Business Partnerships as a Force for Good | Learning Series | ImpAct Report - November 2021

ImpAct Report A report prepared by Business Partnerships for Global Goals with support from 60dB November 2021

ImpAct Report | Mott MacDonald | 3

Contents

Note from the Project Director

04

The Need for this ImpAct report

05

1. About Us 06 2. Our Business 08 3. Our investments 10 4. Our Performance on Sustainable Development Goals

12

5. Our Impact Processes 14 6. What type of Investments: Our 8 projects

16

7. Key Insights: What have we heard by listening

18

7.1. Who are we supporting?

7.2 What impact & How much: Effect of COVID & Effect of Support

20 23

8. Beneficiary voices 28 9. The Way Beyond 29 Annex 1: Unpacking Key insights

30

4 | Mott MacDonald | ImpAct Report

ImpAct Report | Mott MacDonald | 5

Note from the Project Director

We are happy to share our Business Partnerships for Global Goals (BP4GG) ImpAct Report to explain how we have been thinking about impact and share some highlights of our impact performance.

In times of COVID-19, we set out to test innovative approaches to create shared value for people and the planet, changing lives of the vulnerable women and men in global value chains.

COVID-19 was not only a health shock but also a major disruption to the global trade and economy which hit the garments and agriculture value chains adversely.

The measures adopted globally to curb the pandemic led to demand reduction, impacting trade, pushing millions of workers and farmers out of job, into poverty, with no social safety nets in place.

In order to test and scale responsible and inclusive business initiatives in partnership with the private sector with a focus on improving lives, incomes and access to jobs as well as markets for the poorest and most marginalised people, Business Partnerships for Global Goals programme², funded by the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) UK set up the Vulnerable Supply Chains Facility which implemented eight partnerships projects in seven countries across Asia and Africa.

Four of these projects co-financed by the FCDO and business partners are in agriculture sector (in Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania and Zimbabwe) and four are in garments sector (in Bangladesh and Myanmar). We worked with businesses and industry players who are leading the pathway for responsible sourcing, traceability and focus on ESG action as well as reporting.

The Need for this ImpAct³ report

The aim of this report is transparency - a chance for us to share our impact and offer learnings to FCDO, our partners, brands and retailers and the broader sector striving toward embedding positive impact into their systems and ways of working and being.

The aim of this report is also transparency of learning, sharing models that worked, or not, the practice of impact measurement, using Impact Management Project (IMP) norms, and LeanDataSM. The aim of this report is transparency of partnering, bringing out how partnerships can result in more than the sum of its individual parts.

Finally, the aim of this report is stimulating reflection and action from the reader. We emphasize the importance of Action in ImpAct. What can we do more to help those most in need?

This report will lead the pathway to ideas for continued industry led action that can change lives of the bottom billion, reducing time to impact to achieve Global Goals.

I would like to thank all our 331 partners as well as 60 Decibels (60dB) who helped collect impact data in a safe manner during the times of COVID-19. A huge thank you to Raania Rizvi, Kate Cooper, Radana Crhova and Ian Felton at FCDO for their support in our programme which helped make change happen on the ground.

“Real change, enduring change, happens one step at a time.”¹ Ruth Bader Ginsburg

¹ Notorious RBG: The Life and Times of Ruth Bader Ginsburg ² Business Partnerships for Global Goals is a UK-aid funded programme implemented by Mott MacDonald. We partner with 20 UK and international retail brands, Not For Profit organisations, 296 farms and factories across Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Myanmar, Tanzania, and Zimbabwe, to provide economic, social, and health support to 1.4 million women and men impacted by COVID-19.

The ImpAct report provides the BP4GG stakeholders, partner brands/retailers, FCDO a basis for informing their insights and decisions. Stakeholders, including partner brands and retailers, can use the data to inform their internal needs for impact data but also the interest of consumers for more information of responsible sourcing. They can choose to continue to collect the impact data that is important to them and engage regularly with a broad range of stakeholders through their own ESG reporting, to stress-test the value of the information they are reporting to these stakeholders and respond.

Consider the ImpAct report to feed internal business needs: Depending on their ‘impact’ intentions, stakeholders, including, retailers and brands can use these insights to increase the positive impact on agriculture and garments supply chains and minimise the risks identified through this report, hence manage and maximise impact beyond BP4GG

Consider the ImpAct report to respond to information needs of investors: Investors have an increasing interest in SDG-related data to assess risks, including risks related to companies, and new business opportunities. The assessment of business impacts on the SDGs can inform investors’ decisions to help them better represent the values of their clients and offer differentiated sustainable financial products, while understanding their own SDG impacts across their portfolios. To inform their decision-making, investors are seeking information on how companies are transforming their competitive advantage in relation to the SDGs into business results and on how relevant the SDGs are to overall company strategies.

Consider the ImpAct report to feed the information needs of civil society: Civil society organizations assess SDG performance and hold companies accountable as well as press for more transparency.

Consider the BP4GG ImpAct management model to inform how data is collected: Stakeholders, including brands and retailers, may decide to embrace the beneficiary feedback model of managing impact, using LeanDataSM, as a business intelligence tool to more effectively identify risks in their supply chain operations.

Consider the ImpAct report to reflect information needs of consumers: Brands and retailers can use these impact insights to respond to consumers’ increased interest for more visibility of responsible sourcing. Consumers might increasingly demand more sustainable products and services and base their choices on the assessment of corporate sustainability information, including information on performance on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

³ We called our report ImpAct Report, with ‘capital A” as we feel the importance of (triggering) Action is crucial and this needs to stand out.

ImpAct Report | Mott MacDonald | 7

6 | Mott MacDonald | ImpAct Report

1. About Us

Business Partnerships for Global Goals (BP4GG) is a UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) programme which invests in partnerships with multinational companies (MNCs) to test and scale shared value initiatives that support delivery of the Global Goals.

The programme focusses on providing immediate support to vulnerable people to improve their access to incomes, jobs and markets, as well as catalysing responsible business practices in the longer-term.

BP4GG is managed by Mott MacDonald Ltd (MML), in a consortium with Accenture Development Partnerships (ADP) and the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED).

The BP4GG programme was initiated in February 2020 and immediately pivoted to a rapid COVID-19 response facility, the COVID-19 Vulnerable Supply Chains Facility (VSCF), to respond to the impact the pandemic had on vulnerable people in the agriculture and garments supply chains. By July

2020, the Facility had successfully joined forces with 20 international and UK retail brands and INGOs to implement eight partnership projects that would provide immediate relief to vulnerable workers in the two acutely affected supply chains (agriculture and garments), whilst working to increase their resilience to similar future shocks and leveraging business’s outreach and influence to ‘build back better’.

By the time the BP4GG ended on December 5, 2021, the Facility supported 296 suppliers of its brands and retail partners, across seven countries- Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Myanmar, Tanzania, and Zimbabwe, and two continents. In doing so, it reached 1.4 million people with economic, social, health and environmental initiatives, of which 63% are living below $5.50 a day.

Of these, more than 789,000 (55%) are women.

Through the dissemination activities that the Facility and its partners invested in and implemented, the learning and successful models tested under BP4GG VSCF have spread much wider, going beyond seven countries and two continents.

Key Programme Information Contract Purchase Order No.

10023

Programme duration

22 months (27 February 2020 – 5 December 2021)

Donor

Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO)

Number of initiatives funded

8 with country or multi-country focus

Sectors

2 (agriculture & garments)

Duration of the FCDO funding period for initiatives

12 months

Location of the initiatives

Kenya, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Ghana, Zimbabwe, Tanzania and Ethiopia.

