ARM Endline Evaluation EU RESTORE and SIDA 2023

51 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project Figure 9: Level of severity of recent shock Community social capital: The HH survey findings shows that only 28%of respondents (28% equal for both female and male headed HHs) were likely to provide support to others in the event of facing shocks and hazards. An additional 21% were reasonably likely to do so (21% female and 23% male headed HHs). The highest likelihood was captured among fisher folk HHs (74%) and highest reasonably likely among peri urban and urban HHs at 29%. Most of agro pastoral HHs reported they were unlikely possible to help. In addition, 30% of households (30% female and 31% male headed HHs) indicated high likelihood of receiving help / support if they experienced a hardship that affected all their means of income and savings at once (70% among fisher folk HHs followed by 58% among pastoral HHs then 14% among peri urban and urban HHs as well as 12% among agro pastoral HHs. See the table below for additional details. Table 19: HH responses on social capital Responses Overall Female headed HHs Male headed HHs Fisher folk HHs Agropastoralist HHs Pastoral HHs Peri urban/Urban HHs Likelihood of providing support to others Unlikely possible) 33% 31% 35% 6% 50% 15% 39% Very likely 28% 28% 28% 74% 10% 54% 12% Reasonably likely 21% 23% 19% 4% 23% 14% 29% Could not help 18% 18% 18% 17% 17% 17% 20% Likelihood of receiving support would it be that you could get help / support? No help available 37% 33% 40% 15% 54% 17.% 44% Unlikely possible) 30% 30% 31% 70% 12% 58% 14% Reasonably likely 22% 25% 20% 4% 26% 14% 31% Very likely 11% 12% 10% 11% 9% 12% 12% 58% 43% 70% 44% 71% 61% 25% 37% 16% 19% 14% 33% 9% 10% 8% 25% 7% 6% 10% 5% 100% 13% 14% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Overall Female headed HHs Male headed HHs Fisher folk HHs Agro pastoral HHs Pastoral HHs Peri urban and urban HHs Level of severity of recent shock Moderate impact Strong impact Worst ever happened Slight impact

52 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project 3.3.3 INTERMEDIARY OUTCOME 2: ENHANCED FOOD SECURITY AND CAPACITY TO MEET SOCIAL NEEDS Results Chain Indicator Baseline (2019) Target End line (2020) Intermediary Outcome 2: Enhanced food security and capacity to meet social needs through sustainable cash-based assistance mechanisms and improved access to social capital targeting 13,853 HH in the targeted 44 village Io2I1: % of target HH who have improved Food Consumption Score (FCS) index -Io212: % of target households who have improved Coping Strategies Index (No or low coping; CSI(0- 3)) -Io2I2: % of most vulnerable HHs benefitting from social community transfers during stress and shocks (safety nets) 61% 21.8% 25.8% Io2I1: 40% Io2I2: 27% Io2I2: 14% point increase 45% 71% 26% Indicator 2.1: Households with improved Food Consumption Score The Food Consumption Score (FCS) is a composite score based on dietary diversity, food frequency and relative nutritional importance of different food groups and is calculated using the frequency of consumption of different food groups consumed by a household during the 7 days before the survey. The Food Consumption Score (FCS) is a measure of nutritional adequacy by consumption at household level. This indicator looks at diet diversity using 8 food groups weighted by nutritional value over a 7- day recall period. From the findings, 45% of households reported an acceptable FCS (equal for both male and female) which was a significant reduction from 61% of households during the baseline (2019) and 50.4% during the Annual Resilience Measurement (2021). The drop in the food security indicators has been mainly as result of devastating effects of drought that has been experienced in northern Somalia and affected both pastoral and agro-pastoral based livelihoods which are predominantly dependent on environmental factors. Acceptable FCS was highest amongst fisher folk (65%) followed by agropastoralists (50%), while Peri-urban/Urban households reported 52% and the least was among the pastoral communities. In addition, slightly over a third of agro pastoral households (33%) and 31% of peri-urban and urban households had a poor FCS. See summary in the chart below: Figure 10: FCS across livelihood zones Dietary Diversity Score: (DDS) measures how many food groups (out of 8) are consumed during a week reporting period. Households that over a seven day period have consumed foods from four or 45% 45% 45% 65% 50% 34% 52% 18% 18% 17% 26% 17% 19% 17% 37% 37% 38% 9% 33% 47% 31% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Overall Female Headed HHs Male headed HHs Fisher-folk HHs Agro-pastoral HH Pastoral HHs Peri-urban/ FCS across livelihood zones Food Consumption Score (FCS) Acceptable Food Consumption Score (FCS) Borderline Food Consumption Score (FCS) Poor

53 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project fewer food groups out of eight are classified as having low dietary diversity. From the evaluation findings, 48% of households scored a medium DDS (49% male and 46% female). This was reported by 57% of peri-urban and urban households followed by 55% among agro pastoral HHs, 54% fisher folk and least among pastoral HH at 34%. The low dietary diversity is a result of low available of foodstuffs in local market as occasioned by failed seasons due to persistent drought conditions that continue to be experienced in northern Somalia. See the summary in the chart below: Figure 11: DDS across livelihood zones Household Hunger Scale (HHS): HHS is a proxy indicator of food access. The HHS is built around 3 questions about perceptions of a household on varying degrees of hunger by the number of times a household has experienced hunger within past 30 days prior to the survey. From the findings, 61% of households (no differences between male and female) reported little to no hunger. Little to no hunger highest reported amongst fisher folk households (70%) followed by pastoral households (69%) while pastoral households was 58% and Peri-urban/Urban households reported 58%. This was a significant drop from the 73.20% households which were captured during the ARM (2021) at 69.6% (Agro-pastoral 70.5%, Pastoral 66.9%, Peri-urban 70.4%; Female 69.2%, Male 70.1%. This implies that households’ livelihoods are increasingly being negatively affected by extreme drought which continues to erode previous gains on the same. However, the situation is still within “manageable level” with only 10% of HH reported experiencing severe hunger (15% among Peri-urban/Urban households, 11% among agro-pastoral HH, 6% among fisher folks and 5% among pastor HHs. This could be mainly due to various food diversity interventions which have been implemented under the project such as livestock and animal production, VSLA nutrition trainings, and kitchen gardening. See summary in the chart below: Figure 12: HHS across livelihood zones 27% 28% 27% 37% 14% 36% 32% 48% 46% 49% 54% 55% 34% 57% 25% 26% 24% 9% 31% 30% 11% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Overall Female Headed HHs Male headed HHs Fisher-folk HHs Agro-pastoral HH Pastoral HHs Peri-urban/ DDS across livelihood zones Household dietary diversity score Low (≤4) Household dietary diversity score Medium (5-8) Household dietary diversity score High (≥ 9) 61% 62% 61% 70% 58% 69% 54% 29% 29% 29% 24% 31% 25% 32% 10% 9% 10% 6% 11% 5% 15% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Overall Female Headed HHs Male headed HHs Fisher-folk HHs Agro-pastoral HH Pastoral HHs Peri-urban/ HHS across livelihood zones Household Hunger scale Little to no hunger Household Hunger scale Moderate hunger Household Hunger scale Severe hunger

54 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project Indicator 2.2: Households who have improved Coping Strategies Index (No or Low Coping CSI) Reduced Coping Strategy Index (RCSI) is a measure that is used as a proxy indicator of household food insecurity. It indicates the kinds of coping behaviour (such as limiting portion sizes, relying on less households have had to engage in to cope with food scarcity and/or access issues and combines the frequency of each strategy and severity for households reporting food consumption problems. Higher rCSI indicates a worse food security situation and vice versa. From the findings, only 17.8% of HHs (17.6% female headed and18 % male headed) reported low coping index. This was report highest among pastoral households (84%) followed by reported 76% amongst fisher folk households, then agropastoral HHs at 64% and lastly among peri-urban/urban households at 62%. Majority of households 62.6% (62% female headed and 63.1% male headed) were captured as having adopted high coping strategies led by agro-pastoral HHs at 73.1% followed by peri urban and urban HHs at 70.3% and pastoral HHs at 46.9%. Figure 13: Reduced strategy coping strategy index Indicator 2.3: Vulnerable HHs benefitting from social community transfers (safety nets) Most households in Somalia have continued to experience prolonged drought, with failure of seasonal rains (Dyer and GU) since October 2021 and throughout 2022. This resulted in decreased pasture and water availability and necessitated the program to activate crisis modifier funds to respond to the most stressed households in the prioritised project target locations to prevent them from resulting to negative coping strategies as well as losing resilience gains achieved. Unconditional Cash Transfers: From the HH survey, 26% of households benefitted from unconditional cash transfers. The highest beneficiaries of unconditional cash transfers were from agro-pastoral households (41%) followed by peri-urban/urban households (33%) and 11% from pastoralists households. None of fisher folk households benefited from cash transfers. Cash for work: To further prevent HH from adapting negative coping mechanisms and also sustain resilience gains, the project supported households with conditional cash transfers which focused on utilising cash for work approach which implemented prioritised project activities from the CAAPs which were jointly developed by community members and project staff in the initial phase of the project implementation process. From the findings, 74% of households benefitted from cash for work activities (78% female and 70 male headed HHs) reported as follows across livelihood groups (100% among fisher folk, followed 89% among pastoral HHs, 67% among peri urban and urban HHs and 59% among agro-pastoral HHs. Cash for work activities focused on rehabilitation of community assets. From the evaluation, HH reported the main activities they had participated under cash for work program as follows: construction of check dams for control of soil erosion as reported by 39% of households ( as reported by 56% of peri 18% 20% 63% 17% 10% 73% 18% 35% 47% 18% 12% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Low Medium High rCSI across livelihood zones Overall Agro-pastoral Pastoral Peri-urban_urban

