IFAD programme of loans and grants (PoLG) or using resources from IFAD’s
development partners.
15. The above priority areas will focus on strengthening PoLG delivery and results, in
particular through IFAD country programmes. While not all grants will be expected
to address all the above priorities, they are interrelated, interdependent and
mutually reinforcing. Moreover, in the event that proposals potentially qualifying
for funding under one or both SOs exceed the amount of resources available, a
final decision on their submission for approval will be made by ranking and
prioritizing all eligible proposals. Provisions to prioritize the allocation of resources
within the programme are outlined in section C below.
Box 3
Results and lessons in promoting knowledge and innovation
The grant to Farm Radio International for the Upscaling Technologies in Agriculture through Knowledge Extension
project in the United Republic of Tanzania is a successful example of how innovation and knowledge can be
leveraged by grants to strengthen linkages between research, extension services and farmers through the power of
ICT.
With this grant, two ICT-based innovations were developed: Uliza Answers, and the Knowledge Plus platform.
Uliza Answers is an innovative mechanism, which enables the pooling of real-time feedback and insights from
farmers using a blend of smart and traditional technologies. The Knowledge Plus platform is a digital tool that
enables virtual extension services to reach champion farmers via web and mobile applications. These two
innovations have already reached hundreds of thousands of smallholder farmers in the United Republic of
Tanzania, with promising prospects for future replication.

B. Theory of change
16. The regular grant programme’s theory of change is informed by the lessons
learned from IFAD grants implemented over the years, as well as by the current
changes in IFAD’s strategic direction. Proposals will include catalytic interventions
with leveraging potential to unlock broader opportunities for IFAD’s engagement
through the PoLG and other programmes and instruments. This, in turn, will result
in mutually reinforcing synergies between the menu of lending and non-lending
instruments at IFAD’s disposal. It will lead to stronger engagement beyond the
country level, help establish partnerships with potential for cofinancing, and
improve the overall quality of IFAD policies and operations.
17. This theory of change is illustrated in annex III, which shows how the catalytic
effect of grant-funded interventions will unlock opportunities to support IFAD in the
delivery of its broader mandate. While the theory of change refers to the high-level
vision and impact of the broader programme, individual initiatives are also
expected to describe how they align with the principles of this policy.

C. Key principles
18. Sustainable allocation of resources to the programme. The application of a
fixed percentage allocation for regular grants will be discontinued12 in favour of a
predetermined figure agreed as part of replenishment consultations, in order to
ensure that the amount of IFAD resources provided in the form of grants does not
exceed IFAD’s financial sustainability as derived from replenishment outcomes.13
The estimated level of resources available in each replenishment period will be
calculated at the beginning of each three-year cycle based on the commitments
made by Members at the start of each replenishment and potentially adjusted
annually in line with the updated resources available for commitment (RAC)
calculation. They will be based on the concept of a sustainable replenishment
baseline.14 Moreover, available resources will be calculated taking into account the

12
Until IFAD11, the allocation of resources for the IFAD grants programme was calculated by applying a fixed
percentage (6.5 per cent) to the overall PoLG figure for a given replenishment period.
13
For the IFAD12 period, an allocation of US$100 million has been agreed (GC 44/L.6/Rev.1).
14
As introduced by the Debt Sustainability Framework Reform (EB 2019/128/R.44).

6
 EB 2021/132/R.3

broader availability of grant-based resources, which include both DSF and regular
grants.
19. Value addition. The programme will focus on interventions where regular grant
financing has a clear added value as compared to other instruments, as well as
activities for which innovative approaches are required. Regular grants will
complement other programmes and initiatives and help pursue opportunities under
the three priorities described earlier (policy, partnership and knowledge), thus
serving to broaden and deepen IFAD’s overall impact. Opportunities and entry
points for complementary, value-adding action will be sought across IFAD’s
instruments, including through the internal review of COSOPs and IFAD-funded
operations. In addition to this, regular grants will not be used to finance any
activity that could be funded through IFAD’s administrative budget.
20. Prioritization of activities to be funded through regular grants. All activities
financed through regular grants will have to demonstrate alignment with the
programme’s SOs and relevant IFAD replenishment commitments and priorities,
and make a concrete contribution towards their achievement. It is expected that,
within any given replenishment cycle, the majority of resources available will be
allocated to activities focused on the achievement of SO1, those that strengthen
IFAD’s results on the ground. A summary of priority replenishment commitments
that could benefit from grant-funded activities will be presented for approval at the
last Executive Board session preceding the start of each replenishment cycle.15 This
will allow the Board and Management to make informed decisions on the
prioritization of activities to be funded through grant resources, once the indicative
financial size of the programme for a given replenishment is determined. Moreover,
individual proposals will not be approved on a first-come-first-served basis but will
be assessed by IFAD’s rigorous, arm’s length quality assurance processes to
determine their suitability for funding.16 A scorecard for the arm’s length
assessment and prioritization of proposals is included as annex IV.
21. Country eligibility. This policy discontinues the practice of allocating a portion of
regular grant resources to individual “green” countries17 as part of their PBAS
allocations and excluding countries eligible for DSF support from country-specific
support through regular grants. Resources under the regular grants programme
are delinked from the PBAS, meaning that no pre-allocations will be made available
to countries or regions on the basis of the existence, size and financing terms of a
lending programme through the PBAS, and no a priori exclusions will be made for
countries that receive resources from IFAD through the DSF framework. In line
with IFAD’s commitment to allocate its core resources to low-income countries
(LICs) and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs), regular grant resources will be
used in upper-middle-income countries only as part of broader initiatives covering
more than one country, and explicitly including LICs and LMICs as part of their
target.
22. Catalytic approach and linkages to national and regional priorities.
Activities funded by the programme will mutually reinforce other IFAD development
instruments and the catalytic approach of grant-funded projects will be integrated
into IFAD’s enhanced business model. Given the inherently limited overall size of
regular grants, and of the individual proposals funded by this programme in
particular, all projects will be catalytic and supportive of other initiatives and
programmes that form part of IFAD’s new business model and strategic direction.
In this sense, grant-funded projects will aim to act as key enablers of IFAD’s