Cost the initiatives funded

£4.9m (of which £2.5 from partners, £2.4m from FCDO)

Facility Manager

Mott MacDonald UK

Office Location

Mott MacDonald House, 8-10 Sydenham Road Croydon CR0 2EE, UK

Our Partners • Arco • Awaj Foundation • CARE International • Co-op • Coventry University • Mi Hub • Ethical Trading Initiative • Fairtrade Africa • Fairtrade Foundation • Flamingo Horticulture • Flower Hub • Flower Watch • FNET • Girl Determined • GoodWeave International • Impactt • IPL • Marks & Spencer • MM Flowers • Mondelez International • Minor Weir and Willis • Monsoon Accessorize • Morrisons • New Look • Partner Africa • Practical Solutions International • Primark • Proctor & Gamble • Sainsbury’s • Tesco • Union Roasted • VF Corporation • Waitrose • Women Win • Women Working Worldwide • Xpol

Panda Flower Farm, Kenya Photo credit: Fairtrade

8 | Mott MacDonald | ImpAct Report

ImpAct Report | Mott MacDonald | 9

2. Our Business

Our theory of change explains the change and impact we seek to create and how to achieve these aspirations.

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the world’s most vulnerable populations through loss of health, jobs, incomes, assets, and education. The crisis highlights the need for urgent action to cushion the pandemic’s social and economic consequences and help vulnerable populations recover.

The BP4GG mandate is to pilot and scale up responsible business models that will ultimately make agriculture and garments supply chains more resilient to deal with economic and social shocks, such as of the pandemic. Investments made by both FCDO and partners over a 12-month period will not only see vulnerable groups working in these supply chains being reached with support, but we expect these vulnerable groups to recover from the effects of the pandemic, and businesses continue their operations in a more responsible and transparent way.

A continuous focus on learning and dissemination by the Facility and its partners will lead to these models, or variants of them, continuing and being scaled up widely, so that positive impact on those in most need is sustained beyond.

Figure 1: BP4GG Theory of Change

Learning for improvement, scale up or replication

4. Businesses or NFP led initiatives to respond to challenges & opportunities that COVID-19 presents for agriculture and garments supply chains

3. DFID engages with business and other market players to cocreate initiatives within priority countries and sectors to address social and economic COVID-19 challenges

2. DFID call for proposals

1. Rapid research on challenges faced by businesses in garments and agriculture due to COVID-19 that impact on vulnerable groups in DFID priority countries

Flower worker harvesting roses Photo Credit: Karen Smith BP4GG

8.2. Businesses continue their operations in a responsible and transparent way

5.2. Initiatives that impact on policies to ensure improved standards on workplace health & safety completed 5.1. Initiatives that directly impact on health, safety & livelihoods of workers, suppliers completed

Learning for improvement, scale up or replication

6.2. Reduced impact of COVID-19 on businesses and other market actors (ISPs) 7. Innovative and scalable models create sustainable change in supply chains making them more resilient

8.1. COVID-19 vulnerable groups recover from economic and social shocks

6.1. Reduced impact of COVID-19 on vulnerable groups as suppliers workers, migrant workers, including women

• Livelihoods of vulnerable groups maintained and improved • Health and safety improved • Other benefits

• Human rights of workers • Safety of workers • Protection of migrant workers in host country • Payments for suppliers and workers • Income generation activities • Others

ImpAct Report | Mott MacDonald | 11

10 | Mott MacDonald | ImpAct Report

3. Our investments

Ghana

Cadbury Farmer Resilience Fund Lead partner: Fairtrade Foundation and Fairtrade Africa Consortium partners: Mondelez International

Bangladesh

Supporting women in the garment industry earn a living, stay safe and be respected in a COVID-19 environment.

Lead partner: Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI) Consortium partners: Arco, Mi Hub, M&S, New Look, Primark, Sainsbury’s, Tesco

Hidden Supply Chains in Bangladesh – Bringing agency and resiliency to informal workers Lead partner: GoodWeave International Consortium partners: Monsoon, VF Corp, Awaj Foundation

Preventing a COVID-19 Garment Health Worker and Supply Chain Crisis Lead partner: CARE International UK Consortium partner: M&S, Primark

During a ten-week period we assessed the applications received for funding and selected eight initiatives with a total value of £2.4m, of which £1.18m in agriculture and £1.22m in garments from FCDO. Partners invested £2.5m, giving a total budget for these initiatives of £4.9m.

The programme invested in four projects in agriculture and four in garments across seven countries and two continents.

7 countries

5 countries in Africa

2 countries in S & SE Asia

8 projects

4 in agriculture

4 in garments

£ 4.9m

£2.6m in agriculture

£2.3m in garments

£ 2.4m

£1.18m in agriculture

£1.22m in garments

13 in agriculture

10 in garments

Total investment

FCDO investment

20 brands

and retailers (clear of overlaps)

296

suppliers

1,428,000

people reached with support

1,188,000

people improved working practice, and ability to deal with impact of the pandemic

83 in agriculture

213 in garments

228,000 in agriculture

1,200,000 in garments

160,000 in agriculture

1,028,000 in garments

Kenya

Building resilience and sustainability in flower supply chains Lead partner: Fairtrade Foundation, Fairtrade Africa and MM Flowers Consortium partners: Co-op, Coventry University, FNET, M&S, Tesco, Women Working Worldwide Sea Freight Flowers Lead partner: Flamingo International Consortium partners: Flower Watch, Practical Solutions International

Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Zimbabwe

Securing workers’ rights in a COVID-19 context in East African agriculture and horticulture supply chains Lead partner: Ethical Trading Initiative Consortium partners: Coop, Flamingo, MM Flowers, Minor Weir and Willis, Morrisons, Partner Africa, Sainsbury’s, Tesco, Union Roasted, Waitrose

Myanmar

Bridging the gap: supporting the transition from crisis to resilience Lead partner: Impactt Limited Consortium partners: Primark, Women Win

ImpAct Report | Mott MacDonald | 13

12 | Mott MacDonald | ImpAct Report

4. Our Performance on Sustainable Development Goals Our portfolio is producing benefits that reflect aspirations under the UN Sustainable Development Goals

Our investment changed the way suppliers do business and ensure workplaces are safe and secure with COVID-19 safety measures in place

The BP4GG contributes to 8 of the 17 Global Goals

The BP4GG worked with 296 suppliers (factory and farms); The support helped suppliers deal with the pandemic in a way that benefited both the business and their workers. Here is what 97 managers selected across all suppliers have told us:

1 No Poverty

2 Zero Hunger

3 Good Health & Well-being

7.1% of the world’s population or 734 million people lived on less than $1.90 a day in 2019. The pandemic increased depth and breadth of the 734 million BP4GG has built the resilience of nearly 1.2m vulnerable workers, farmers or community people and reduced their exposure and vulnerability to similar economic, social and environmental shocks such as the pandemic.

13 % of these beneficiaries live on less than $1.90 a day. 38 % below $3.20. 63 % below $5.50.

In light of the pandemic’s effects on the food and agricultural sector, prompt measures are needed to ensure that food supply chains are kept alive to mitigate the risk of large shocks that have a considerable impact on everybody, especially on the poor and the most vulnerable.

The BP4GG helped agriculture supply chains, through ETI led Kenya-Zimbabwe-Tanzania interventions, to maintain trade in vegetables and fruit; it also directly addressed food shortages of over 12,000 Bangladeshi garment workers, 4,000 Kenyan flower & vegetable farm workers and almost 84,000 Ghanaian cocoa farmers and their families, supporting them with food aid, nutrition gardens, food crops.

Ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being at all ages is essential to sustainable development. Currently, the world is facing a global health crisis unlike any other — COVID-19 is spreading human suffering, destabilizing the global economy and upending the lives of billions of people around the globe.

BP4GG have reached over a half of a million garment workers and communities in Bangladesh with sensitisation about COVID-19 vaccine. 52% have registered for vaccines already. 33% have had the COVID vaccine, of which 13% of them are fully vaccinated.

92% of those which are not vaccinated, plan to take the vaccine in the future. BP4GG have provided access to primary care services to over a quarter of a million workers and community people in Bangladesh.

5 Gender Equality Women are not only the hardest hit by this pandemic, they are also the backbone of recovery in communities. Putting women and girls at the centre of the recovery process will fundamentally drive better and more sustainable development outcomes for all, support a more rapid recovery, and place the world back on a footing to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.

55 % of those reached with BP4GG support are women. This helped over 0.6 million women improve working practices, knowledge, information, reduced their exposure and vulnerability to COVID 19 and build their resilience to related extreme events such as the pandemic.