55 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project urban and urban HHs, 37% of agro pastoral HHs and 18% of pastoral HHs); followed by activities under farmers managed natural resources management as reported by 37% of households (62% of pastoral HHs, 35% agro-pastoral HH and 26% peri urban and urban HHs). Other included rehabilitation of local access roads(14%), rehabilitation of water infrastructure(3%), rehabilitation of warehouse/storage infrastructure (3%), rehabilitation of market infrastructure (2%),reclamation of soil erosion control gulley(2%) as well as construction of semi-circular soil bunds(15). See the table below for additional details. Table 20: Activities under cash for work Activities Under cash for work Overall Female headed HH Male headed HHs FisherFolk HHs AgroPastoral HHs Pastoral HHs Peri-Urban And Urban HHs Construction of check dam 39% 40% 39% 0% 37% 18% 56% Farmer managed natural resources management 37% 38% 36% 0% 35% 62% 26% Rehabilitation of access road 14% 12% 16% 0% 17% 10% 12% Rehabilitation of water infrastructure 3% 3% 3% 0% 3% 2% 2% Rehabilitation of warehouse/storage infrastructure 3% 1% 1% 0% 3% 3% 1% rehabilitation of market infrastructure 2% 2% 2% 0% 2% 3% 1% Gulley reclamation 1% 1% 1% 0% 2% 2% 0% Construction of semicircular soil bunds 1% 1% 2% 0% 2% 0% 1% Review of project reports confirmed that a total of 10,474 (6677 male and 3,797 female) households benefitted from CfW activities implemented under CAAPs. In addition, a cumulative total of USD 957,270 was distributed through CfW while a total of 5,112 cash for work tools were distributed to the communities to facilitate the CfW activities. 3.3.4 INTERMEDIARY OUTCOME 3 : ENHANCED LIVELIHOOD DIVERSIFICATION Results chain Indicator Baseline (2019) Target End line (2022) intermediary Outcome 3 : Enhanced livelihood diversification for 8,196 number of HH women, men, and youth in 44 targeted villages through the restoration and protection of productive assets, value chains and the uptake and adoption of agricultural technology Io3I1: % of HHs newly engaging in diversified livelihood strategies (data disaggregated by sex, livelihood group and strategy employed) - Io3I2: % increase in diversification of asset ownership (access) at HH level (data disaggregated by sex, type of asset and livelihood group 20.3% F=78.6% M=79.6% Pastoral =86.6% Agropastoral=69.9% Periurban=69.9% Io3I1:13% point increase Io3I2: 20% 15.4% 28.7% Indicator 3.1: Households newly engaging in diversified livelihood strategies The results show that proportion of households who adopted diversified strategies (i.e. more than on strategy) decreased from 20.3% in 2019 to 15.4% in 2022 (agro-pastoral =20.5%, pastoral =15.3%, peri-urban =9.1%); as well as compared to ARM 2021 Mean of 171.9 USD std deviation 1035. Agro-

56 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project pastoral 189.0 USD, Pastoral 1128.2 USD, Peri-urban 177.0 USD. The decrease in proportion of people engaging in multiple strategies can be attributed the worsening global economy and further aggravated by prolonged drought in Somalia which has further resulted in limited economic opportunities. This is also reflected in average household incomes which have declined by nearly half from USD 140.45 in 2021 to USD 72.1 in 2022. The big contributing shares of the income were cash transfers income (USD29.3), livestock sales (USD21.7), and crop income (USD12.7). The average income was higher among male headed households (USD74.0) than female headed households (USD 70.1). See the table below for additional details. Table 21: HH sources of income Income source Sample size Average (USD) Standard deviation (USD) Minimum (USD) Maximum (USD) Crop income 2,733 12.7 42.7 0 800 Livestock income 2,733 21.7 63.5 0 632 Livestock labor wages 2,733 1.3 9.7 0 200 Agri-business 2,733 1.6 16.7 0 500 Nonfarm wage 2,733 1.2 11.6 0 400 Non-farm business 2,733 4.3 36.1 0 700 Cash transfers 2,733 29 54.8 0 650 Total income 2,733 72 98.1 0 1255 Across livelihoods, agro-pastoral households had the highest average income (USD78.4), followed by peri-urban (USD 71.1), and lastly the pastoral (USD 66.9). The results further revealed that cash transfers were greatest shares of income for pastoral households (35.2) and peri-urban households (30.9) which could as a result of post emergency response interventions. On the other hand the greatest share of agro-pastoral income was crop income. The results further show that proportion of household who had recorded increase profit gains reduced significantly from 72% in 2021 to 25% (female 25.8%; male 24.3%) in 2022. The majority of the households in 2022 recorded no profit gains (58%) while 17% reported losses. The results further show the proportion of households reporting profit gains where highest among pastoral households (32.3%), followed by agro-pastoral households (25%), and lowest among peri-urban households (15.2%). The decreases in profit gains can be attributed to impacts of prolonged droughts and global economic crisis which has significantly impacted Somali as a country at large. Table 22: HH which record of profit gains Livelihood zone % households who recorded profit gains % households who recorded neither profit gains nor losses % households who recorded losses Sample size Agro-pastoral 25% 55% 20% 969 Pastoral 32.3% 55% 12.7% 1,015 Peri-urban 15.2% 65.8% 19% 749 All 25% 58% 17% 2,733 Agricultural Support: Most of households’ in Somalia are predominantly pastoralists, with pastoralism constituting the main mode of livelihood. The agricultural mode of livelihood is often negatively affected by unfavorable climatic conditions (except in South Central State) which include low productivity, high post-harvest losses, low product quality, and high vulnerability to climate change. Households with access to agricultural services: Provision of affordable and accessible agricultural services is essential in protecting agro-pastoral livelihoods. From the end line evaluation, 10% of households (10% female and 10% male headed HHs) indicated having benefitted(accessed) agricultural services at 14% among agro-pastoral HHs and 5% among peri urban and urban HHs. Both fisher folk and pastoral HHs did not benefit from this service. For the 10% of HHs that benefitted from these services, they reported crop pests and disease control as the main service received (65%) followed by agricultural extension services (47%) in aspects which include training on agribusiness, crop production, irrigation, soil and water conservation, as well post-harvest management practices. Slightly over half of the beneficiaries of agricultural services (59%) reported the services as affordable and 50% reported them as easy to access.

57 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project Sources of water for irrigation: Farming HHs reported their main sources of water as borehole (43%), followed by hand dug well fitted with water pump (17%), water pan (13%) as well as rain (13%) and surface water from river (4%). From the findings, only 16% of households (18% female and 15% male headed HHs) indicated having practiced any form of irrigation (described as use any source of water for farming other than rainfall during the wet season) at 33% among fisher folk HHs, 19% among pastoral HHs, 18% among agro-pastoral HHs and 9% among peri urban and urban HHs. A near equal proportion (17%) of households (17% female and 16% male headed) indicated having practiced any form of irrigation, (described as use any source of water for farming other than rainfall during the dry season) at 26% among fisher folk HHs, 20% among agro-pastoral HHs, 16% among pastoral HHs, and 11% among peri urban and urban HHs. A variety of irrigation methods were utilized by agro pastoral HHs. The most common irrigation type was the canal which was reported by 57% of farmers who practiced irrigation, followed by use of bucket at 30%, use of a sprinkler at 9% as well as gravity at 4%. Out of the respondents that reported using canals for irrigation, 92% used earthen canals while only 8% used cement-lined canals. In terms of the performance, the cement-lined canal are considered more effective since they reduce water losses from ground seepage- which is common in earth canals. Training on Good Agricultural Practices: The EU RESTORE and SIDA project focused on enhancing the capacity of target households in addressing various climatic shocks and stresses that affects their households with the goal of improving their adaptive capacity, improve yields and protect their livelihoods as well as increase their household income. From the end line evaluation, the proportion of agro-pastoralists that reported receiving training on good agricultural practices was 46%. For the trained farmers, the main aspects of the training covered crop production training as reported by 92% of all trained farmers, 38% have been trained on improved soil-water conservation and 30% have been trained on improved post-harvesting management practices. Farmers trained under crop production module covered various topics, with majority reporting having been trained on early land preparation (before rain starts), followed by early planting (with first rain or before rain starts), then correct ridge spacing and correct plant spacing as well as preparation of compost manure. The main topics covered under the soil and water conservation modules were reported as mixed cropping, followed by construction of check dams, then construction of semi-circular bunds and mulching as well as gulley reclamation. The main topics covered under the post harvesting module were reported as seed selection, harvesting and storage followed by proper storage structures then proper harvesting time as well as storage pest control. For skills adoption, 83% of trained farmers were practicing improved crop production, 34% were practicing post-harvest management skills while 29% were practicing soil and water conservation measures. Review of project data confirms that a total of 615 (442 male and 173 female) farmers were trained on good agricultural practices. 63 kitchen gardens were established. In addition, 655 farmers (469 male and 186 female) received agricultural inputs including seeds and tools, 76 fisher folk community members were trained and provided with inputs while 57 marketing associations were established which comprised of 755 (527 male and 228 female) members. Duration HH took to deplete crop yield after harvest: Among farming communities, 53% reported 3- 4 months to deplete produce after the harvest while 20% took 1-2 months, 17% took over 6 months, 8% took between 5-6 months while 5% depleted their produce immediately after harvest. The ability of households to have access to food for 3 months post-harvest was reported as mainly due to trainings conducted among farming communities’ especially on post-harvest post-harvesting management practices. Sources of planting seeds: most of agro pastoral HHs reported sourcing their planting seeds from diverse sources which included aid and development organisations (44%), local market (36%), from relatives (26% and from own seed in store at 8%. This implies that most households’ still need external intervention in accessing quality planting seeds as their average income continues to drop. The evaluation also asked beneficiaries of GAP training on effects of the same on their crop production in the past 12 months. From the findings, 46%had experienced decreased production, 43% had experienced an increase while 23% indicated the crop production has remained the same. For the 43% that reported increased production, they attributed the increase to improved crop husbandry practices, followed by increased size of cultivated land, then increase use of farm inputs as well as adoption of improved soil management practices in rank order. For the 46% of HH that reported decreased crop