15
E.g. in December 2021 for the IFAD12 period.
16
IFAD’s internal quality assurance function is already deployed to assess all IFAD-funded operations from an arm’s
length perspective and to advise Senior Management on their approval. Given the inherently competitive nature of
funding under the regular grants programme, the role of quality assurance within the programme will also include
prioritization and ranking among competing proposals.
17
Defined as countries that do not receive support, in part or in total, from the DSF initiative.

7
 EB 2021/132/R.3

programmes, policies, strategies and initiatives. In order to foster linkages with

country programme delivery through the loan programme, COSOPs and CSNs are
expected to play a key role in identifying entry points for funding through grants.
23. The catalytic effect of regular grants will be felt not only through the mobilization of
additional financing, but also through the piloting of initiatives for larger-scale
replication or for regional uptake. For example, initiatives funded with regular
grants may, through their flexible and targeted interventions, enhance the offer of
tailored non-lending support to situations of crisis, transition18 or fragility. Regular
grants could also support IFAD’s engagement in small island developing states and
regional activities, including support to regional policy dialogue, which is essential
to the success of IFAD’s regional lending operations.19
24. Moreover, the programme will initiate or strengthen partnerships, for example
through the IFAD Private Sector Engagement Strategy 2019-2024, and contribute
to the successful implementation of the IFAD Partnership Framework. In pursuing
partnerships, Rome-based agency collaboration will be given particular attention.
Regular grants will also serve to generate and share knowledge resources, thus
contributing to the operationalization of IFAD’s Knowledge Management Strategy.
25. Flexible but rigorous and transparent selection of implementation
partners. Competitive selection will be the norm in selecting grantees, with the
exception of proposals valued at less than US$100,000 in IFAD resources, or in
exceptional circumstances to be defined in the implementing procedures. Potential
grantees include developing Member States, intergovernmental organizations
(including United Nations agencies), civil society organizations, research and
academic institutions, producers’ associations/organizations, and private sector
foundations and companies (in the case of grantees from the private sector, more
stringent cofinancing requirements will apply). Identified implementing agencies
must have been legally constituted in an IFAD Member State.
26. Private sector entities will continue to be eligible to receive regular grants. This will
not result in overlaps with operations implemented under IFAD’s private sector
strategy and NSO framework. These are IFAD’s primary channel for engaging with
the private sector and offer loan, equity-based and other risk mitigation financing
instruments. In the case of regular grants, the selection of recipients will be
informed by the nature of the activities proposed: private companies will be able to
access resources when they are deemed to be the most suitable recipients.
27. Value for money. To strengthen the requirement that project proposals should be
small yet catalytic, the implementing procedures relating to this policy will define a
maximum ceiling for individual grant proposals. A flexible and fast-track process for
the review and approval of grants responding to urgent situations will be defined as
part of the development of implementing procedures to operationalize the policy,
balancing the need for nimbler processes with the need to continue ensuring
rigorous oversight.20 IFAD will also mitigate the risks arising from an excessively
high number of small proposals – e.g. undue transaction costs for the Fund – by
introducing a minimum size or average number of grants per replenishment cycle,
also to be determined as part of the policy’s implementing procedures. It is
expected that the overall envelope for regular grants will be smaller than in the
past (which will prevent a high number of grants being approved under a single
replenishment cycle); however, efforts will be made to ensure that each proposal is
sizeable enough to leverage a range of benefits, including the mobilization of
cofinancing from implementing agencies and other partners.