8 Decent Work & Economic Growth Sustainable economic growth inclusive of all people and provides decent, meaningful jobs for the global community to improve human well-being.

BP4GG provided over 1.4m people with COVID-safe workspaces, COVD-19 vaccination awareness and information, as well as access to health care and more nutritious food in workplace canteens 84% of them are garments workers or people from communities where garment workers live.

10 Reduced Inequalities

13 Climate Action

17 Partnerships For The Goals

79%

Impact of the pandemic on factory/farm: For 79% COVID-19 had a largely negative or slightly negative impact on their factory or farm.

96%

Operational changes: For 98% of suppliers the way they run their business has very much improved or improved because of the support received. Stricter implementation protocols, sanitizing and wearing a face mask were the most frequently reported changes that were being enforced at the workplace.

100%

98%

Reached with support: All respondents report that they received support from their respective partners.

Importance of support: For 98% the support provided to the factory/farm through BP4GG was very important or important to help deal with the impact of the pandemic.

Training and awareness & implementation of safety protocols were the most important type of support mentioned by managers.

100%

Continuation beyond: All of them said it was very likely of somewhat likely to continue implementing these changes in their factories/ farms/unions.

100%

Recovery from covid-19: For 100% the support provided to the factory/farm through BP4GG was very important or important to help recover the impact of the pandemic. Factory leaders in Bangladesh report improved results related to COVID-19 awareness, while union leaders in Ghana talk about improved cocoa farmers livelihoods; other managers in Kenya talk about continuation of operation and ensuring workers livelihoods.

85%

Perceived business health: Overall nearly 9 in 10 managers report that their business is doing much better than other similar business around. Managers feel they are more capable, more supported and safer working conditions than other similar factories/farms/unions around.

82%

Relationship: 63% very much improved relationship with retailers/brands, 19% slightly improved. In Ghana for all union leaders the relationship with their buyer has very much improved.

100%

Degree of change experienced: All mentioned that their expectations have been met with the support, they received, and the support led to a much improved working environment.

100%

Change in outlook: 100% are feeling more positive now about their factory/farm/ union now than when this support started.

COVID-19 has deepened existing inequalities hitting the poorest and most vulnerable communities the hardest. It has put a spotlight on economic inequalities and fragile social safety nets that leave vulnerable communities to bear the brunt of the crisis BP4GG have used Washington Convention to identify PwD in its supply chains, and ensuring they are equally benefiting from the support provided.

14-16% of flower workers reached with support in Kenya are PwD. Overall, 6.9 % of those which benefited from support in agriculture sector are PwD. 3% in the garments sector. 36% of workers which benefited from support are youth.

As countries move toward rebuilding their economies after COVID-19, recovery plans can shape the 21st century economy in ways that are clean, green, healthy, safe and more resilient. The current crisis is an opportunity for a profound, systemic shift to more sustainable economies that work for both people and the planet.

3,710 tonnes of CO2 emissions removed or abated in twelve months 2020-2021 (equivalent to taking 500 cars off the road for a year⁴). And growing…as weekly shipments continue since July 2021 independent of FCDO funding.

Over 16.5 million flowers shipped from Kenya to Europe, reducing carbon emissions by up to 95% Over 7,000 cocoa farmers in villages in Ghana are practicing more resilient agriculture because of the BP4GG support.

No country can overcome this pandemic alone. Global is not only a moral imperative, it is in everyone’s interests. Any successful intervention requires inclusive partnerships — at the global, regional, national and local levels — built upon principles and values, and upon a shared vision and shared goals placing people and the planet at the centre.

35 partners of which 20 brands/retailers and their 296 suppliers joined forces with FCDO to address the social and economic shocks that COVID-19 brought into agriculture and garments supply chains.

FCDO invested £2.4m to address the crisis in agriculture and garments supply chain… but partners brought in even more resources (£2.5m) to fund adequate COVID-19 response and recovery measures. ⁴ Ref: https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gases-equivalencies-calculatorcalculations-and-references#vehicles

ImpAct Report | Mott MacDonald | 15

14 | Mott MacDonald | ImpAct Report

5. Our Impact Processes

We embed an impact lens into our decision making across our portfolio and we have developed processes and tools that reflect both how we manage for better outcomes and how we measure the type and degree of change that has resulted from our efforts: We ask what impact we can have; screen for whether there is enough impact and understand how we can manage and deliver those targets; and evaluate and reflect upon whether we achieved what we set out to do.

We have aligned with global good practice in impact management and measurement and have incorporated elements from the IMP & 60dB LeanDataSM into our processes and tools.

The Impact Management Project IMP provides a forum for building global consensus on measuring, assessing and reporting impacts on people and the natural environment. It is relevant for enterprises and investors who want to manage environmental, social and governance (ESG) risks, as well as those who also want to contribute positively to global goals.

IMP⁵ is an initiative with input from over 2,000 impact management professionals globally that aims to build consensus across the industry about how we talk about, manage and measure impact. The foundation framework includes the five dimensions of impact, which outline who is impacted, what the problem is being solved, how much impact is being created, the contribution toward impact of the investment intervention, and the impact risks. We have adopted these five dimensions to assess impact⁶ as part of our due diligence process and in our communications and reporting.

Figure 2: The IMP reached global consensus that impact can be deconstructed into five dimensions: What, Who, How Much, Contribution and Risk Impact dimension

Impact questions each dimension seeks to answer

What

What outcome occurs in period?

How important is the outcome to the people (or planet) experiencing it?

Who

Who experiences the outcome?

How underserved are the affected stakeholders in relation to the outcome?

How much

How much of the outcome occurs — across scale depth and duration?

Contribution

What is the enterprise’s contribution to the outcome, accounting for what would have happened anyway?

Risk

What is the risk to people and planet that impact does not occur as expected?

LeanDataSM @60dB 60dB (https://www.60decibels.com/) is a techenabled impact measurement company, working in over 76 countries with over 576 MNCs and other businesses, impact investors, foundations and not-forprofits. 60dB’s clients include: Unilever, MasterCard Foundation, Omidyar Network, Rockefeller Foundation, CDC, BRAC and Acumen. What is LeanDataSM @60dB? Listening to beneficiaries: customers, employees, suppliers and wider beneficiaries, using light touch, remote, standardised surveys via phone, SMS, IVR. So far 60dB has spoken to over 180,000 beneficiaries, across four continents. 60dB’s repeatable, rapid approach to gathering impact indicators and customer insights provides clients with genuine benchmarks of impact performance.

These benchmarks enable a deeper understanding of impact and help to inform better decision making as well as data-led impact management.

⁵ https://impactmanagementproject.com ⁶ https://impactmanagementproject.com/wp-content/uploads/Impact-data-categoriesworksheet-2.pdf

Bringing it all together; how did we know meaningful change has occurred?

We collected impact data in different ways working with our partners. A clear focus on impact performance was built from the design phase, when we worked with partners to understand what impact we can expect.

A ‘hybrid’ model to manage impact performance was used: VSCF partners had set thorough data collection at baseline and endline points; however the VSCF Facility Manager, complemented that with its own assessments, using LeanDataSM⁷. Beneficiary feedback studies were designed to bring in depth insights of impact by talking to beneficiaries⁸ and suppliers and gather different perspectives. We used elements of the IMP norms to design our data collection & reporting.

Through 2021, we have spoken to over 3,200 workers, farmers or suppliers by following this process.

To report our impact results, we try to make meaningful sense of what has happened for our partners, FCDO, and broader stakeholders. We do this by streamlining impact reporting and reporting against the Sustainable Development Goals, with elements of the IMP in defining impact, highlighting the most important headline quantitative impact metrics, and listening from beneficiaries about that. The balance of key metrics, partners data collection, complemented by our own data collection, consistent frameworks, streamlined reporting and meaningful beneficiaries’ stories let us and our stakeholders know whether and what type of change has resulted from our investments.

Section 8, Beneficiary insights, presents key findings from beneficiary feedback studies. Detailed findings from these studies are presented in Annex 1 of this Report.