58 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project production, they attributed the decrease to shocks- mainly drought, followed land degradation, lack farm inputs as well as reduced size of cultivated land in rank order. Agricultural production and yield: The purpose of supporting agriculture is to increase yields for food security and income. The end line evaluation assessed the extent to which those that were supported by the project cultivated their land and their resultant yield as a result of the intervention. From the survey findings, the size of land cultivated in acres and Taab under each of the 4 seasons in Somalia varied, with most land cultivated under Gu followed by Deyr, then Hagaa and lastly Jillal as summarized in the table below: Table 23: average size of land cultivated per season Season Unit of measurement Size Hagaa Acre 3.2 Taab 4.6 Gu acre 6.1 Taab 4.4 Deyr Acre 3.6 Taab 4.7 Jilal Acre 2.4 Taab 1.8 From the study very few sampled farmers engaged in crop production, mainly due to the fact that most of them were dependent on rain fed agriculture, and with continuing drought, the farming activities have continued to decline. From the findings 29.5% of sampled agro- pastoral communities indicated they cultivated various crops during the Hagaa season (n=23), 71% cultivated land during Gu season (n=55), 54% cultivated during Deyr (42) while 16.7% cultivated during Jilaal season (n=12). In addition, farmers continued to cultivate various crops across seasons (see annex 5.1) and realized varied yields with Gu presenting the best yield as summarized in the table below: Table 24: size of land cultivated and corresponding yield Season Crop Number of farmers First priority Hagaa land and harvest Taab 4.5 Acre 1.8 harvest 21.1 Second priority Hagaa land and harvest Taab 4.1 Acre 1.6 harvest 12.8 Third priority Hagaa land and harvest Taab 3.8 Acre 1.5 harvest 8.9 First priority Guu land and harvest Taab 2.8 Acre 4 harvest 301.8 Second priority Guu land and harvest Taab 2.8 Acre 2.7 harvest 284.8 Third priority Guu land and harvest Taab 3.8 Acre 2.7 harvest 114.8 First priority Deyr land and harvest Taab 3.5 Acre 2.4 harvest 12.9 Second priority Deyr land and harvest Taab 2.5 Acre 1.2 harvest 4.9 Third priority Crop Deyr land and harvest Taab 2.9 Acre 2.5 harvest 4.2 First priority Crop Jilal land and harvest Taab 2

59 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project Acre 1.8 harvest 40.4 Second priority Crop Jilal land and harvest Taab 2 Acre 2 harvest 35.3 Third priority Crop Jilal land and harvest Taab 2 Acre 1.6 harvest 6.1 The depressed yield also resulted in low income among farmers with the study capturing average household incomes having also declined by nearly half from USD 140.45 in 2021 to USD 72.1 in 2022. The decline, according to FGD and KII data the persistent unfavourbale environmental conditions experience in Somalia and across the horn of Africa has continued to negatively impact both pastoral and agro-pastoral based livelihoods. This finding also compares to those of FSNAU, which revealed that household food and income sources from crop and livestock production have sharply decreased as a result of the four-season drought, which is the third significant drought of this magnitude to occur in less than a decade. The challenge of drought is compounded by the backdrop of supply chain disruptions from COVID-19 pandemic which is further exacerbating acute food insecurity conditions, primarily due to very high prices for imported staple foods such as rice, wheat, and vegetable. Improved Livestock Management Practices: The livestock sector is a pillar of the Somalia food system and a contributor to poverty reduction, food security and agricultural development and the highest contributor to Somalia’s Gross Domestic product (GDP). To support this, SomReP partners have been training Community Animal Health Workers (CAHWs) to provide extension services amongst animal rearing households. This intervention is aimed at protecting pastoral mode of livelihood which is the major source of livelihood for the target group as well as increase their access to incomes and food security. Households with access to veterinary services: Provision of affordable and accessible veterinary services is essential protecting pastoral livelihoods. Livestock keeping in Somalia remains the main source of food (meat) and milk and hence improvement of the sector would have far-reaching income and nutrition impacts for the beneficiaries and community at large. The biggest threat to livestock as a sector is the recurrent drought that decimates pastures and water resources therefore leading to losses both in the livestock quality in addition to decimating the numbers due to drought related deaths. The end line evaluation assessed the penetration and adoption of improved animal management practices. From the findings, 13% of households (16% female and 11% male) indicated having benefitted(accessed) veterinary services at 20% among pastoral HHs followed by agro-pastoral HHs(10%) and peri urban and urban HHs at 9%. Fisher folk HHs did not benefit from this service. The interventions household benefitted from mainly included clinical services such as treatment of sick livestock(55%), preventive services for reducing outbreak of diseases (51%), provision of drugs, vaccines and other animal health related products(9%) as well as provision of human health protections services such as inspection of market animal products at 5%. This was a significant reduction from ARM 2021 where 76.2% reported that they were received clinical veterinary services while 39.7% received preventive veterinary services. Other services received include provision of drugs (28.5%) and Human health protection (16.9%). Majority of beneficiaries of veterinary services (78%) reported the services as affordable and 45% reported them as also easy to access. Review of project data confirmed that a total of 78 CAHWs were trained and equipped with veterinary kits while 40 Community Animal Health Workers (63 male and 15 female) were trained on disease surveillance, diagnostic and treatment techniques, thereby empowering them to properly conduct disease surveillance, diagnosis, prevention, control, and sampling techniques of livestock diseases. The trainings were conducted by project staff in collaboration with the Ministry of Livestock and Fishery Development. Feedback from FGDs with livelihood groups and KKIs with project staff and government officers confirmed that the project conducted training for CAHWs. The trainings were done in partnership with staff from the ministry of livestock development. The trained CAHWS also work alongside private veterinary service providers who give specialized services where this is possible. They were also linked a revolving fund facility which ensures availability of veterinary drugs for supporting target communities as well as linked them with financial institutions where they can obtain credit. Additional feedback from project staff also indicated that regular monitoring and tracking of the

60 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project CAHWs performance and the linkages with the agro-vet shops supported as well as extension of the veterinary services has contributed in preventing livestock diseases while agro-vet shops have increased easy access to veterinary drugs. Households with access to livestock insurance services: Livestock insurance is key in reducing vulnerability to negative impacts of climatic shock for households practicing pastoral mode of livelihood. SomReP has been working with ILRI to develop, advice and support the uptake of livestock insurance. Tawakal Insurance Company that supported the role out of the insurance in Kenya is the largest services provider in Somalia. To check the penetration of livestock insurance in the project target areas, the respondents were asked if they had access to insurance of which 12% of households (15% female and 9% male) reported that insurance services are available in their location (20% among pastoral HHs followed by 11% among fisher folk, and 7% for agro-pastoral and peri urban and urban HHs equally. The uptake and acceptance of insurance services can be attributed to the ongoing piloting of livestock insurance services in selected project locations although it’s still at an early stage and therefore uptake remains modest. The penetration of insurance still remains low as was also captured during the ARM 2021 where 17.5% of respondents reported that it was difficult to access while 51.9% remained neutral on the matter. However, 28.9% reported it was easy to access insurance while 0.6% reported it was very easy. Insurance products have not spread to all parts of Somalia as services providers are still limited. This could explain the fact that a substantial percentage of respondents found it difficult to access insurance services. For 12% of households with access to insurance services, the main insurance services were reported as car insurance, health and house policies as well as livestock insurance. However, uptake of livestock insurance remained very low as was noted to be under pilot phase. For the proportion that had purchased insurance policy, most them indicated them as affordable and easy to pay the required premiums but indicated it was very difficult to claim from insurance providers. Very modest proportion indicated willingness for any insurance policy, including livestock policy. Household access to loans: Debts exposes HH to additional vulnerabilities, especially where populations earn very basic incomes. However, taking a loan to invest in an IGA is considered as a source of income as well as a form of economic security. From the end line evaluation, only 18% of households (20% female and 17% male headed HHs) had taken a loan in the past 12 months preceding the study. The highest proportion of those who had taken the loans was among agro pastoral HHs (39%) followed by pastoral HHs (29%), then fisher folk (13%) and lastly among peri urban and urban HHs at 9%. This was a slight reduction from ARM 2021 which showed that 23.8% of the respondents had taken loans. The peri-urban population had a higher proportion of respondents who reported debt with 26.2%, pastoral respondents reported 24.3% while Agro-pastoral respondents reported the least proportion of respondents with loans at 22.7%. This finding was comparable with membership of VSLAs which enabled HH access loans easily, and whereby 23% of households (27% from female and 19% male headed HHs) were captured as having directly benefited from the VSLA interventions implemented under the project. A majority, 88.9% of the loan taken was in the form of food while 11.1% took loans in the form of cash. The proportion that took loan in the form of food reported experiencing acute food shortage at the household level. The peri-urban/urban category reported less boring of food and more borrowing of cash debts as For those who had taken, the loan was in form of cash (72%) at 68% female and 76% male headed HHs) as reported by 85% of agro pastoral HHs, followed by 74% of peri urban and urban HHs, then 69% of pastoral HHs and lastly 29% of fisher folk HHs. Loans had diverse repayment periods with the monthly repayments accounting for 72% (81% female and 63% male headed households). This repayment period was reported highest among pastoral HHs (92%), followed by fisher folk (76%), then peri urban and urban HHs (66%) while most agro pastoral HHs mostly reported an end of season repayment period (64%). See the table below for additional details.