18
EB 2018/125/R.7/Rev.1.
19
EB 2018/125/R.7/Add.2.
20
Lessons learned from the implementation projects under the RPSF will be considered in the preparation of the
implementing procedures.

8
 EB 2021/132/R.3

28. Approval. The President of IFAD has been delegated by the Executive Board to
approve grant proposals of up to US$500,000 or equivalent, while proposals
exceeding this amount will be subject to approval by the Board itself.21 This
provision will be maintained under the new policy. All proposals awarded to private
sector entities shall be discussed and approved by the Executive Board, regardless
of the grant amount.

D. Risk management
29. The regular grants programme is expected to finance activities that are often
innovative and for which there may only be proof of concept. IFAD recognizes that
this aspect of grant-funded activities is key to the programme’s role as a catalyst
and an assembler of the different instruments at IFAD’s disposal. IFAD is therefore
well aware that it may be exposed to some risks – for which corresponding
mitigation measures are being envisaged. Given the nature of the activities
foreseen, and in line with IFAD’s enterprise risk management framework, the
following types of risks and mitigation measures will be considered:
 Strategic risks. These may occur in the event of insufficient institutional
prioritization and lack of alignment with IFAD’s mission and vision. The main
mitigation strategy will be a strong grants portfolio oversight function,
ensuring strategic prioritization of proposals as a prerequisite to their entry
into pipeline, and timely reporting through a dedicated results framework
(see annex V).
 Operational risks. These result from use of funds for activities that are not
eligible for regular grants financing, that are not aligned with the objectives
agreed by the grantee and that fail to achieve intended results. Such risks
will be mitigated through appropriate screening, due diligence and controls
during implementation to ensure that resources are used appropriately and
that expected results are delivered.
 Fiduciary risks. They relate to the failure to carry out project activities in
accordance with IFAD’s financial regulations and to funding not being used for
their intended purpose, or with scant regard for economy, efficiency and
effectiveness. This risk will be mitigated through application of IFAD’s
financial management and procurement procedures (which will be reassessed
when the implementing procedures for the policy are developed), including
external audit as well as upfront due diligence before grants are awarded.
 Reputational risks. These relate to: (i) inefficient procedures resulting in
prolonged uncertainty over approval of proposals, and (ii) failures of various
kinds involving the recipients of grant-funded activities. Revised
implementing procedures focusing on efficiency in grant reviews and
approvals will be enforced, including for risks associated with subgrantees,
contractors and service providers. Furthermore, due diligence and
appropriate legal protection via the legal agreements signed by the grantees
will be ensured. Enhanced due diligence will continue to be applied as
concerns grantees from the private sector.
 Financial risks relate to financial losses arising from IFAD’s failure to
manage its broader financial resources efficiently and economically, for
example by overfunding grant-based programmes at the expense of overall
financial sustainability. Mitigation of these risks is embedded in the resource
allocation mechanism introduced by this policy. As a fixed percentage of
resources will no longer be allocated to regular grants, financial commitments
made through the programme will never exceed levels compatible with IFAD’s
financial sustainability and will always be commensurate with replenishments.

21
EB 2009/98/R.9/Rev.1.

9
 EB 2021/132/R.3

 Legal risks will be offset by ensuring appropriate legal protection in the

development and negotiation of the legal instruments that will govern
initiatives funded through regular grants.
30. Besides these higher-level categories of risk applying to the regular grants
instrument, risks will be identified and assessed at the level of individual proposals
and appropriate mitigation measures put forward. The robustness of risk
management will be among the review criteria for regular grants.

V. Implementation of the policy

31. Implementing procedures. This policy will supersede the previous grant
financing policy22 and will become effective on 1 January 2022. During the
transition period immediately following approval of the policy, its broad principles
will be applied. Implementing procedures for the policy will be prepared
immediately after its approval by the Executive Board and will include, inter alia,
streamlined design and approval processes customized to specific situations, and
indications for operationalizing the criteria for allocating resources through the
programme, as identified in annex IV.
32. Monitoring, reporting and learning function. The revised procedures will
strengthen accountability in the management of individual grant proposals, and will
introduce mechanisms for improved monitoring, reporting and learning from
projects across the programme. In addition, corporate oversight functions for
grant-funded projects will be strengthened to enhance delivery, facilitate analytical
work including in-house mapping of ongoing grant initiatives and avoid the
proliferation of grants covering similar areas. Instead, it will promote capitalizing
on experience, with ongoing grants feeding in-house discussions and leading to the
possible replication and scaling up of activities. The corporate oversight function to
be established will also play a key role in ensuring complementarities and avoiding
overlaps between different initiatives and in identifying potential linkages, e.g.
among regular grants and projects funded by the enhanced Adaptation for
Smallholder Agriculture Programme (ASAP+) or the Private Sector Financing
Programme. This function will be positioned within the existing organizational
structure of IFAD, and will be determined as part of the implementing procedures.
The grants portfolio will be included in corporate monitoring systems to enhance
reporting and learning. Clear requirements will be set for more effective and
efficient grant management by the sponsoring division or department.
33. Reporting on the implementation of the policy will be carried out every year
through a dedicated, stand-alone progress report submitted to the Executive Board
at its April session.23 The report will review operations in the previous year, also
using the indicators included in the results framework. The progress report will
provide information on the allocation of regular grant resources, as well as on
results achieved and lessons learned. Moreover, as part of the midterm review
report presented to each replenishment consultation, Management will include a
dedicated section on the implementation of the Regular Grants Policy.
34. Annex V provides an indicative results framework, which will be further refined and
finalized when the implementing procedures for the policy are developed. The final
version of the framework will include targets and, where available, baseline
indicators. It will be shared with the Board for information along with the first
progress report.
35. Evaluation of the policy. A more comprehensive self-evaluation of the
implementation of the policy and the results achieved through grant-funded
projects will be carried out by Management after the policy’s approval and