Design

Implement & iterate

Endline

Post endline

• Sector • Country • New project ideas • Impact • Aspirational goals

• Decision-making filters • Partners monitor & report • Mid-way impact check ‘during’ with LeanData • Clarifying effects & check ToC & targets validity • Data fed into learning and iterative management

• Beneficiary feedback studies with LeanData • Data fed into learning and iterative management • Data shared broadly for scale up models

• Beneficiary feedback studies (gather additional data beyond) with LeanData • Review and finalise impact • Data shared broadly for scale up models

What impact can we have?

Will it be enough impact? Test value of the information we are reporting with our partners.

Did we generate the desired impact? What have we learnt?

Does impact continue?

Test value of the information we are reporting with our partners.

⁷ LeanDataSM uses remote, typically mobile phone-based data collection ⁸ Beneficiaries = workers, farmers or community people

16 | Mott MacDonald | ImpAct Report

ImpAct Report | Mott MacDonald | 17

6. What type of Investments: Our 8 projects⁹ Four projects in the agriculture sector implemented in Africa (two focusing on Kenya, one on Ghana and one working across multiple countries including Kenya, Zimbabwe, Tanzania and Ethiopia).

Project Title: Building Resilience in Flower Supply Chains Lead partner:

Fairtrade Foundation (FT), Fairtrade Africa and MM Flowers

Consortium partners:

M&S, Co-op, Tesco, FNET, Women Working Worldwide, Coventry University

Countries:

Kenya

Beneficiaries targeted:

Flower farm workers (FT and non FT farms)

Key areas of support:

The project supported Kenyan flower workers to address the crisis brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic hitting flower sales by meeting their immediate health protection and nutrition needs, but also to promote a more sustainable flower sector and bolster longer-term resilience.

Key areas of support: distribution of health packages, setup of kitchen gardens to enable workers to support themselves and their families, awareness raising campaigns on key COVID-19 and nutrition messages, alternative income generating activities with seed funding to workers and farms to pilot diversification/climate smart activities; nutritional gardens set up on the farms to help feed workers; training to support gender equality in relation to the COVID-19 impact.

Four projects in the garments sector implemented in South Asia (three in Bangladesh and one in Myanmar).

Project Title: Supporting women in the garment industry, earn a living, stay safe and be respected in a COVID-19 environment Lead partner:

Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI)

Consortium partners:

Primark, Marks & Spencer, Tesco, Arco, Mi Hub, New Look, Sainsbury’s

Countries:

Bangladesh (with learning focus in Pakistan)

Beneficiaries targeted:

garments workers and other factory staff

Key areas of support:

Technical Assistance for factory repurposing for 6 factories Knowledge sharing on repurposing best practices with 14 factories OHS training, COVID-19 prevention awareness (utilising digital technology) Expert Support Network (ESN) to share best practices with Myanmar producing brand and wider RMG industry

Project Title: “Hidden Supply Chains in Bangladesh” Lead partner:

GoodWeave International

Project Title: Cadbury Farmer Resilience Fund

Consortium partners:

Monsoon Accessorize, VF Corporation, Awaj

Lead partner:

Fairtrade Foundation and Fairtrade Africa

Countries:

Bangladesh

Consortium partners:

Mondelez

Beneficiaries targeted:

Garments workers (from Tier 1 and Tier 2/subcontractors/informal)

Countries:

Ghana

Key areas of support:

Beneficiaries targeted:

Cocoa farmers, their families and cocoa communities

Key areas of support:

The project responds to the impact of COVID-19 on Ghanaian cocoa farmers by building on the Mondelēz-funded Cocoa Life Programme to ensure farming families are resilient to the pandemic, and to accelerate and deepen work on income diversification through climate-smart farming.

Key areas of support: support to unions and members with income diversification through start-up capital for promising new business models; organisational strengthening activities for unions and their members, on community adaptation, climate smart crops and income diversification and COVID-19 safety training and awareness.

Immediate food and other aid, rapid assessment of ready-to-hire informal workers Supply chain mapping to identify full extent of supply chains Remediation of child and bonded labour if found COVID-19 prevention and legal rights knowledge Sharing best practises with other brands and wider RMG sector

Project Title: Securing workers’ rights in a COVID-19 context in East African agriculture and horticulture supply chains Lead partner:

Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI)

Consortium partners:

Partner Africa, Morrisons, Coop, Waitrose, Tesco, Sainsbury’s, Union Roasted, Flamingo, Minor Weir and Willis, MM Flowers

Countries:

Kenya, Tanzania, Ethiopia, Zimbabwe

Beneficiaries targeted:

Horticulture farm workers

Key areas of support:

The project contributes to the building of a more resilient East African flower and horticulture industry that collaborate to increase safe work practices and remain viable during crisis such as COVID-19 pandemic.

Key areas of support: Tailored TA support to rebuild farms and create a safe work environment.

Dissemination of lessons and good practice within the ETI network & beyond to encourage wider adoption.

Project Title: “Preventing COVID-19 Garment Health Worker and Supply Chain Crisis” Lead partner:

CARE

Consortium partners:

Marks & Spencer, Primark

Countries:

Bangladesh

Beneficiaries targeted:

Garments workers, factory health staff, and communities of garments workers

Key areas of support:

Covid-19 and GBV education for factory workers and community members Training of health champions, health and safety committee members Connection to health resources, setting up Factory Health Corners, 20 satellite clinics, quarantine centres and digital wellbeing centres GBV orientation, training anti-sexual harassment committee, building capacity and awareness for community support groups Vaccination sensitisation, awareness and linkages Scaling up of HALOW+ best practices with addition of OHS modules

Project Title: Sea Freight Flowers

Project Title: “Bridging the Gap”

Lead partner:

Flamingo

Lead partner:

Impactt

Consortium partners:

Practical Solutions International, Wilmar Flowers (other supply chain actors joined since the design: Marginpar Group, Silpack, Kuehne & Nagel and IPL

Consortium partners:

Primark, Women Win

Countries:

Kenya

Countries:

Myanmar

Beneficiaries targeted:

Flower farms and indirectly their workers

Beneficiaries targeted:

Garments workers

Key areas of support:

This project aims to prove that sea freight of flowers between Kenya and Europe is feasible, costefficient, sustainable and climate friendly.

Key areas of support: Set up protocols for sea freight to be used by the industry; Assessment of Supplier farms for suitability and readiness for sea freight and provide recommendations for improvements; Support across the sea freight value chain to supplier farms, importers, packaging, transporters, shipping companies, offloaders and importers supported to implement protocols for sea freight. Thirteen containers shipped. Learnings documented, including the business case & shared among the industry.

Key areas of support:

Cash transfers to 1,500 workers (5000 planed but stopped due to the coup) Technical Assistance and Training provided to 3 factories(planned not implemented due to the coup) Resilience Fund set up to select longer term initiatives (planned not implemented due to the coup) Working group established to share best practises throughout RMG industry (planned not implemented due to the coup)

⁹ hereinafter we refer to these 8 projects by lead partner name

18 | Mott MacDonald | ImpAct Report

ImpAct Report | Mott MacDonald | 19

7. Key Insights: What have we heard by listening?

Key findings11

60dB collected data for us from a representative sample of beneficiaries (workers and farmers) across our seven projects in four of our seven countries and prepared Impact reports. Here is what we found out from listening to beneficiaries through beneficiaries feedback reports. Detailed information by project, by country and by sector is presented in Annex 1.

Methodology We structured our area of inquiry around three areas (from IMP norms10): • Who are we supporting ……to profile of our beneficiaries • What type of changes have our investments generated….to understand Impact • How much impact….to understand scale of impact and depth of impact

Poverty profile

Inclusivity ratio

Workplace changes

Workplace change satisfaction

38%

0.84

96%

4.6

Live below $3.20 a day

Relative inclusivity ratio

Report employer implemented changes to make workplace safer for workers

Poverty profile

Usefulness of support

Ability to cope with the pandemic

Workplace safety

Concerns about COVID-19

85%

92%

67%

Confidence earning income

Coping compared to others

Sense of safety

…however

63%

62%

92%

61%

93%

report support was useful

Report improved confidence

A Union Leader at Amansie West, Ghana Photo credit: Karen Smith, BP4GG

10 11

Report improvements Reported very satisfied with improvements in in ability to cope workplace

Report are coping much better or slightly better than others in the sector

https://impactmanagementproject.com/impact-management/impact-management-norms/ Annex 1 Unpacking key insights presents detailed findings from beneficiary feedback studies.