61 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project Table 25: Households access to loans Response Overall Female Headed HHs Male headed HHs Fisher folk HHs Agro pastoral HHs Pastoral HHs Peri urban and urban HHs Form of recent loan Cash 72% 68% 76% 29% 85% 69% 74% Food 28% 32% 24% 71% 15% 31% 26% Loan Repayment period After the next harvest 2% 2% 2% 0% 6% 0% 2% End of season 22% 14% 31% 10% 64% 6% 19% None specified 2% 2% 1% 0% 1% 1% 6% One month 72% 81% 63% 76% 28% 92% 66% One year 2% 2% 2% 14% 2% 0% 6% HH access to financial services: Access to financial services key in unlocking financial potential in establishing IGAs or expanding existing one. Findings from the end line evaluation captured only 18 % of HHs (22 female and 15% male headed HHs) with reported access to financial services. The highest was among fisher folk HHs (39%) followed by pastoral HHs (27%) then at 15% agro pastoral and lastly peri urban and urban HHs at 9%. The access to financial services was mainly through mobile telephone services providers and VSLAs groups for those who have registered as members (as captured in other section of this report at 23%). This is in line with the project financial security model which linked various VSLA groups with banks for accessing financial services which include savings, loans services and business advice/training and where members of VSLA formed collateral to one another in order to access “non-secured loans”. The main financial services accessed by most community members were reported as mobile banking (65%), followed by VSLAs (42%) and subsequently, most other HHs had financial accounts with both, at 72% mobile accounts and 40% VSLAs accounts. See the table below for additional details: Table 26: HH access to financial services Financial services HH have access to Overall Female Headed HHs Male headed HHs Fisher folk HHs Agro pastoral HHs Pastoral HHs Peri urban/ urban HHs Banks 5% 4% 7% 5% 10% 3% 5% Hawala 3% 3% 4% 0% 9% 1% 5% Microfinance 2% 1% 3% 0% 4% 1% 3% Mobile banking 65% 66% 63% 5% 52% 76% 64% Village Savings and Loans Association(VSLA) 42% 40% 46% 91% 59% 27% 58% Financial Institutions HH have bank accounts with Banks 6% 4% 8% 0% 11% 4% 6% Hawala 3% 2% 3% 0% 9% 0% 3% Microfinance 1% 1% 1% 0% 1% 0% 3% Mobile banking 72% 76% 68% 6% 55% 85% 70% Village Savings and Loans Association(VSLA) 40% 36% 45% 94% 61% 20% 76% Majority of those with financial services (68%) reported it was easy to deposit money in their financial account (63% female and 61% male headed HHs) led by agro pastoral HHs (81%) followed by peri urban and urban HHs (75%), pastoral 56% while most fisher folk considered this difficult at 95%. In addition, most those with financial accounts (68%) also reported it was easy to withdraw money (at 68% female and 66% male headed HHs) led by peri urban and urban HHs (78%), followed by agro pastoral HHs (77%), then pastoral HHs (64%0 while fisher folk considered this difficult at 95%. Lastly only 42% of HH (45% female and 38% male headed HHs) considered in easy to access a loan from these financial institutions as reported by 46% of agro pastoral HHs, fooled by 43% of pastoral HHs, then 42% of peri urban and urban HHs while 95% of fisher folk reported this as difficult. Indicator 3.2: Diversification of asset ownership (access) at household level An asset index is a proxy measure for the economic well-being of a household. Assets can either be individual, Household, or communal. The household assets determine the well-being and resilience of

62 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project a household as they are used as an alternative measure of poverty. Assets have always provided a safety net and a source of income to households and communities when faced with shocks and stresses. The results show that the average asset score decreased from 35.3 in 2021 to 28.7 in 2022. Across livelihood zones, pastoral community had the highest mean asset score of 29.7 however the mean asset score in peri-urban community decreased from 31.3 in 2021. The average asset score however decreased significantly by half among the peri-urban community from 54 in 2021 to 26.9. For agro-pastoral communities the average asset score reduced marginally from 30.6 in 2021 to 29.2 in 2022. The decrease in average asset scores among communities could be attributed to the effects of shocks and mainly the prolonged drought in Somalia. See the table below: Figure 14: Average asset score across livelihood groups Across the districts, the average asset scores were high in Salahley (112.3), Hargeisa (91.2), Burao (55.1), and Eyl (50.1), but low in Badhan (5.5), Lughaye (8.9), Baidoa (16.0), and Ceel Afweyne (19.3). The table below provide disaggregated data at district level. Table 27: Asset score across districts District Average asset score Standard deviation Sample size (n) Afgooye 27.0 56.3 303 Badhan 5.5 15.0 321 Baidoa 16.0 57.6 747 Bossaso 23.8 107.6 72 Burao 55.1 169.2 175 Cee-Afweyne 19.3 35.7 321 Eyl 50.9 167.6 382 Hargeisa 91.2 161.0 43 Laas Caanood 41 82.9 216 Lughaye 8.9 4.5 59 Salahley 112.3 56.3 42 Xudur 27.6 17.1 51 All 28.7 94.2 2,732 31.3 30.6 54 29.2 29.7 26.9 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Agro-pastoral Pastoral Peri-urban Average asset scores 2021 2022

63 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project 3.3.5: INTERMEDIARY OUTCOME 4: ENHANCED MANAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE OF NATURAL RESOURCES, SOIL AND WATER SYSTEMS Interventions under the EU RESTORE and SIDA project promoted natural resources management aimed at building resilience of target communities. Through the program, various structures were established and interventions implemented that promote sustainable use of available natural resources such as water for multiple use (domestic, livestock and irrigation) as well as soil and water conservation activities. Indicator 4.1: Access to multi-use water (for irrigation, domestic use & livestock) Year-end access to multi-use water: Access to adequate and reliable water ensures communities are well protected from frequency and intensity of shocks. Under the program, SomReP and partners promoted various water and natural resources management interventions which included investments in expanding and rehabilitating water infrastructure as well as enhancing management, operations and maintenance of the same. From the findings, 76.47% of households had access to water for multiple use. This was a significant increase from 60% during the baseline in 2019 and an overachievement of the 50% overall project target. The favourable result could be attributed to the project efforts in rehabilitation and construction of multi-use water infrastructures and irrigation canals over the past 4 years. This is noted to have significantly contributed in increasing access to multiple use water among the target communities. Access to water is also crucial in bolstering the resilience of the targeted households and communities, since it supports both livestock and crop production. Sources of domestic water during wet season: The main sources of water during the wet season included boreholes (31%) followed by berkards (20%), wells fitted with hand pumps (12%) as well as unprotected wells and earth dams equally at 7%. Boreholes were reported as the main source mostly among pastoral HHs (36%) and agro pastoral HHs (31%), berkards were mainly reported among pastoral HHs (27%), while piped water in homestead was reported mainly by fisher folk (55%). The table below shows water sources across livelihood groups during the wet season. Table 28: Primary sources of water during the wet season Primary source of water for household’s during the most recent WET season Overall Female headed HHs Male headed HHs Fisher -Folk HHs AgroPastoral HHs Pastora l HHs Peri-Urban and Urban HHs Borehole 31% 31% 31% 7% 31% 36% 25% Rainwater harvest berkard 20% 18% 21% 15% 11% 27% 22% Well fitted with Hand pump 12% 14% 11% 7% 17% 11% 9% Unprotected well 7% 9% 6% 0% 4% 5% 15% Earth dam 7% 6% 8% 0% 19% 1% 1% Rainwater harvesting pan 5% 5% 5% 11% 6% 5% 3% Water tanker car 4% 6% 2% 2% 2% 1% 12% Rainwater 3% 3% 3% 0% 4% 3% 2% Results chain Indicator Baseline (2019) Target End line (2022) Intermediary Outcome 4 : Enhanced management and governance of natural resources, including soil and water systems to support sustainable pastoral livelihoods in 44 target villages Io4I1: % of target population with all year access to multi-use water (for irrigation, domestic use & livestock) - Io4I2: % of water infrastructure with operational maintenance systems - Io4I3: #of hectares of land benefiting from improved agricultural management) 32.8% 14.5% 6214 Darap & 1312 Taap Io4I1: 50% Io4I2: 60% 76.47% 67% 5,320 (HA)

64 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project Unprotected surface water 3% 3% 3% 0% 2% 4% 1% Standpipe –public tap 2% 3% 2% 35% 1% 1% 2% Piped water to household 2% 2% 2% 20% 2% 2% 1% Shallow well 1% 1% 2% 0% 0% 1% 4% Water trucking 1% 29% 33% 0% 0% 1% 2% Unprotected spring 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% During the wet season, most households (57%) accessed water within 15minutes (mainly among fisher folk 93% followed by pastoral HHs at 62% and peri urban and urban HHs at 60%. An additional 24% of households accessed water within 30 minutes (mainly agro pastoral HHs). Dry Season: Just as captured under wet season, boreholes (29%) remained the main source of water during the dry season followed by berkards(17%), wells fitted with hand pumps(12%) as well as unprotected wells at 11%. Among livelihood groups, boreholes were the main source mostly among pastoral and peri urban and urban HHs equally at 25%, hand pumps among agro pastoral HHs (22%), while piped water in homestead was reported mainly by fisher folk (20%). The table below water sources during the dry season. The table below shows water sources across livelihood groups during the dry season. Table 29: Primary sources of water during the dry season Primary source of water for HHs during the most recent DRY season Overall Female Headed HHs Male headed HHs FisherFolk HHs AgroPastor al HHs Pastor al HHs Peri-Urban and Urban HHs Borehole 29% 26% 32% 7% 25% 37% 25% Rainwater harvest berkard 17% 19% 16% 20% 12% 20% 21% Well fitted with hand pump 12% 12% 12% 4% 22% 4% 10% Unprotected well 11% 12% 10% 0% 2% 4% 1% Water tanker cart 9% 10% 7% 2% 4% 11% 12% Water trucking 4% 4% 3% 0% 0% 9% 2% Rainwater-harvest pan 4% 3% 5% 6% 8% 2% 3% Unprotected surface water 3% 3% 2% 4% 2% 1% 2% Earth dam 3% 3% 3% 0% 8% 1% 1% Piped to household 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% Public tap standpipe 2% 3% 2% 20% 2% 2% 2% Shallow well 2% 1% 2% 0% 1% 1% 4% Unprotected spring 2% 1% 2% 37% 1% 1% 2% During the dry season, 49% of households reported accessing water within 15minutes (mainly among fisher folk 91% followed by pastoral HHs at 55%, peri urban and urban HHs at 51% and agro pastoral HHs at 40%. An additional 27% of households accessed water within 30 minutes (mainly agro pastoral HHs at 36% and peri urban and urban HHs at 28%. Sources of Water for irrigation: The project promoted multi use of water- including irrigation through identification of water structures under community action and adaptation plans (CAAPs) and rehabilitating them through cash for work activities. From the end line evaluation, only 4% of households reported practicing rain fed agriculture while 16% of households (18% female and 15% male) practiced irrigation farming during the wet season (33% among fisher folk, 19% among pastoral HHs, 18% among agro pastoral HHs and 9% among peri urban and urban HHs. A near equal proportion (17%) practised irrigation agriculture (17% female and 16% male) during the dry season at (26% among fisher folk, 20% among agro pastoral HHs, 16 among pastoral HHs and 11 % among peri urban and urban HHs. Pastoral and Farmer Managed Natural Regeneration: Natural resources that form the backbone of Somalia’s economic activity, underpin the livelihoods of much of the country’s population, and have considerable cultural significance. SomReP partners have been promoting establishment of pastoral and farmer managed natural regeneration through various cash for work activities as well conducting FMNR training in the sites. The end line evaluation assessed the penetration and adoption of the same among project target groups. From the findings, only 22% of households have been trained on FMNR