22
EB 2015/114/R.2/Rev.1.
23
This dedicated report will complement any other information reported through the Report on IFAD’s Development
Effectiveness (RIDE).

10
 EB 2021/132/R.3

completion of two full replenishment cycles, with a midterm review. Management

will seek the inputs of the Independent Office of Evaluation of IFAD on
methodological aspects before embarking on the self-evaluation. The results of this
self-assessment and of the midterm review, and related lessons learned, will be
presented to the Executive Board. Revisions to the policy may be considered as an
outcome of the midterm review.
36. Communication and outreach. Systematic efforts will be made to ensure a
comprehensive and timely roll-out of this policy and its implementing procedures,
as well as to train relevant staff. Efforts will also be made to sensitize potential
grantees through a variety of communication instruments – for example, by
systematically informing the development community of opportunities offered by
the regular grants programme – as well as to enhance the communication aspects
of individual proposals.
37. Deviations from the policy. Any material deviations from the present policy for
exceptional reasons will be assessed on an ad hoc basis and submitted to the
President of IFAD for approval.

11
Annex I EB 2021/132/R.3

Summary of findings, lessons learned and examples of

successful grant-funded initiatives

I. Summary of findings and lessons learned

1. Grants are valuable instruments that complement IFAD’s efforts and
further its mandate. Having a regular programme of grants fits in well with
IFAD’s dual role as a financing institution and a specialized United Nations agency.
Grants help to build partnerships, including within the United Nations system and
with the private sector, as well as support research on poverty alleviation, foster
innovation and generate knowledge. Furthermore, the grants programme can
remain relevant even after the introduction of new programmes such as the
enhanced Adaptation for Smallholder Agriculture Programme (ASAP+) and the
Private Sector Financing Programme, and in the context of IFAD’s evolving
business model, since there is scope for building synergies among different
programmes through regular grants.
2. The objectives of the regular grants programme should be revised.
Experience suggests that the objectives of previous grant policies, while usually
relevant, may have been too generic, with insufficient attention paid to focus and
prioritization. This has resulted in grant-funded activities being only loosely aligned
with the overall goals of the respective policies and a lack of strategic vision. A
revision and re-prioritization of the objectives of the grants policy can play a key
role in ensuring the continued relevance of the programme.
3. Greater strategic prioritization of proposals will be needed. In light of IFAD’s
evolving strategic vision, it is important that only the most strategic proposals,
demonstrating a strong catalysing effect and synergies, are selected for the grants
programme.
4. Greater efforts should be made to demonstrate the ability of grant-funded
initiatives to generate impact. While attributing the impact of grant-funded
initiatives may be complex due to the brief period of implementation, the high
transaction costs of carrying out impact assessments on relatively small projects
and the nature of the initiatives themselves, evidence suggests that greater impact
could be achieved through strong alignment with other IFAD-funded initiatives and
strategies.
5. There is ample evidence of results achieved through grant-funded
activities, but reporting and dissemination of lessons learned has not been
consistently successful. In spite of the good performance of numerous
proposals, the effectiveness of the grants programme as a whole could have been
greater had more attention been devoted to best practices in the management of
the grants portfolio. For example, grant-funded activities have generated a
significant body of knowledge, but its dissemination – including in house – has not
always been consistent. The same applies to M&E, supervision and reporting.
Virtually all of the highlighted shortcomings could be addressed through improved
management during implementation and after completion. There is a need to
address the issue of language barriers among different regions – which in the past
has posed challenges due to a lack of resources to make lessons learned available
in English at the corporate level.
6. Lack of centralized oversight, monitoring and extraction of lessons has
undermined the effectiveness of grant-funded initiatives. Responsibilities for
corporate-level oversight, monitoring and extraction of lessons and results from
the grants programme at the portfolio level should be introduced, with specific
roles and responsibilities to be defined in the development of revised implementing
procedures.