Reported their sense of safety and security at work has very much improved or slightly improved

are still concerned about COVID-19 …

level of concerned re COVID-19 has very much decreased or decreased

ImpAct Report | Mott MacDonald | 21

20 | Mott MacDonald | ImpAct Report

7.1. Who are we supporting?

• Demographics • Poverty profile (we used 2011 PPI) • Inclusivity (we used 60dB Inclusivity index) • Vulnerability (we used 60dB Vulnerability index) IMP Norm: Who do BP4GG projects affect? How underserved are they? Have we reached those most in need? To address these questions, we asked a number of questions to learn more about the typical beneficiary BP4GG is reaching, we analyse and present them under the ‘Who’ dimension.

We found out that….We reached the vulnerable and we have been inclusive with our approach: • Income distribution of workers shows that BP4GG projects are inclusive of low-income populations.

• The typical worker lives in an urban setting, is male, aged 39, and lives in a household of five.

• On average, 38% of our beneficiaries are living in poverty (below the $3.20 / day), 63% are low income earners (below the $5.50 / day) .

• Agriculture projects are reaching beneficiaries with lower income than the garments ones; hence the diagram below shows a higher inclusivity ratio of 0.99, compared to 0.64 for garments.

• Males are lower income, on average, than females. There is a high degree of variation by country and project.

• Garment and female workers are coping better with impact of COVID-19 than agriculture and male workers.

• Detailed information about the profile of our beneficiaries is included in Annex 1.

About the workers Country 5%

Gender

Bangladesh

40%

76% Between 23 and 46

42%

18

Female

Live in rural areas; 63% live in urban areas

39 Average

Relative poverty

Youngest

% of population / farmers

Female

0.74

72%

1.89

Ghana

63%

1.61

East Africa Agriculture Benchmark

0.80

Kenya

0.78

38%

40%

FT Cocoa

0.80

FT&MM Flowers

0.79

Flamingo ETI Garments

35% Bangladesh

8% $-

$1.90

$5.50

CARE

0.60

0.64

Per person / per day (2011 PPP)

All averages are at partner level to minimize the effect of varying sample sizes; Country average is calculated by averaging poverty head count ratios in the 3 countries partners operate in.

12

0.69 0.63

Max

Country Avg Average All averages are at partner level to minimize the effect of varying sample sizes; Country average is calculated by averaging Program poverty head count ratios in the 3 countries partners operate in.

0.75

GoodWeave

Portfolio Average : 0.84 $3.20

1.61

ETI Ag - Kenya

13%

20%

0.64

Inclusivity Ratio by Project

West Africa Agriculture Benchmark

60%

Garments

0.99

Middle class

Low income

80%

Agriculture

Portfolio Average : 0.84

Inclusivity Ratio by Country

100%

0%

0.92

We calculate the degree to which you are serving lowincome workers compared to the general population. 1 = parity with national population ; > 1 = overserving; < 1 = underserving.

Income Distribution of projects Relative to Portfolio Country Average Income Distribution of projects Relative to Portfolio Country Average % living below $xx per day (2011) % living below $xx per day (2011) Extreme poverty

Inclusivity Ratio by Sector

Male

TOP 40%

36%

45%

Male

0.84

Average household size

Kenya

55%

Inclusivity Ratio by Gender

Degree that BP4GG is reaching low-income workers relative to national population

5.0

Ghana

13%

Across all countries, the average inclusivity ratio is 0.84, which is in the top 40% relative to 60dB benchmarks. As it is nearing overall 1, almost at ‘parity with national population’, it shows that BP4GG is reaching low-income population.

Inclusivity Ratio

Age 76 Eldest

Zimbabwe

We use the Inclusivity Ratio to show the degree to which BP4GG is over- or underpenetrating low-income segments in the countries. The ratio is a metrics developed by 60dB to estimate the degree to which an enterprise is reaching less well-off customers. It is calculated by taking the average of company % divided by the National %, at the $1.90, $3.20 and $5.50 lines for low-middle income countries, or at $1.90, $3.20 and $11 for middle income countries.

The 60dB benchmark include voices from 176,000+ workers, from 400+ companies in 55 countries.

ImpAct Report | Mott MacDonald | 23

22 | Mott MacDonald | ImpAct Report

60dB Vulnerability Index We used 60dB Vulnerability Index to identify how shocks affect beneficiaries and their families during COVID-19. The index is made of four themes:

7.2 What impact & How much? Effect of COVID & Effect of Support

Vulnerability Index by Gender and Sector Coping

18% 27%

32%

37%

50%

19%

• Poverty level • Financial situation • Coping mechanisms used • Food consumption effects

48% Vulnerable

16% 17%

17%

20%

20%

15% 23%

Garment and female workers are coping better with COVID-19 impact than agriculture and male workers.

26%

20%

16%

15%

4%

11%

9%

Workers in Bangladesh are coping the best while those in Kenya are the most vulnerable.

7%

Garments

60dB Benchmark

17%

11%

Male

Female

Agriculture

20%

23% 11%

There were two areas of inquiry, specifically considering the positive and negative impacts. These were:

Slightly vulnerable

21%

16%

13% Aggregate

Coping

• The effect of COVID-19 on physical, mental and financial wellbeing • The positive effect of BP4GG support on satisfaction, Extremely vulnerable resilience, safety & earnings Very vulnerable

IMP Norm: What outcomes do we contribute to? How much? How do we know if the outcomes achieved are ‘good enough’? We explore these data under the ‘What’ dimension to answer these questions.

The following diagrams compare the negative impact of COVID-19 with the positive impact of Partner Support

by Project Sector and Country, broken out by gender.

Detailed information about impact of our support on beneficiaries, e.g., by project, country, overall is included in Annex 1.

We compared and contrasted the two aspects to understand if we made an impact, what impact have we made and how much.

NegativeImpact ImpactofofCOVID-19 COVID-19 Negative How to read Spider Charts Company Name

Slightly vulnerable

Average of the % of the 5 metrics below. The higher the number the more negative the impact

Company – xx%

Vulnerable COVID-19 level of concern % “very much and somewhat concerned”

Very vulnerable Extremely vulnerable 43%

Vulnerability Index % “extremely and very vulnerable”

Vulnerability Index by Project

Vulnerability Index by Country

33%

13%

Blue Line: average percentage of males 52%

CARE

14% 10%

GoodWeave

29%

72%

23%

Bangladesh

9%

23%

39%

Ghana

38%

Kenya

19%

Kenya Benchmark

19%

12% 13%

15%

15%

Coping

50%

29%

Slightly vulnerable Vulnerable

31%

Very vulnerable ETI Garments

23%

25%

10%

30%

22%

16%

Coping compared to others around % coping “much and slightly worse than others around them”

14%

Extremely vulnerable

Various dimensions chosen to indicate the negative impact of COVID-19

59%

Red Line: average percentage of females

Overall change in financial situation % “got much and slightly worse”

Overall change in food consumption % “very much and slightly decreased”

PositiveImpact Impact Partner Support Positive ofof Partner Support How to read Spider Charts

FT Cocoa

12%

13%

15%

29%

31%

16%

22%

18%

24%

Company Name Flamingo

ETI Ag- Kenya

FT & MM Flowers

Aggregate

12%

22%

26%

31%

18%

13%

21%

20%

15%

35%

16%

21%

30%

17%

25%

16%

11%

Aggregate

60dB Benchmark

13%

11%

16%

15%

21%

20%

17%

Average of the % of the 5 metrics below. The higher the number the more positive the impact

Company – yy%

32%

48%

Usefulness of support % “extremely useful”

10%

32%

46%

Confidence to earn an income % “very much improved”

61%

37%

Blue Line: average percentage of males Red Line: average percentage of females Sense of safety and security at work % “very much improved”

52%

46%

Satisfaction with support % “very satisfied” Various dimensions chosen to indicate the positive impact of Partner Support

Ability to cope with pandemic % “Yes – very much improved”

ImpAct Report | Mott MacDonald | 25

24 | Mott MacDonald | ImpAct Report

By sector

By country

BP4GG generated positive impact on those which needed most.