65 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project (22% female and 22% male) as follows: 39% among fisher folk HHs followed by 25%among agro pastoral HHs, 22% among pastoral HHs (10%) and 17% among peri urban and urban HHs. Among the trained HHs, 41% had taken up the role of FMNR champion in their village (47 female and 35% male) with the highest number of FMNR champions captured among fisher folk HHs followed by pastoral HHs, then agro pastoral HHs(and lastly among the peri urban and urban HHs. The main activities implemented in the FMNR sites were captured as construction of fire breaks, promotional of rotational grazing, establishment of tree seedlings nurseries, tree planting and pruning as well as and protection of trees from animals. Feedback from in-depth interviews with government officers confirmed their engagement during the project implementing process. In Puntland, the NRM and DRR coordinator for the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change confirmed that he has supported the formation of FMNR committees which are currently reaching approximately 3,416 HHs and a total of 5,320 hectares of land rehabilitated under the FMNR approach. In addition, he confirmed various training on FMNR have been completed in addition to provision of approximately 60Kg of various seed species to FMNR champions who have already established approximately 12 tree seedlings nurseries. Indicator 4.2: Operation and maintenance water infrastructure and supply systems Community water management committees: From the household survey findings, 28% of households had their water managed by a water management committee as reported equally by both men and women. The highest proportion was reported by fisher folk communities (43%), followed by pastoralists (34%, agro-pastoralists (32%) and least among peri-urban and urban/ IDP communities at 12%. In addition, 31% of households reported having integrated water management plans (50% among fisher folk communities followed by 37% among pastoralist, 31% among agro-pastoralists and 19% among peri-urban and urban communities including IDPs. Additionally, 67% of households reported their water management committee as functional during the end line evaluation (female 66% and 67% male). The highest functionality was reported among agro pastoral HHs (70%) followed by pastoral HHs at 69%, 61% among fisher folk and lastly 48% among peri urban and urban HHs. The key achievements of the water management committees were report in ranked order as 1. Fixing any breakages of water points, maintaining hygiene conditions around water points as well as collecting water revenue from consumers. Qualitative feedback from FGDs with water committees confirmed their existence and their roles in the community. As in other committees, women remained the minority, as demonstrated by reported gender ration of committee members which was often 2men per every woman. They also confirmed they have been trained under the project on basic management and operations and maintenance (O&M) and are currently performing roles such as promoting environmental hygiene around water points, ensure separate watering areas for human and livestock as well as fencing of open water sources such as earth dams to prevent contamination by animals and risks of drowning. Community Structures Aligned to Support Contingency Planning: Since the year 2020, communities in both Somaliland and Puntland have continued to various shock which has affected their livelihoods. In 2020, communities Puntland and some parts of Somaliland were affected by tropical cyclone Pawan which resulted in flooding. From October 2021 to close of project in 2022, communities in the northern Somalia has continued to experienced prolonged droughts and failure of seasonal rainfalls. To enhance target communities’ resilience, the project has been supporting formation, capacity building as well as strengthening community based natural resources management structures to manage and drive the contingency planning agenda. During the end line evaluation, we asked HH which community based NRM governance structures was in place in their community and their respective role. Their responses are captured in the sub sections below. Early Warning Committees: Slightly over a third (32%) of respondents reported existence of Early Warning Committees in their villages. From the findings, women had slightly higher knowledge (34%) compared to men (29%). The highest knowledge was captured among fisher folk (37%, followed by agro-pastoralists (35%), pastoralists (32%) and lastly urban and peri-urban population-including IDPs at 26%. In addition, 21% of households reported having conducted a hazard analysis (at 46% among fisher folk, 25% among agro-pastoralists, 20% among pastoralists and 15% among urban and peri urban/IDP populations). Subsequently HHs 60% of HHs9 57% female and 63% male headed HHs) reported they had already/sent early warning information of the committees (95% among fisher folk

66 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project HHs, followed by 71% among agro pastoral HHs then 55% among peri urban and urban HHs and lastly 48% among pastoral HHs. Community Water Management Committees: From the household survey findings, 28% of households had a Water Management Committee in place as reported equally by both men and women. The highest proportion was reported by fisher folk communities (43%), followed by pastoralists (34%, agro-pastoralists (32%) and least among peri-urban and urban/ IDP communities at 12%. In addition, 31% of households reported having an integrated water management plans (50% among fisher folk communities followed by 37% among pastoralist, 31% among agro-pastoralists and 19% among periurban and urban communities including IDPs. Village Development Committees: From the findings, 29% of households had a village development committee in place as captured from 32% female and 28% of male headed households. The highest proportion was reported by fisher folk communities (41%), followed by pastoralists (38%, agropastoralists (30%) and least among peri-urban and urban/ IDP communities at 17%. In addition, 29% of households reported having and formulated village development plans in form of CAAPs as reported among 32% women and 29% men). The highest was reported by fisher folk communities (46%) followed by 37% among pastoralist, 26% among agro-pastoralists and 19% among peri-urban and urban communities including IDPs. For the proportion of those that were aware of their village development plans were also aware of their content. However, the proportion men who reported awareness of the content of village development plans was higher than that of women. Community Social Affairs Committees: The project also supported the target villages in mapping potential co-financing resources from diaspora, private sector and local communities, as well as facilitated establishment of village level and district level social affairs committees (SACs). The role of Social affairs committees is to support the process of matching fund mobilization, beneficiary identification and manage social fund disbursement process at community level. However, as of the time of the end line evaluation, this component of the project was still lagging behind, with no village reporting having an effective funding mechanisms for implementing contingency plans beyond what the drought recovery project had managed to finance. From the findings, 28% of households had a social affairs committee in place as captured from 30% women and 25% of men respondents. The highest proportion was reported by fisher folk communities (50%), followed by pastoralists (36%, agro-pastoralists (25%) and least among peri-urban and urban/ IDP communities at 17%. For the proportion of those that were aware of existence of social affairs committees, most reported their community as having opened a bank account for the village contingency fund as well as having released funds during the last one year to support households to mitigate the impacts of drought. The knowledge was noted a slightly higher among women than men. Review of project documents confirmed that 47 Natural resource management committees were formed and a total of 200 community members trained on natural resource management (NRM) and conflict resolution mechanisms. Feedback from FGDs with members confirmed existence of the above committees in their villages. Membership in these committees was reported as open to both men and women although male members were proportionately more than female across all them. The average size of each committee was 7 members with higher ration of men compared to women, often at 5: 2. The low participation of women was explained to be mainly due to Somali community culture which limits women participation in public affairs. Indicator 4.3: Hectares of land benefiting from improved agricultural management From HH survey, the end line established that a total land of approximately 5,320 hectares were under natural resource management mainly in Puntland compared to 1312 Taap during the baseline survey (2019). The increase in size of land cultivated was attributed mainly to project interventions which continued to promote farmer managed natural regeneration activities through training targeted farmers on the approach and selection of champions, provision of seed species as well as establishment of tree seedlings nurseries for planting on degraded lands.

67 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project 3.3.6: INTERMEDIARY OUTCOME 5: PROGRAM LEARNING AND RESEARCH Results chain Indicator Baseline (2019) Target End line (2022) Intermediary Outcome 5: Result 5: Program learning and research generated and shared among relevant stakeholders (including communities, NGOs, and government) Io5I1. % of the government stakeholders with knowledge and capacity to participate in resilience monitoring, evaluation and research studies Io5I2. # of functional learning forums established among stakeholders (Community learning meetings, M&E field visit, startup workshops, Technical working group, Annual learning events, Evaluations, Trainings and Monitoring visits) Io5I2. # of documents / reports published on resilience at relevant national and international platforms 0 0 0 Io5I1.1: 20% Io5I2. 7 Io5I2.2 2 Cannot be quantified since this was done qualitatively 11 12 Indicator 5.1: Government stakeholders with knowledge and capacity to participate in resilience monitoring, evaluation and research studies Under the EU RESTORE and SIDA project, the project staff continued to foster collaborations with all levels of government in Somalia (federal, state and local-district) which promoted synergy in the implementation and monitoring process. The collaboration was also an avenue for enhancing key government staff capacity on coordination. Feedback from KIIs with government officers across all the 12 districts which constituted the project target locations confirmed their involvement in the implementation, supervision, monitoring as well as learning aspects of the EU RESTORE and SIDA project. Specifically the project staff conducted a number of training targeting government staff and aimed at enhancing their capacity to supervise and technically support the project implementation and monitoring aspects. The trainings conducted included the following: • Refresher Training for HADMA staff • Sensitization on Natural Resources Management aspects • Training on Field Data Collection, Review and Validation • Orientation on Joint Performance Monitoring and Reporting Other activities conducted under the project with an aim of enhancing government stakeholders’ knowledge and capacity to participate in Resilience monitoring, evaluation included the following: • Conducting Joint Performance Monitoring and Review sessions including dissemination and validation workshop in Hargeisa • Joint assessments and planning, annual resilience measurement, disaster impact assessment and recovery strategies, as well as seasonal assessment. • Appointment of focal points in critical ministries responsible for resilience building, such as planning, disaster risk management, agriculture, and the environment, to assist with assessment, planning, and technical outreach. • Support to Ministry of Planning of Somaliland to develop training content, plan and convene a stakeholder meetings on resilience building in an effort to deepen the appreciation of how these interventions work and identify policy gaps that they can support to address. • Support to Regional Durable Solutions Secretariat (ReDSS) and the Durable Solutions Unit under the Ministry of Planning, Investment and Economic Development of the Federal