12
Annex I EB 2021/132/R.3

7. Efficiency of the grants programme could be improved. This could be done

by streamlining the review and approval processes, with a view to reducing both
their duration and the transaction costs incurred by grant-sponsoring divisions and
departments.

II. Examples of successful grant-funded initiatives

8. Medium-term Cooperation Programme with Farmers’ Organizations in Asia
and the Pacific. The objective of this programme is to strengthen FOs at the
national, subregional and regional levels. This grant embodies a strong knowledge-
sharing and management agenda covering 20 countries. It is increasingly
becoming linked with, or integrated into, IFAD country programmes. The grant’s
knowledge-sharing programme culminates in the annual knowledge management
fairs, which serve as platforms for documenting and sharing good practices
promoted by FOs. During knowledge management fairs, participants are able to
vote for what they consider the best-showcased practice, and winners are awarded
small monetary prizes to be used towards learning visits or scaling up activities.
Some of these practices have also been featured in the publications and online
platforms of partners such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, the
European Union and the Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the networks and outreach mechanisms
established under this programme were used to channel resources from the Rural
Poor Stimulus Facility (RPSF) resources, thus enabling many smallholder farmers to
benefit from limited RPSF funding.
9. Upscaling Technologies in Agriculture through Knowledge Extension
project in the United Republic of Tanzania. This project took up the challenge
of strengthening links between research, extension services and farmers through
the power of ICTs. To this effect, the recipient Farm Radio International developed
two ICT-based tools, namely Uliza Answers and the Knowledge Plus platform. Uliza
Answers is an innovative mechanism that uses a blend of smart and traditional
technologies to pool real-time feedback and insights from farmers. The Knowledge
Plus platform enables virtual extension services to reach champion farmers via web
and mobile apps. These two innovations have already reached hundreds of
thousands of smallholder farmers in the United Republic of Tanzania, with
promising prospects for future expansion.
10. IFAD-Bioversity International partnership on neglected and underutilized
species. This includes several grants supporting investments in neglected and
underutilized species (NUS) through the “IFAD NUS approach”. It recognizes these
resources as an engine of economic growth and a means of empowering vulnerable
people. The approach proposes a novel value chain framework based on multi-
stakeholder, participatory interventions. The programme has implemented a wide
range of interventions for the conservation of local grains and indigenous
knowledge concerning their utilization, thus reinforcing the resilience of poor rural
communities. NUS brands such as Kolli Hills Natural Foods in Tamil Nadu (India)
have been established, generating consistent income for millet farmers. Successful
experiences have been publicized through tourist guidebooks and agritourism.
Activities were mainstreamed through national multi-stakeholder platforms and in
collaboration with the private sector. The programme’s integrated livelihood
approach was showcased at local, national and international forums, contributing to
an enabling policy environment for nutritious millets. At the global level, findings
emerging from the different phases of the NUS programme were shared with
policymakers and other stakeholders through books and scientific articles, and
through a series of international events. The latter included the international
seminar “Crops for the XXI Century” held in Cordoba, Spain in December 2012 and
the NUS 2013 Conference held in Accra, Ghana in September 2013.