Negative effect of the pandemic • The overall negative impact that COVID-19 has had on agricultural sector workers is higher than that on the garment sector • 2 in 5 agricultural workers are “extremely vulnerable” or “very vulnerable” compared to 3 in 20 garment workers.

• Concern about Covid-19 is almost double for agriculture workers compared to their garment counterparts.

Positive impact of BP4GG support (how we responded) • Agriculture sector beneficiaries reported much deeper positive impact from BP4GG support than those in garment sector.

• Nearly 9 in 10 found the support extremely useful compared to nearly 4 in 10 of garment workers. For 6 in 10 their ability to cope with the pandemic has very much improved compared to 2 in 10 of garments workers.

• Female beneficiaries show deeper impact than male workers on all metrics, in the agriculture sector.

Negative Impact of COVID-19 by Gender Within Sector Negative Impact of COVID-19 by Gender Within Sector Agriculture – 43%

Garments – 30%

Female – 38%; Male – 47%

Female – 28%; Male – 29%

Negative effect of the pandemic • Workers in Kenyan farms are almost universally concerned about Covid-19. Half of these farm workers qualify as “extremely vulnerable” and “very vulnerable” on 60dB vulnerability index.

• Workers in Zimbabwe are less vulnerable than Kenyan ones.

• Bangladesh scores lowest on this index with only 3 in 20 workers qualifying as “extremely vulnerable” and ”very vulnerable”.

Negative Impact of COVID-19 by Gender Within Country

Negative Impact of COVID-19 by Gender Within Country

Bangladesh – 30%

Kenya – 49%

Ghana – 42%

Zimbabwe – 26%

Female – 28%; Male – 29%

Female – 44%; Male – 51%

Female – 45%; Male – 41%

Female – 24%; Male – 30%

86%

85%

82% 43% 45%

8%

32%

45%

COVID-19 level of concern % “very much and somewhat concerned”

Female Average

Coping compared to others around % coping “much and slightly worse than others around them”

16%

47%

57%

Male Average

57%

43%

16%

4%

Positive impact of BP4GG support (how we responded) • Deeper impact of BP4GG support was reported in Kenya and Zimbabwe than in Bangladesh.

• All in Zimbabwe and 9 in 10 in Kenya found the support extremely useful compared to nearly 4 in 10 in Bangladesh.

For 8 in 10 in Zimbabwe and 7 in 10 in Kenya ability to cope with the pandemic has very much improved compared to 2 in 10 of garments workers.

• Male and female beneficiaries in Bangladesh reported similar depth of impact of the BP4GG support, while female beneficiaries in Kenya reported slightly deeper impact than their male counterparts.

Workers in Kenya are extremely vulnerable. They are amongst those which reported deep impact because of BP4GG support.

Vulnerability Index % “extremely and very vulnerable”

47%

57%

Male Average Female Average

Overall change in food consumption % “very much and slightly decreased”

Positive Impact of Partner Support

by Gender Sector Positive ImpactWithin of Partner Support by Gender Within Sector Agriculture – 63%

Garment – 32%

Female – 67%; Male – 61%

Female – 32%; Male – 32%

24%

3%

5%

8% 14%

26%

32%

Overall change in financial situation % “got much and slightly worse”

51%

8%

56%

43% 64%

COVID-19 level of concern % “very much and somewhat concerned”

Overall change in financial situation % “got much and slightly worse”

Coping compared to others around % coping “much and slightly worse than others around them”

Overall change in food consumption % “very much and slightly decreased”

Vulnerability Index % “extremely and very vulnerable”

Positive Impact of Partner Support by Gender Within Country Positive Impact of Partner Support by Gender Within Country

88%

Bangladesh – 39%

Kenya – 61%

Zimbabwe – 66%

Female – 32%; Male – 32%

Female – 72%; Male – 63%

Female – 66%; Male – 77%

93%

100%

34% 78%

32%

24%

35% 75%

51%

34% 51%

22%

23%

64%

35%

Female Average

Usefulness of support % “extremely useful”

Ability to cope with pandemic % “Yes – very much improved”

Confidence to earn an income % “very much improved”

Male Average Female Average

Satisfaction with support % “very satisfied”

Sense of safety and security at work % “very much improved”

86%

43%

24%

81%

Male Average

79%

39%

Usefulness of support % “extremely useful” Satisfaction with support % “very satisfied”

70%

79%

Ability to cope with pandemic % “Yes – very much improved” Sense of safety and security at work % “very much improved”

79%

Confidence to earn an income % “very much improved”

ImpAct Report | Mott MacDonald | 27

26 | Mott MacDonald | ImpAct Report

By project Agriculture projects have workers which have been most affected by the pandemic. Amongst those, workers in ETI Kenya and FT MM Flowers are deeply impacted by COVID-19. BP4GG responded effectively to their needs, as these are the workers who reported deeper impact because of our support.

Negative effect of the pandemic • Almost 7 in 10 workers of ETI Agriculture in Kenya report facing a worsened financial situation, while 3 in 5 workers also report having had to decrease their food consumption. As a result, 3 in 5 of their workers can be considered “extremely vulnerable” or “very vulnerable” under 60dB vulnerability index.

• There is near universal concern surround Covid-19 amongst the workers of ETI Agriculture Kenya.

• A relatively high percentage of workers reported their food consumption has very much decreased or slightly decreased, e.g., 1 in 7 in FT&MM Flowers and 1 in 6 of workers in the ETI Ag in Kenya reported that.

These are also workers which reported their financial situation got much worse. In only few cases, e.g., CARE project, the decrease in food consumption is less severe: about 1 in 5 workers reported a decrease in food consumption and a worsened financial situation.

Concern about Covid-19 is also the lowest for these workers, at 1 in 5. As a result, in this project, only 1 in 30 workers qualify as “extremely vulnerable” or “very vulnerable” under 60dB Vulnerability index.

Negative Impact of COVID-19 by Gender Within Projects

Positive impact of BP4GG support (how we responded) • Beneficiaries of Sea Freight project in Kenya, reported the deepest positive impact of the support across all projects. Beneficiaries of ETI Agriculture in Zimbabwe & FT MM Flowers follow closely.

• On average, female beneficiaries reported deeper impact than their male counterparts • Support seems to have been reached workers equitably: we didn’t observe significant difference between impact felt by male and female beneficiaries across ETI Garments, CARE and ETI Agriculture Zimbabwe.

Positive Impact of Support by Gender Within Project

Positive Impact of Support by Gender Within Project

Negative Impact of COVID-19 by Gender Within Projects

Bangladesh

Bangladesh

Bangladesh

Ghana

Bangladesh

Bangladesh

Zimbabwe

ETI Garments – 36%

GoodWeave – 39%

CARE – 14%

FT Cocoa – 42%

ETI Garments – 47%

CARE – 36%

ETI Agriculture – 66%

Female – 33%; Male – 40%

Female – 38%; Male – 41%

Female – 15%; Male – 13%

Female – 45%; Male – 41%

Female – 46%; Male – 48%

Female – 39%; Male – 33%

Female – 63%; Male – 73%

89%

91%

100% 46%

44%

43%

19% 33%

13%

17%

5%

4%

17% 52%

19%

59%

Male Average Female Average Agriculture Garments

0% 23%

27%

15%

30% 63%

74%

COVID-19 level of concern % “very much and somewhat concerned”

Overall change in financial situation % “got much and slightly worse”

Coping compared to others around % coping “much and slightly worse than others around them”

Overall change in food consumption % “very much and slightly decreased”

61%

37%

Vulnerability Index % “extremely and very vulnerable”

34%

46%

52%

86%

38%

57%

79%

Male Average

Usefulness of support % “extremely useful”

Female Average

Ability to cope with pandemic % “Yes – very much improved”

Satisfaction with support % “very satisfied”