68 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project Government of Somalia to facilitate the resilience and self-reliance workshop in Mogadishu Somalia. Indicator 5.2: Functional learning forums established among stakeholders Data from project secondary data as well as feedback from key project staff indicated efforts in knowledge management and enhancing cross learning. Key results are outline in the section below. • The project Technical Unit continued to host meetings and forums which included Donor Advisory Groups, Technical Working Group as well as quarterly review meetings throughout the project. • The project Technical Unit jointly with implementing agencies (CARE and AAH) supported the Ministry of Environment Agriculture and Climate Change to hold an event to in commemoration of World Environment Day on 26th January 2021. • The project Technical Unit jointly with implementing agencies (AAH and CARE) jointly supported an event to commemorate World Environment Day on 26th January 2021 which was led by MoEACC. This event was followed by a two-day capacity building workshop on 27th and 28th January 2021 the training covered introduction to CBNRM, principles of rangeland management and basic grazing systems and ecosystem restoration and dry land afforestation. Additionally, CARE conducted a government capacity building training on NRM in Somaliland. • The technical unit with Oxfam ( implementing agency) conducted a workshop on disaster and climate shock trends in the last 20 years, covering 2000-2020 with team from HADMA and NADFOR with participation of governments line ministries and other Government organizations, UN agencies, International/Local Organizations, Universities (students and Dean of University of Bosaso), the Chairman of Puntland Non-State Actors and HADMA subsequently, Oxfam and HADMA led an inter-agency rapid assessment on the GATI cyclone in Bari region which was used to determine the needs of the people and the best way to respond to the crisis. • The TU conducted 8 training sessions for NADFOR and HADMA (now MoHADM) on early warning systems and disaster risk management. • HADMA and Oxfam team completed and disseminated an early warning data collection tool to community early warning early action committees in 15 villages where community representatives were also provided with a refresher training on the tool to ensure they understand its usage. • The project facilitated a learning event on the Somaliland Mobile Early Warning System was facilitated between HADMA and NADFOR, aimed to cross-pollinate and observe progress made in Somaliland’s mobile early warning system. • The project supported NADFOR in conducting Somaliland Disaster Management Policy dissemination workshop in 2020. • HADMA identified and signed an agreement with a tech company to develop a platform for EWEA data collection, analysis and dissemination and has progressed to create an Interactive Voice Response system (IVR) and rent a server from the GOLIS telecommunication company • SomReP engaged with federal line ministries in a new one-day co-creation process to (i) identify common areas of interest, (ii) define short and long terms areas of Joint Action; (iii) map the institutional support space; and finally (iv) develop action plans for short term Joints Action. • SomReP engaged with the federal Ministry of Economic Investment & Planning to coimplement the consortium’s Annual Resilience Measurement (ARM). • SomReP has set up an operational research under SIDA and EU-RESTORE where some VSLA groups will be injected with cash to contribute to contingency fund which will be managed by Village Social Affairs Committee. It is also expected that VSLA leadership will be part of the signatories to the village bank account and therefore be part of the decision-making process. Indicator 5.3: Documents / reports published on resilience at relevant national and international platforms Data from project secondary data as well as feedback from key project staff indicated efforts in knowledge management and enhancing cross learning. Through strategic partnerships under the EU RESTORE and SIDA project, the project has managed to publish 12 documents against baseline of zero in 2019 and exceeding the overall project target of 2. The published materials are listed below:

69 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project 1. Publication of visibility banners targeting 9 project Target villages (Bedey,Dawad,Biyo Ado,Maraya,Diilin,Hasbahale,Dhiganle, Cambare and Qarxis ) 2. Publication of visibility label sticker targeting 9 project Target villages (Bedey,Dawad,Biyo Ado,Maraya,Diilin,Hasbahale,Dhiganle,Cambare and Qarxis) 3. Publication of visibility scarf/garbissar for VSLA groups targeting 9 project Target villages (Bedey,Dawad,Biyo Ado,Maraya,Diilin,Hasbahale,Dhiganle, Cambare and Qarxis ) 4. Publication of visibility T-shirts targeting 9 project Target villages (Bedey,Dawad,Biyo Ado,Maraya,Diilin,Hasbahale,Dhiganle, Cambare and Qarxis ) 5. Publication of visibility hat/caps targeting 9 project Target villages (Bedey,Dawad,Biyo Ado,Maraya,Diilin,Hasbahale,Dhiganle, Cambare and Qarxis ) 6. Publication of visibility coat targeting 9 project Target villages (Bedey,Dawad,Biyo Ado,Maraya,Diilin,Hasbahale,Dhiganle, Cambare and Qarxis ) 7. Publication of visibility signboard targeting 9 project Target villages (Bedey,Dawad,Biyo Ado,Maraya,Diilin,Hasbahale,Dhiganle, Cambare and Qarxis ) 8. Nutrition training manuals distributed to ToTs for VSLA groups 9. Partnership with the BRCiS consortium to support Somali Response Innovation Lab (SomRIL) which worked with federal MoPIED and MoLFR and local Somali entrepreneurs to raise awareness of facilitative business policies and opportunities to invest at the SANKALP forum https://youtu.be/_QjcMingPWk. 10. Partnership with SomRIL and Federal MoH onset of COVID-19 to develop contextualized and digitized health messaging covering a range of issues related to the disease (https://www.responseinnovationlab.com/somalia-covid-19 and also on the official RCCE repository https://covid19som-ochasom.hub.arcgis.com/pages/rcce). SomRIL also supported the government to develop a protocol to enable the rapid development and dissemination of informational material. 11. SomRIL partnered with Startup Blink to migrate the RISE research to their platform so that Somalia will be included in a global ecosystem mapping. https://www.startupblink.com/startups/somalia 12. SomReP launched its draft Government & Private Sector Engagement Strategy (2020-2021) at the Donor Advisory Group. 3.4 EVALUATION OBJECTIVE 3: IDENTIFY AND ASSESS KEY LESSONS AND CHALLENGES FOR INFORMING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE PROGRAM INTERVENTIONS Findings presented under this sub section was obtained primary data gathered through in-depth interviews ( key informant interviews) with project staff supporting the implementation of the EU RESTORE and SIDA Project( both SomReP and implementing agencies teams) as well as line ministries government officers. 3.4.1: FEEDBACK PROMISING RESULTS (PROJECT ASPECTS THAT HAVE WORKED WELL) The following were reported as key aspects of the EU RESTORE and SIDA project under respective sectors that have worked well: Natural Resources Management and Disaster Risks Reduction • High acceptance of CBDRM activities among local communities as the main pathway of responding to impacts of climate change and enhancing communities’ journey towards climate change adaptation • Cross learning visits for government officers to various project locations where CAAPs activities have been successfully implemented as well as interacting with the dash board. This also promoted exposure of government officers on operations of the dashboard which provided them with

70 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project opportunity to have firsthand experience on tracking messages sent from various sites they have been supporting • High acceptance of DRR activities among state actors including adoption of CAAPs by regional government in Puntland and Somaliland including integration in the National Development Plans with budgetary allocation. • High acceptance of DRR activities in regional and district authorities including creation of DRR units in municipalities which have positively taken up dissemination of early warning system and resultant actions. The DRR units have also taken up lead in vulnerability assessments, development, implementation, monitoring and review of CAAPs as well as positively tracking dashboards Food Security and Livelihoods • VSLAs have been effective in impacting lives. Through them, communities have adopted culture of saving, pooling resources and lending to each other. Loans have also been used to establish new income generating activities, expand existing ones as well as improve on their economic situationfeed their families • DRR activities have been widely accepted by both pastoral and agro-pastoral communities. This include early warning and early action • Use of local champions: the use of lead farmers, VSLAs agents and DRR champions as authority in local communities have increased buy-in and adoption among target groups. In some locations, VSLA champions have spearheaded formation of VSLA groups without external support from project technical staff. • Lead farmers have also championed adoption of GAPs among peers while DRR champions have gone ahead to partner with regional government in Somaliland and Puntland to champion inclusion of DRR in municipalities and Somalia National Development Plan. Gender and Social Protection • Studies and assessment: To fully ground the gender mainstreaming in the project cycle and operations, SomReP has spearhead focused inquiry and remedial measures. This has been done through conducting various assessment including gender sensitive vulnerability and capacity assessment, CVCA, gender analysis, desk reviews of consortium gender policies and strategies as well as mapping of women organizations. This has helped to reduce gender blindness and increased focus on gender transformative approaches/models. • Unlocking access to finances for women groups: Successful piloting of increasing access for women (implemented by Oxfam). The focus was to address barriers to finances by women. Women organizations of diverse membership (rural, urban, educated/elite and non-educated) were facilitated to establish linkages with Somalia chamber of commerce. The chamber of commerce supported with formal recognition of the groups which enabled them access finances. • Internship for female youth: SomReP has been providing internship to qualified women and girls as bridge to increasing access to future employment. The internship is providing hands on experience to the female youth who are often intimidated by requirement in advertisements for gainful employment and rarely takes up these opportunities. • Gender training and other capacity building efforts: The project has to date conducted gender training for all project staff from the implementing agencies and also identified 2 gender focal persons from each agency. These staff are currently coordinating gender mainstreaming activities throughout the project implementation process. 3.4.2: PROJECT ASPECTS THAT NEED FURTHER ATTENTION (WHAT HAS NOT WORKED WELL) Feedback obtained through in-depth interviews (key informant interviews) with project staff supporting the implementation of the EU RESTORE and SIDA Project (both SomReP and implementing agencies teams) as well as line ministries government officers established the following project aspects as requiring additional attention: Gender and Social Inclusion