13
Annex I EB 2021/132/R.3

11. Cameroon Aquaculture Entrepreneurship Promotion Project. This project

established three aquaculture stations to produce fry and train young fish farmers.
It helped establish 300 fish farms with over 1,000 ponds, thereby creating 1,500
jobs and producing 637,000 tonnes of fish, benefiting 7,525 rural people.
12. Partnering for Value: Promoting Public-Private-Producer Partnerships
(4Ps) in IFAD-funded Value Chain Development Projects. This grant
supported the establishment of 4Ps in IFAD-funded loan projects and worked with
both government and project staff and with producers’ organizations. Some of the
4Ps successfully demonstrated the potential for long-term agreements among
stakeholders in value chains such as coffee, dairy, aquaculture and staple crops.
The grant also supported the development of viable business plans by
smallholders, and offered capacity-building activities for both project staff and
beneficiaries on value chain integration.
13. Scale up Empowerment through Household Methodologies: from
Thousands to Millions. This regional grant to Oxfam Novib of the Netherlands
covers multiple countries in the East and Southern Africa and West and Central
Africa regions. The project is making a significant contribution to the poverty-
alleviating and gender-transformational impact of IFAD’s activities, by testing and
setting up mechanisms for promoting and scaling up household methodologies
(HHMs). HHMs position marginalized rural women, men and young people as
drivers of change, introducing a more demand-driven and participatory way of
working with target groups. The project is reaching out to selected loan-financed
programmes in the IFAD portfolio through the empowerment learning communities
and back offices of the regional hubs currently under development. By March 2020,
a total number of 3,230 households or 6,490 individuals (55 per cent women,
45 per cent men) had been involved. Out of these, 577 households
(1,947 individuals) were part of IFAD projects reached directly with HHM capacity-
building activities, and 2,653 households or 4,543 individuals (54 per cent women,
46 per cent men) involved directly through the development and strengthening of
the empowerment learning communities.
14. Support to Farmers’ Organizations in Africa Programme. Implemented
between 2013 and 2018, SFOAP is a successful example of partnership and
resource mobilization through grant-funded resources. An IFAD-funded grant of
EUR 1.9 million leveraged a total investment of almost EUR 20 million in support of
stronger FOs in Africa, including through access to economic services and increased
participation in policymaking at the national and subregional levels. Among the
principal results achieved, SFOAP resulted in increased productivity and higher
income and revenues. At the end of the implementation period, FOs supported by
SFOAP had mobilized EUR 12 million from public sources and over EUR 4 million
through partnership agreements or contract sales.
15. Reunión Especializada en Agricultura Familiar. This grant, for the Specialized
Meeting on Family Farming (REAF), was originally implemented in Argentina,
Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay but was later extended to most of the Latin America
and the Caribbean region. It contributed to a shared definition of the concept of
family farming and created national registries as the basis for the development of
targeted policies. Recommendations issued by the platform were adopted by
several Common Market of the South (MERCOSUR) members and associate
countries as the basis for promoting and strengthening family farmers and their
production systems.
16. Rural Development for Rural Youth, Territories and Opportunities: A Policy
Engagement Strategy. This knowledge-sharing and policy dialogue project
established national rural development groups in Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico and
Peru. The project contributed to drafting 14 project documents and seven policy

14
Annex I EB 2021/132/R.3

briefs, and greatly influenced national youth and rural development policies in all
four countries.
17. Training and Global Certification Framework for Monitoring and Evaluation
and Impact Assessment in Rural Development. This grant addressed the issue
of recurrent weaknesses in M&E in the IFAD portfolio, often due to scarce human
resources in borrowing countries. The Programme in Rural M&E (PRiME) was the
first capacity-building programme of its kind to focus specifically on rural
development projects. The programme not only proposed training but also
certification and professionalization, and it specifically targeted project
management unit staff, rather than development cooperation and finance
professionals. As of end-September 2019, more than 190 participants from 82
countries and 140 IFAD projects had successfully completed the “Fundamentals on
M&E” module under PRiME. The programme also attracted participants on a self-
paying basis from other development partners, including the World Bank and World
Food Programme. While a second phase of the grant was launched in 2019, the
model is already being replicated, e.g. for financial management and procurement.
18. Driving Delivery of Results in the Agriculture Sector (DELIVER). The goal of
this grant is to improve the advancement of critical government priorities in
agricultural and related sectors while also contributing to SDGs 1 and 2. The
project is helping to develop capacities and improve performance in ministries of
agriculture and other implementing agencies in the target countries (Ecuador,
Ghana, Madagascar, Samoa and Togo) by setting clear priorities, improving
institutional capacities and enhancing the delivery of rural development strategies.
The DELIVER grant is establishing high-level partnerships with senior management
and high-level officials in beneficiary countries. DELIVER is directly linked to the
improvement of delivery in the National Rural Entrepreneurship Project in Togo, as
well as the Samoa Agriculture and Fisheries Productivity and Marketing Project.
19. South-South and Triangular Cooperation IFAD-Morocco-Madagascar. This
grant has led to an institutional breakthrough with the creation of the Ifrane Centre
of Excellence for Agricultural South-South Cooperation. The centre is now a fully-
fledged institution for implementing the strategic vision of the Government of
Morocco for SSTC in agriculture. Under IFAD’s brokerage, Morocco and Madagascar
have joined together in this flagship SSTC programme, an innovative partnership
marking a first for Morocco.
20. Agricultural Bank of Sudan Microfinance Initiative. IFAD committed grant
resources in support of the drive by the Agricultural Bank of Sudan (ABS) to
improve rural entrepreneurs’ access to microfinance services, in close collaboration
with the Microfinance Unit of the Central Bank of Sudan and IFAD. The tailored
technical assistance funded through the grant helped scale up ABS’s Microfinance
Initiative in conjunction with other IFAD-financed projects. This successful
intervention covered around 900 communities in nine Sudanese states. It turned
30,000 rural women into successful entrepreneurs, encouraging them to set up
savings and credit clubs numbering between 10 and 20 members. Group members
obtained 70,000 small loans totalling US$7.4 million, mostly used to start or
expand small businesses. The repayment rate was close to 100 per cent.
21. Association for Collaborative Unified Aims Foundation (ACUA Foundation).
The ACUA Foundation was established in 2007 as the result of an IFAD grant. Its
objective is to empower populations of African descent by recovering and
developing their traditional practices, and also to improve their social and political
status. In 2018, ACUA’s grant-funded Regional Programme for Economic, Social
and Political Empowerment with Cultural Identity was approved. Its aim is to help
improve the social, economic and political inclusion of Afro-descendant populations
in selected poor areas of Colombia, Ecuador and Peru, with a special focus on
women (50 per cent) and youth (30 per cent). In 2019, the programme