Agriculture

Confidence to earn an income % “very much improved”

Sense of safety and security at work % “very much improved”

Garments

Negative Impact of COVID-19 by Gender Within Projects Negative Impact of COVID-19 by Gender Within Projects

43%

42%

36%

Positive Impact of Support by Gender WithinImpact Projectof Support by Gender Within Project Positive

Kenya

Kenya

Kenya

Zimbabwe

Kenya

Kenya

Kenya

ETI Agriculture – 56%

Flamingo – 43%

FT &MM Flowers – 46%

ETI Agriculture – 26%

ETI Agriculture– 48%

Flamingo – 73%

FT &MM Flowers – 61%

Female – 52%; Male – 59%

Female – 36%; Male – 46%

Female – 42%; Male – 48%

Female – 24%; Male – 30%

Female – 55%; Male – 46%

Female – 79%; Male – 71%

Female – 66%; Male – 59%

98%

97%

71%

63%

54%

38%

0%

7%

3%

70%

32% 66%

68%

29%

14%

33% 63%

7%

Female Average Agriculture Garments

COVID-19 level of concern % “very much and somewhat concerned”

Overall change in financial situation % “got much and slightly worse”

Coping compared to others around % coping “much and slightly worse than others around them”

Overall change in food consumption % “very much and slightly decreased”

87%

82%

64%

26%

29%

34% 43%

63%

67% 88%

78%

Male Average

100%

97%

82%

57%

Vulnerability Index % “extremely and very vulnerable”

Male Average Female Average Agriculture Garments

Usefulness of support % “extremely useful” Satisfaction with support % “very satisfied”

92%

Ability to cope with pandemic % “Yes – very much improved” Sense of safety and security at work % “very much improved”

Confidence to earn an income % “very much improved”

ImpAct Report | Mott MacDonald | 29

28 | Mott MacDonald | ImpAct Report

8. Beneficiary voices

9. The Way Beyond

Feedback from workers and farmers:

Suppliers’ voices:

“I have small children and I do not want them to be infected with COVID-19 because of me”

“I feel more safer now. Due to the training, workers are more concerned about their health. They tend to follow the rules more and wear the mask all the time.”

Female worker, garment factory, Bangladesh

“At work my employer has done the most during this pandemic and am grateful.”

Female worker, vegetable farm, Kenya

“Temperature checks every morning at work and fellow employees being able to put in practice what we are being taught is giving me hope.”

Male worker, flower farm, Kenya

“I feel safe in the factory and in the area where I live because everyone is more concerned about COVID-19. I see hope in it.”

Male worker, garment factory, Bangladesh

“During the lockdown most of the garments companies are shutting down. But my company is paying us full salary. So, I am happy.”

Male worker, garment factory, Bangladesh

Manager, garment factory, Bangladesh

“Due to this support, we changed the way we operate…we made arrangements to wash hand before entering factory, we check body temperature of the workers, and always instruct them to wear masks. Also, we have a doctor present in the factory.”

Manager, factory, Bangladesh

“We have reduced our meeting times and developed effective ways engaging the farmers with the intention of preventing the spread of the COVID-19” Union leader, Ghana

“We have posters all over the farms and greenhouses. This has helped create awareness and sensitization about COVID-19, as workers see them everywhere.”

Farm manager, Kenya

‘Posters on COVID-19 were pictorial and eye-catching and (made it) easy to pass the message to the workers.”

Farm manager, Kenya

The Impact report is a source of data on what changes BP4GG and its partners investments have made, on scale of these changes, or on depth. Stakeholders, including brands and retailers, may decide to engage with these findings.

Depending on their ‘impact’ intentions, retailers & brands can use these insights to increase the positive impact on their supply chains and minimise the risks that this Impact report identified, and manage and maximise impact beyond.

1. Stakeholders, including our brands & retailers can decide to use these data to feed their internal needs of impact data and choices of what impact to follow through and act on. This report can be a powerful stimulus for internal conversation and decisionmaking with regard to contributing to the SDGs and what SDGs at all levels within an organisation.

2. They can decide to use this information to feed the needs of their ‘consumers’ or their investors. Consumers demand more sustainable products and services and base their choices on the assessment of corporate sustainability information, including information on performance on the responsible sourcing. The SDGs are becoming increasingly important also for investors, as they are ‘an articulation of the world’s most pressing environmental, social and economic issues and, as such, act as a definitive list of the material ESG perspectives that should be taken into account as part of an investor’s fiduciary duty.’

3. They can draw on the findings and continue to collect ‘the impact’ that is important to them 4. They can (then) decide to use these data and engage regularly with a broad range of stakeholders, e.g., for brands/retailers throughout their own ESG reporting process 5. They can decide to use the beneficiary feedback model.

A BP4GG paper has more details on this model: i.e.

Listening and Learning’: Using beneficiary feedback to drive better performance in agriculture and garments supply chains. The paper provides key insights on the impact performance model that the BP4GG programme put in place to manage impact, and how could these insights be considered by brands and retailers, or donors for similar initiatives or in similar contexts.

6. They may want to contact us for all of the above.

By choosing one (or more) of the above and focussing more attention on beneficiaries’, stakeholders, brands and retailers, may find value along a more transparent supply chain. Impact can sit alongside strategy and operations to drive overall business performance to safeguard a company’s long-term success.

You can contact us at email: Mehnaz.bhaur@ mottmac.com for any insights from this paper or a discussion about findings beyond what we have included in this report. This is just a snapshot…

ImpAct Report | Mott MacDonald | 31

30 | Mott MacDonald | ImpAct Report

Annex 1: Unpacking Key Insights

1. Effect of COVID-19 Two areas of inquiry were researched • Effect of COVID-19 on physical, mental and financial wellbeing • Positive effect of BP4GG Support on satisfaction, resilience, safety & earnings We found out that….

• Agricultural workers were significantly more concerned about COVID-19 compared to any other group • Male workers (48%) were more likely to be “very much concerned” compared to female workers (34%).

• Females are also more likely to be “not at all concerned” 24% compared to males 16%.

• The overall negative impact of COVID-19 on agriculture sector workers is higher than the garment sector.

• Almost 8 in 10 garment sector workers reported a decrease in level of concern since the pandemic but more than half of these reported the decrease as slight.

• Beneficiaries in the agriculture sector reported having had deeper impact from the support received than those in the garments sector

Level of Concern Over COVID-19: Q: Are you currently concerned about COVID-19?

6%

4%

8%

9%

16%

6%

10%

17%

9%

24%

10%

18% 10%

20%

Not really

Not at all concerned

Not at all concerned

Not really concerned

Not really concerned

Yes, slightly

31%

11%

Not really

Yes, slightly

Yes, very much

Yes, very much

22%

11% 25%

60%

27%

48%

We asked workers what actions taken by their employer, family or community were giving them hope. While there wasn’t a massive difference in places where males and females found hope, women were more likely to not have any hope compared to men.

The top sources of hope were support by the community, provision of PPE kits and sanitization of workplaces. 1 in 10 workers found no sources giving them any hope

Sources of Hope, by Gender and Sector Q: What actions, if any – by your employer, community, family and friends, or others – are giving you hope right now? Open-ended, coded by 60 Decibels.

Provision of PPE kits

Company support

34%

Awareness campaigns

Male

Female

Agriculture

Garments

Aggregate

No hope

Level of Concern Over COVID-19: Q: How has your level of concern changed since you first heard about the pandemic last year?

Very much decreased

Not really

21%

27%

Slightly decreased

22% 35%

27%

Not at all concerned

No change

Not really concerned

Somewhat increased

Yes, slightly

Yes, very much increased

Yes, very much

29%

32%

34%

39% 9%

11% 6%

43%

7%

10%

10%

6%

4% 34%

31% 20%

Male

Female

12% 4% 7%

Agriculture

Garments

We asked workers what could improve their life during this pandemic. Garment workers were far more likely to report not wanting any support compared to their agricultural peers. However, 2 in 5 of them also wanted financial aid.

There were no major differences in the support needed by men and women.