71 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project • Collaborations and partnership with government: In some locations especially in the South West State, government officers have not fully embraced the centrality of mainstreaming gender in relief and development work. This is mainly due to prevailing cultural barriers that suppress the voice of women and their active involvement in key decision making processes both at household and community level. However, positive interest has been identified in project locations in Somaliland where past efforts in sensitization and awareness creation by aid and development agencies have resulted in increased acceptance of gender related conversations. • Low Acceptance and uptake at community level. The prevailing misconception and lack of proper understanding of what hence mainstreaming among local communities continue to hinder transformation. Most of them equate it to feminism or direct challenge of power held by men at both household and community levels. Most women (especially the elderly) have resigned to the fate of patriarchal nature of the Somali community and are comfortable with status quo. Food Security and Livelihoods • Crop Failure: Agricultural production in northern parts of Somalia has continued to struggle due to unfavorable climatic conditions (unreliable rainfall and extremely high temperatures) both of which results in massive crop failure • Access to farm inputs: most seeds used by farmers in Somalia are not tested and adopted to local situation. They are mostly imported from other countries, with most sourced from Middle East. • Access to markets: This aspect remains a major challenge in Somalia- mainly due to vast distance to formal and organized markets. This mostly leaves the farms with no choice than to trade locally among themselves which affect both scale of business as well as prices for agricultural products. 3.4.3: KEY CHALLENGES EXPERIENCED IN THE IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS Feedback obtained through in-depth interviews (key informant interviews) with project staff supporting the implementation of the EU RESTORE and SIDA Project (both SomReP and implementing agencies teams) as well as line ministries government officers established the following project aspects as requiring additional attention Natural Resources Management and Disaster Risks Reduction 1. Prolonged droughts situation as experience in Puntland and Somaliland has resulted in depletion of water sources (especially open sources such as earth dams and hand dug/shallow wells as well as depletion of vegetative cover. This has affected implementation of key activities in the CAAPs especially those related to water supply and natural resources management and also affected the key project outcomes. 2. Displacements among local communities has continued throughout the project period. These have been occasioned by harsh environmental factors which has caused massive movement of affected communities, including some under the project intervention locations to others. These movements have continued to exert pressure on both natural and financial resources thus suppressing project outcomes. 3. Delays in 2020-21 occasioned by COVID-19 onset and related movement restrictions and lock down. This resulted in breakdown of local enterprises-including those which were earlier formed under the project through IGAs interventions. This also affect inflow of crowd sourcing funds spearheaded by SomReP private sector partner Shaqodoon. Food Security and Livelihoods • High staff turnover for both implementing partners and government staff have been experienced during the project cycle which has continued to affects the implementation pace of key interventions

72 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project • Low technical capacity of government staff who are mostly working on voluntary basis and who quickly moves on when employment opportunities manifest leaving implementation challenges in their respective locations • Lack of budgets for projects by government including logistical support for government officers to conduct field supervision and monitoring • Drought cause delay in key project activities (both agriculture and livestock Delay in onboarding of key staff (economic advisor resigned) and recruitment of livestock specialist took considerable time. This affected timeliness of implementation of various activities under FSL. There was rush to complete activities within the project timeline. • The online fund raising platform managed by private sector partner Shaqodoon which predominantly targeted the Somali diaspora community experience hitches connecting with other online payment platforms such as PayPal and therefore could not remit to could not be local banks including Dahaabshil. This necessitated the change of focus form Diaspora community to local community crowd funding.

73 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The below conclusions and recommendations are drawn from in-depth analysis and interpretation of both quantitative and qualitative findings and structured along the main theme areas of EU RESTORE, SIDA and SomReP in general. 4.1 NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AND DISASTER RISKS REDUCTION Environmental shocks and hazards have continued to negatively affect HHs supported by the project and thus poses a threat of eroding resilience gains made over the past 3 years. As noted form the evaluation finings, majority of households (75%) reported their primary livelihoods as having been affected by recent shocks/hazards- mainly as a result of the prolonged drought that has been experienced in Puntland and Somaliland and which has resulted in depletion of water sources (especially open sources such as earth dams and hand dug/shallow wells as well as depletion of vegetative cover. This has affected implementation of key activities in the CAAPs especially those related to water supply and natural resources management and also affected the key project outcomes. In addition, the drought situation has resulted in massive displacement of local communities who are currently residing in IDP camps. To address the above concerns, the following key recommendations are set forth: 1. Intensify cross learning activities at all program implementation levels (community level, regional government level as well as federal government level. The focus should be on creating a learning journey throughout the process as exemplified by an ongoing USAID funded resilience program in Somalia 2. Increase focus of early warning early action system, especially the use of already existing dashboards. These platforms are already providing critical information such as market prices for both livestock and related products as well as agricultural products; monitoring rangeland management through satellite imagery as well as provision of related advisory services. 3. Consider scale up capacity building of both government and CSOs who act as front line workers for DRR activities, especially in embracing adaptation model. 4.2 FOOD SECURITY AND LIVELIHOODS The food security indicators have continued to deteriorate mainly due to the 3 years of consecutive drought experienced across the horn of Africa including Somaliland and Puntland. From the end line findings, less than half of HH (45%) reported an acceptable FCS (equal for both male and female) which was a significant reduction from 61% of households during the baseline (2019) and 50.4% during the Annual Resilience Measurement (2021). In addition, only 48% of households scored a medium Dietary Diversity Score while, only 17.8% of HHs reported low coping index- implying that most of the HHs have resulted to high coping strategies which could erode resilience gains attained over the past 2 years (2020-2021). Low access and uptake of improved agricultural and livestock management practices was also captured. This is despite the fact the EU RESORE and SIDA project has been promoting improved agricultural and livestock management practices. In particular only 10% of households indicated having benefitted (accessed) agricultural services, only 16% of households indicated having practiced any form of irrigation while very few sampled farmers engaged in crop production, mainly due to the fact that most of them were dependent on rain fed agriculture, and with continuing drought, the farming activities have continued to decline and only 13% of households indicated having benefitted (accessed) veterinary services. To address the above concerns, the following key recommendations are set forth: 1. Take up untapped opportunity of widening scope of support for livestock based livelihood: The program focus on CAHWs as the major intervention for pastoral communities has yielded very low results. This has resulted in missed opportunities such as supporting pastoralist in organizing themselves under livestock association and building their capacity in improved livestock rearing. This should also include providing farmers with information on prevailing markets process for livestock thus enabling them negotiate better prices with buyers. This will also enable them tap into already existing livestock market in gulf countries through existing infrastructure (port of Berbera) 2. Upscale support for livestock support to farmers through formation and training of livestock producer groups or associations. Tap into existing opportunity of livestock marketing infrastructure particularly using the shipping port of Barbera.

74 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project 3. Scale down agricultural interventions in unfavorable locations (especially in the northern parts of Somalia) and concentrate the same in the South West State 4. Organize framers into producer groups or associations and provide linkages with markets in major towns 5. Conduct mapping of viable private partners in project locations which can support market based interventions (both livestock and agricultural production groups/associations) and link them with pastoralists and farmers in respective project locations. Also utilize the private sectors actors in providing various capacity building activities such as training for producers groups and associations as well as in providing market information to producers. 4.5 GENDER AND SOCIAL INCLUSION As captured under other sections of this report, the project (and Somalia in general) has continued to experience low acceptance and uptake of affirmative action for women at community level. This is mainly due to prevailing misconceptions and lack of proper understanding value of gender mainstreaming among local communities, a fact that continue to hinder transformative change. As also noted, most community members equate gender mainstreaming to feminism or direct challenge of power held by men at both household and community levels. Most women (especially the elderly) have therefore resigned to the fate of patriarchal nature of the Somali community and are comfortable with status quo. To enhance gender issues in subsequent projects, the following recommendations are put forth: 1. Scale up targeting criteria and go beyond focus on having a certain number of women in project and considering that as gender mainstreaming. All implementing agencies should focus on enhancing inclusion right from project design and maintain focus throughout the project cycle (implementation process, monitoring, reporting, and evaluation) - including engendering approaches in the project monitoring, data collection and reporting tools 2. Upscale sensitization, awareness creation and knowledge transfer among target communities on applying gender lens on beneficiaries selection and targeting, participation and involvement throughout the project cycle 3. Continue to integrate gender lenses in project design activities including incorporating them in the log frame and performance indicators 4. Consider supporting an additional staff who will double up as the gender focal point. The staff should drive the agenda of gender inclusion at federal government level. This can be done on secondment basis to Ministry of Planning and Development to spearhead the development of national gender policy and pursue inclusion aspects in the National Development Plan.