15
Annex I EB 2021/132/R.3

established close to 70 partnerships with government entities, the private sector,

international organizations, grass-roots organizations and universities. In addition,
ACUA signed an agreement with the Colombia International Corporation and the
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development in the framework of the IFAD-
financed Building Rural Entrepreneurial Capacities Programme: Trust and
Opportunity. Since the agreement was signed, the programme has directly
supported and strengthened a group of initiatives showing commercial promise and
potential for scaling up in Colombia. It has also helped with the design of 134
business plans in nine Afro-descendant municipalities prioritized by the project in
the Colombian Pacific region.

16
Annex II EB 2021/132/R.3

Main changes introduced by the new policy

2015 policy New policy

Variable amount calculated according to a sustainable baseline concept

Fixed percentage calculated as
Allocation of determining the maximum level of grant resources allocated in any
6.5 per cent of the total
resources to the replenishment cycle, directly linked to the level of core replenishment
programme of loans and grants
programme contributions and potentially adjusted annually in line with the updated
(PoLG)
resources available for commitment (RAC) calculation.
Grant resources are delinked from the PBAS and provided over and above
PBAS allocations. Moreover, sub-allocations to global, regional and country
Fixed sub-allocation to global grants are also discontinued. This will allow further prioritization based on
and regional proposals and overall strategic relevance and potential to realize the programme’s catalytic
fixed sub-allocation to country- effects.
specific proposals based on The discontinuation of a fixed allocation for country-specific grants to
available performance-based countries borrowing on ordinary terms will enable IFAD to direct available
Country eligibility allocation system (PBAS) grant resources where they are most needed. Following the principle of
resources. Resources for universality, it will be possible to implement grant-supported activities
country-specific grants available targeting all developing Member States. Furthermore, in line with IFAD’s
only to "green" countries evolving business model, grant resources will only be used in upper-middle-
income countries as part of broader initiatives, i.e. activities being
implemented in more than one target country, and explicitly as part of an
agenda benefiting lower-middle-income countries and low-income countries.
Given the inherently limited size of the grants programme in general, and of
the individual proposals funded by this programme in particular, all efforts
Catalytic will be catalytic and supportive of other initiatives and programmes under
Not present in the 2015 policy
approach IFAD’s new business model and strategic orientation. In this sense, grant-
funded projects will act as key enablers of the Fund’s programmes, policies
and strategies.
To significantly broaden and
add value to the support
provided to smallholder farming
and rural transformation, The overall goal of the regular grants programme is to contribute to further
Overall goal thereby contributing to rural IFAD’s mandate of sustainable and inclusive rural transformation, and help
poverty eradication, sustainable achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.
agricultural development, and
global food security and
nutrition
 Promote innovative, poverty-
eradicating approaches and The programme will have two strategic objectives (SOs), in order of priority
technologies with the and expected level of resource allocation:
potential for expansion and (i) SO1: Leverage better impact on the ground for IFAD’s programme of
greater impact work, including through improvement of in-country capacity for greater
 Strengthen partners’ sustainability of benefits; and
Objectives institutional and policy (ii) SO2: Foster a more conducive policy and investment environment for
capacities smallholder agriculture and rural development, including at the regional
 Enhance advocacy and and global level.
policy engagement The overall goal and SOs will be achieved through three pathways – policy
 Generate and share and investment, partnerships and knowledge.
knowledge for development
impact
All activities financed through regular grants will have to demonstrate
Determined on an annual or alignment with the programme’s SOs and relevant IFAD replenishment
three-year basis through the commitments and priorities, and make a concrete contribution towards their
Thematic focus
implementation of a strategic achievement. A summary of priority replenishment commitments that could
guidance note benefit from grant-funded activities will be presented for approval at the last
Executive Board session preceding the start of each replenishment cycle.
Linkages to IFAD- Mostly focused on the IFAD Extended to include all the programmes at IFAD’s disposal, including those
funded initiatives loan portfolio to be implemented in the transition towards IFAD12 and beyond.
Risk management for individual proposals is retained. In addition, a broader
Risk management Only applicable at the individual
risk management framework with corresponding mitigation measures is
framework proposal level
provided for the overall programme.
A corporate portfolio monitoring function will be established, to enhance
Portfolio-level reporting of results through implementation and at completion, and to
Not present in the 2015 policy
oversight function enforce provisions for capturing and disseminating knowledge gained from
the implementation of the policy and of individual proposals.
The Results Management Framework was enhanced with the addition of
Through the Results
Reporting output indicators monitoring progress against specific objectives, both
Management Framework
during implementation and at completion.

17
Annex III EB 2021/132/R.3

Theory of change

IFAD’s mandate of sustainable and inclusive rural and food

system transformation is advanced
Impact Results and impact of activities funded by IFAD through
different instruments are enhanced

IFAD’s commitment to broadening and deepening its impact

by 2030 is supported

IFAD’s visibility and positioning are promoted

Lending and non-lending instruments act in synergy

Outcomes IFAD’s country/regional/global engagement is strengthened

Partnerships are unlocked and cofinancing is boosted

Knowledge is used to strengthen quality of programmes and

policies

Enabling environment for policy and investment is fostered

Innovation, research and technologies targeting the poor are

piloted for scaling up through PoLG and other instruments

Partnerships are initiated, including for crowding in

resources under the private sector strategy
Key outputs Integrated packages of solutions are available for countries
in transition and countries in fragile situations

Regional public goods and regional activities in support of

regional lending operations are funded

Knowledge is shared and disseminated to the benefit of

IFAD’s lending and non-lending instruments

Inclusive and sustainable rural and food system

Action areas and
transformation policies
inputs
Knowledge, evidence, innovation and research targeting the
poor

Strategic and operational partnerships, including for rapid

response to crises and fragility

CHALLENGES
Attain an affordable programme
Direct grant resources where they are most needed
Provide mutual reinforcement among IFAD’s instruments
Capitalize on lessons learned

18
Annex IV EB 2021/132/R.3

Scorecard for the assessment of the strategic relevance

of grant-funded proposals
Criteria Score
Alignment. The proposal concretely contributes to at least one strategic objective and IFAD replenishment
XX/20
commitment identified as potentially benefiting from regular grant resources, as approved by the Executive Board.
Ownership and priority focus. The proposal is aligned with at least one priority area of the programme (policy,
partnership and knowledge) and with the sustainable rural development priorities of the countries in which activities XX/20
will take place, as articulated in regional and national strategies and/or the COSOP/CSN.
Synergies. Proposed activities will enhance delivery and impact of other initiatives and programmes forming part of
XX/20
the IFAD business model, including the PoLG.
Value addition and comparative advantage. Regular grant financing has a clear value added and the comparative
XX/10
advantage of using grants as opposed to investment projects or other instruments is evident.
Innovation and scaling up potential. The proposal includes innovative approaches and will pilot activities suitable
XX/10
for larger-scale replication beyond the IFAD regular grants programme or uptake at the policy level.
Cofinancing. The proposal foresees the mobilization of additional resources through cofinancing. XX/10
Implementing capacity. The implementing agency has the required capacity to deliver grant activities. Ideally,
XX/10
implementing agencies are selected on a competitive basis.
Total XX/100

19
Annex V EB 2021/132/R.3

Indicative results framework

Expected results Performance indicators Means of verification
Relevance and  Number and percentage of new grant projects rated 4 or better  Quality Assurance
alignment with the (5 or better) at entry for overall quality of design Group ratings
Regular Grants  Number and percentage of new grant projects aligned to each SO
Policy and priority replenishment commitment identified by the
Executive Board
 Number and percentage of new grant projects rated 4 or better
(5 or better) at entry for ownership and priority focus
 Number and percentage of new grant projects rated 4 or better
(5 or better) at entry for synergies
 Number and percentage of new grant projects rated 4 or better
(5 or better) at entry for knowledge management
 Number and percentage of new grant projects rated 5 or better at
entry for innovation and scaling up
Implementation  Number and percentage of ongoing grant projects rated 4 or  Grant status reports
effectiveness better (5 or better) for overall implementation progress  Progress reports
 Percentage of grant projects under each pathway rated 4 or better  Supervision reports
(5 or better) for policy, partnerships, or knowledge (according to
the corresponding pathway during implementation and at  Completion reports
completion)
 Number and percentage of grant projects rated 4 or better (5 or
better) for effectiveness at completion
 Number of grant projects leading to at least one policy being
formulated (ongoing)
 Number of grant projects leading to at least one operational
partnership being formulated (ongoing)
 Number of grant projects piloting research, innovations and
technologies targeting the IFAD target groups with plans for
scaling up through the PoLG or other resources (ongoing)

Efficiency in grant  Average number of working days required to process new grant  Quality Assurance
management proposals from entry into pipeline to approval Group data
 Disbursement ratio (grants)  Grants and Investment
 Cofinancing mobilized by grant projects (per United States dollar Projects System
invested by IFAD)

20