75 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project 5.0 ANNEXES 5.1 TOR, INCEPTION REPORT AND QUESTIONAIRE 5.2 CROPS CULTIVATED AND YIELD PER SEASON Season Crop Number of farmers First priority crop Hagga maize 17 melon 3 onion 2 sorghum 1 Second priority Hagaa maize 1 melon 3 onion 2 pigeon_peas 3 sesame 1 sorghum 13 Third priority crop Hagga maize 1 melon 4 onion 3 other 2 pigeon_peas 3 sesame 7 sorghum 3 first priority Hagaa land and harvest Taab 4.5 Acre 1.8 harvest 21.1 Second priority Hagaa land and harvest Taab 4.1 Acre 1.6 harvest 12.8 Third priority Hagaa land and harvest Taab 3.8 Acre 1.5 harvest 8.9 First priority crop Guu maize 28 melon 8 onion 3 pigeon_peas 2 sesame 2 sorghum 12 First priority Guu land and harvest Taab 2.8 Acre 4 harvest 301.8 Second priority crop Guu maize 7 melon 2 onion 9

76 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project other 2 pigeon_peas 3 rice_paddy 1 sesame 3 sorghum 28 Second priority Guu land and harvest Taab 2.8 Acre 2.7 harvest 284.8 Third priority crop Guu maize 5 melon 8 onion 4 other (beans, tomatoes, lemon) 11 pigeon_peas 10 sesame 13 sorghum 3 tobacco 1 Third priority Guu land and harvest Taab 3.8 Acre 2.7 harvest 114.8 Cultivate land during During Deyr No 36 Yes 42 First Priority crop Deyr maize 28 melon 5 onion 2 rice_paddy 1 sesame 1 sorghum 5 First priority Deyr land and harvest Taab 3.5 Acre 2.4 harvest 12.9 Second Priority crop Deyr maize 2 melon 4 onion 4 other 1 pigeon_peas 2 sesame 5 sorghum 24 Second priority Deyr land and harvest Taab 2.5 Acre 1.2 harvest 4.9 Third Priority crop Deyr maize 4 melon 3 onion 6 other 7

77 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project pigeon_peas 11 rice_paddy 1 sesame 5 sorghum 5 Third priority Crop Deyr land and harvest Taab 2.9 Acre 2.5 harvest 4.2 Cultivate land during During Jilal No 65 Yes 12 First Priority crop Jilal maize 2 melon 4 onion 1 other 2 rice_paddy 1 sorghum 3 First priority Crop Jilal land and harvest Taab 2 Acre 1.8 harvest 40.4 Second Priority crop Jilal maize 3 melon 2 onion 4 other 1 pigeon_peas 1 rice_paddy 1 sorghum 1 Second priority Crop Jilal land and harvest Taab 2 Acre 2 harvest 35.3 Third Priority crop Jilal maize 2 melon 2 onion 1 other 2 pigeon_peas 1 rice_paddy 1 sesame 2 sorghum 1 tobacco 1 Third priority Crop Jilal land and harvest Taab 2 Acre 1.6 harvest 6.1

78 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project 5.2: LIST OF SAMPLED VILLAGES District Village Entry District Village Entr y District Village Entry Afgooye Dhajalaq 14 Baidoa Midow 41 Laasanoo d Oog 77 Afgooye Jambalu ul 12 Baidoa AwAdinle 24 Laasanoo d Yagoori 38 Afgooye Abanaale 6 Baidoa Salamey 35 Laasanoo d Lafaweyne 10 Afgooye Baalguri 18 Baidoa Wariyaal e 34 Laasanoo d Adhicadeye 8 Afgooye Waranba s 8 Baidoa Awdinle 52 Laasanoo d Kalabaydh 48 Afgooye Ris 20 Baidoa Towfik 1 Laasanoo d Xidh_xidh 5 Afgooye Irdoole 11 Bossaso Barooqle 11 Laasanoo d Tulosamaka b 4 Afgooye Kuraari 19 Bossaso Ciridhab e 14 Laasanoo d Dhumay 3 Afgooye Lafoole 11 Bossaso ufeyn 16 Laasanoo d Waqadari 3 Afgooye Jaran 14 Bossaso Laag 12 Laasanoo d Gambadhe 2 Afgooye Bulalow 4 Bossaso Gao 19 Laasanoo d Shululux 7 Afgooye Kaharoo w 4 Burao Qoyta 16 Laasanoo d Yeyle 11 Afgooye Adanwal o 13 Burao Qoryale 32 Lughaya Garagaara Bari 12 Afgooye Donka 4 Burao Kalbarre 60 Lughaya Lughaya 23 Afgooye Awgooye 15 Burao Balihiile 37 Lughaya Garbodadar 24 Afgooye Libahle 6 Burao Suugsad e 30 Salahley Inaigarre 10 Afgooye Bula_Xar toy 11 ElAfweyne Ceel Midgaan 17 Salahley Qoolcaday 13 Afgooye Balbaley 114 ElAfweyne Fadhigaa b 18 Salahley Salahley 19 Badhan Marshax aled 65 ElAfweyne Geelcas eeye 8 Xudur Banjiney 6 Badhan Haylan 78 ElAfweyne Dhoboca ntug 6 Xudur Dabeelow IDP 2 Badhan Hadaftim o 97 ElAfweyne Bohol 22 Xudur Donfeylaho w IDP 2 Badhan Habasha 81 ElAfweyne Bixin 21 Xudur Dhiil IDP 2 Baidoa Wadajir_ 2_IDP 9 ElAfweyne Illad 17 Xudur Elbarde IDP 2 Baidoa Mooshe, 38 ElAfweyne Dhidinka 14 Xudur Elgodow IDP 2 Baidoa Masubiy e 20 ElAfweyne Balanba al 10 Xudur Fadhigaale IDP 2 Baidoa Busley 33 ElAfweyne Garadag 44 Xudur Garasweyn e_IDP 2 Baidoa Bulla_Ke row 21 ElAfweyne Farroguu l 12 Xudur Holede_IDP 2 Baidoa ADC_1_I DP 29 ElAfweyne Godheeli 23 Xudur Morishilinle IDP 2

79 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project Baidoa H/wadag 29 ElAfweyne Gowsaw eyne 21 Xudur Warshiire IDP 2 Baidoa Bulla_Ma dmalan 21 ElAfweyne Sincarro 16 Xudur Gererimoga w 4 Baidoa Goyale 22 ElAfweyne El_Afwey n 72 Xudur Shilow 4 Baidoa Waberi 56 Eyl Daawad 90 Xudur Qural 4 Baidoa Athika 27 Eyl Qarhis 52 Xudur Lafale 4 Baidoa Hanana1 _IDP 23 Eyl Biyo Ade 21 Xudur Mada Warabe 5 Baidoa Adaada 29 Eyl Diilin 56 Xudur Weerow 4 Baidoa Bula_Jire y 24 Eyl Hasbaha le 54 TOTAL 2,733 Baidoa Wadajir 43 Eyl Dhiganle 54 Baidoa Lowile_Y arey 35 Eyl Cambare 6 Baidoa Bula_Jay 23 Eyl Badey 32 Baidoa Horseed 40 Eyl Mareye 17 Baidoa Misgale 36 Hargeysa Jaleelo 17 Baidoa Buka 2 Hargeysa Arabusiy o 26 5.3: SCHEDULE OF COMPLETED KIIS AND FGDS Table 30: Schedule of KIIs and FGDs PARTICIPANTS Number of interviews conducted KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS SomReP Sectors Technical Advisors and M&E 3 Key staff from project partners( ADRA, AAH, CARE, COOPI, DRC, Oxfam and Shaqodoon) 7 Government staff in Ministry of Health, Water, Agriculture and Livestock 4 NADFOR 1 HADMA 1 District Commissioner’s office 3 Community Based Animal Health Workers 3 Total 22 TRACER SURVEY Village Saving and Loaning Associations (VSLAs) 12(1 per district) Youth(TVET) graduates 12( 1 per district) Total 24 QUALITATIVE OUTCOME HARVESTING Village Development Committees 3 Natural Resource Management Committees 3 Early Warning Early Action Committees 3

80 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project Social Affairs Committees 3 Water Management Committees 3 Farmers associations (beneficiaries of cash for work and Good Agricultural Practices 2 Total 17 5.4: LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED Table 31: list of documents reviewed and links # Document Source/Link 1. Annual Resilience Measurement (2021) Somali Resilience Program 2. UN OCHA Somalia Drought Response and Famine Prevention 15 November - 15 December 2022 https://reliefweb.int/report/somalia/somaliahumanitarian-situation-update-2022- humanitarian-response-plan-revisedrequirements-24-october-2022 https://www.unicef.org/somalia/reports/som alia-situation-reports-2022 3. FSNAU FEWS NET. Somalia Food Security Outlook June 2022 to January 2023 Bulletin. https://reliefweb.int/report/somalia/somaliafood-security-outlook-update-june-2022- january-2023 4. UNHCR’s Protection and Return Monitoring Network (PRMN) https://data.unhcr.org/en/dataviz 5. Francesca Bastagli, Jessica Hagen-Zanker, Luke Harman, Valentina Barca, Georgina Sturge, And Tanja Schmidt (2019) The Impact of Cash Transfers: A Review of the Evidence from Lowand Middle-income Countries. Journal of Social Policy , Volume 48 , Issue 3 , July 2019 , pp. 569 – 594 DOI https://doi.org/10.1017/S00472794180007 15 6. Care International (2017) The Impact of cash transfers on resilience. A multi-country Study. https://reliefweb.int/report/zimbabwe/impac t-cash-transfers-resilience-multi-countrystudy 7. Matias Busso, Juanita Camacho, Julian Messina, Guadalupe Montenego (2020) The Challenge of protecting informal households during the COVID19 Pandemic. Evidence from Latin America. Discussion Paper No. IDB-DP-780. https://publications.iadb.org/en/thechallenge-of-protecting-informalhouseholds-during-the-covid-19-pandemicevidence-from-latin-america 8. World Bank Group hand Book on Poverty and Inequality https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/ en/488081468157174849/pdf/483380PUB 0Pove101OFFICIAL0USE0ONLY1.pdf 9. Annual Narrative Report (2019) Somali Resilience Program 10. Annual Narrative Report (2020) Somali Resilience Program 11. Annual Narrative Report (2021) Somali Resilience Program 12. Annual Narrative Report (2022) Somali Resilience Program 13. Baseline Survey For EU-Restore and SIDA Projects Somali Resilience Program

81 End line Evaluation Report for EU RESTORE and SIDA Project