25%

Community Support

16% 11%

9% 15% 21%

Provision of PPE kits

19% 13%

Sanitized workplace

45% 21%

18%

Community Support

17% 13%

Sanitized workplace

14%

Male

12%

Female Company support

12% 12%

Awareness campaigns

11% 12%

Male

Agriculture

Female

Garments

G

18% 6% 27%

No hope

16%

A

13% 10%

27%

Support Needed, by Gender and Sector Q: Related to this pandemic, what one thing could improve your life at this time?

This could either be something that you currently do not have, or something that you currently do not have enough of. Open-ended, coded by 60 Decibels.

38%

Financial Aid

24%

Donation of Food

14% 12%

9%

No Aid Needed

Male Female

15% 10%

High Salary and Bonuses Donation of PPE kits

8%

14% 3%

Male Donation of Food Female

7% 9%

Aggregate

Access to Farm Inputs

41%

35%

High Salary and Bonuses Donation of PPE kits

32%

Financial Aid

Access to Farm Inputs

9% 3% 12%

No Aid Needed

15%

Agriculture Garments

8% 10% 10% 0% 4% 28%

ImpAct Report | Mott MacDonald | 33

32 | Mott MacDonald | ImpAct Report

2. Impact of BP4GG support Five areas of inquiry were researched • Usefulness of support • Changes at workplace • Satisfaction with changes at workplace • Ability to cope • Suggestions for Improvement Overall, 9 in 10 of the respondents found the support useful with close to two-thirds reporting it was ‘extremely useful’ A higher proportion of workers in the agriculture sector felt support was ‘extremely useful’ while male and female beneficiaries felt similarly about the support.

Usefulness of Support by Gender and Sector Q: How useful has the support provided by (Employer name/Partner Name), been to help you deal with the impact of the pandemic?

6% 28%

9%

15%

15%

7% 29%

33% 52% 82%

65%

64%

58% 32%

Male

Female

Agriculture Garments

Not useful

Somewhat useful

Not very useful

Extremely useful

Aggregate

Changes Implemented at workplace to make it safer for employees • Nearly all workers said that their workplace implemented changes Not useful at all that made them feel safer.

Not vert useful • A bit less in agriculture said that Somewhat useful • There wasn’t any significant Extremely useful difference in how men and women reported these changes.

• Amongst the different countries surveyed, workers from Bangladesh most strongly indicated that their workplace had made changes to make them feel safer. Interestingly all workers in Bangladesh and Zimbabwe that felt the workplace was not safer, were female.

• ETI Agriculture workers in Kenya reported the lowest rate of agreement with this sentiment.

Within this group, male workers were less likely to report seeing changes by the employer, at 86%, compared to their female counterparts, at 97%.

• There was unanimous agreement amongst workers of Flamingo and ETI Garments that the company had made changes to make them feel safer.

Change Implementation by Sector Q: Has your employer/ implemented any changes in your workplace to make it safer for you and other employees?

No Yes

95%

97%

95%

99%

96%

Male

Female

Agriculture

Garments

Aggregate

No Yes

Change Implementation by Project and Country Q: Has your employer implemented any changes in your workplace to make it safer for you and other employees?

10%

No Yes

100%

98%

99%

100%

ETI Garments

CARE

Bangladesh

Flamingo

No Yes

93%

90%

94%

97%

96%

FT& MM Flowers

ETI Ag Kenya

Kenya

ETI Ag Zimbabwe

Aggregate

ImpAct Report | Mott MacDonald | 35

34 | Mott MacDonald | ImpAct Report

What changes are being implemented Most frequently reported changes were enforcing norms around sanitizing hands, social distancing and wearing a face mask.

Workers were asked what changes were implemented by their companies for their safety.

The top changes are reported on the right, segmented by gender and sector.

Other commonly reported changes were donation of PPE kits (21%) and screening workers for symptoms of COVID-19 (18%).

While men and women recounted similar changes being implemented, a higher proportion of women were reporting the top 3.

For agriculture workers, social distancing ranked as the top change, while garment workers mentioned hand sanitization as the top change.

Changes Implemented, by Gender and Sector Q: Can you please explain the changes implemented by your employer? (n=564) Open-ended data, coded by 60 Decibels

Men

Women

1. Sanitizing hands (60%)

1. Sanitizing hands (70%)

2. Social Distancing (48%)

2. Social Distancing (54%)

3. Wearing a face mask (42%)

3. Wearing a face mask (46%)

Satisfaction with Measures taken at workplace Agriculture workers were more likely to be “very satisfied” with improvement measures compared to garment workers. There was little variation in satisfaction by gender.

Satisfaction with Improvement Measures, by Sector Q: On a scale of 1 to 5 how satisfied are you with the current improvement measures taken by (Employer name/Partner Name) at work, where 5 is very satisfied and 1 is very dissatisfied? (n = 588) 7% 25%

6% 27%

6%

13% 20%

Very dissatisfie

Somewhat diss

25%

Neither satisfie

36%

Overall, 9 in 10 beneficiaries were satisfied with measures taken by the employers at the workplace, with 6 in 10 being “very satisfied.

Somewhat satis Very satisfied

66%

66%

75%

67% 50%

Changes Implemented, by Sector Open-ended data, coded by 60 Decibels Male

Agriculture

Garment

1. Social Distancing (60%)

1. Social Distancing (82%)

2. Sanitizing hands (58%)

2. Sanitizing hands (56%)

2. Wearing a face mask (39%)

2. Wearing a face mask (36%)

Ability to cope More than half of agriculture sector workers said their ability to cope had ‘very much improved’ compared to almost a quarter of garment sector workers.

Workers were asked whether their ability to cope had changed compared to when COVID-19 started.

While there was little difference between male and females who mentioned improvement in ability to cope, females were more likely to say they experienced no change in ability to cope.

Female

Agriculture Garments

Very dissatisfied

Somewhat dissatisfied

Somewhat satisfied

Very satisfied

Aggregate

Neither satisfied, nor dissatisfied

Ability to Cope, by Sector and Gender Q: Has your ability to cope with the pandemic changed, compared to when COVID-19 started, because of the support you received, and safety measures implemented by (Employer name/Partner Name)?

11%

19%

6%

14%

26%

Got slightly worse

31% 38%

38%

38%

61% 47%

43% 24%

Male

Female

Agriculture Garments

Got much worse

No change

Got slightly worse

Slightly improved

No change Slightly improved Very much improved

50%

48%

Got much worse

Aggregate

Very much improved

ImpAct Report | Mott MacDonald | 37

36 | Mott MacDonald | ImpAct Report

Reasons for ability to cope Awareness campaigns and enforcement of safety norms were quoted as the most effective forms of support to help with coping in the pandemic.

Workers were asked to describe – in their own words – which form of support offered by the company helped them to cope with the pandemic.

The top reasons are shown on the right segmented by gender and sector.

Agriculture workers cited awareness campaigns as their top reason for coping with the pandemic while garment workers found the enforcement of safety norms at their workplace most valuable.

There were no major differences in reasons reported by men and women.

Sense of safety Agriculture sector workers were most likely to report their sense of safety had very much improved while garment sector workers were more likely to say it had slightly improved.

Overall, 91% of respondents reported improved sense of security and safety at work. Of these, 53% reported their sense of safety had ‘Very much improved’.

There were differences by gender as well with 57% of male workers more likely to report a very much improved sense of safety compared to females at 49%.

Coping Compared to Others A higher proportion of agriculture workers considered themselves to be coping ‘same as others’ compared to garment workers.

Top Coping Reasons, by Gender and Sector Open-ended data, coded by 60 Decibels.

Men

Women

1. Enforcement of safety norms (43%)

1. Awareness Campaigns (45%)

2. Awareness Campaigns (41%)

2. Enforcement of safety norms (43%)

3. Provision of PPE kits (15%)

3. Provision of PPE kits (21%)

Workers were asked how they felt they were coping compared to those around them that are not their colleagues.

Top Coping Reasons, by Sector Open-ended data, coded by 60 Decibels. (n = 796)

Agriculture

Garment

1. Awareness Campaigns (48%)

1. Enforcement of safety norms (42%)

2. Enforcement of safety norms (40%)

9%

7%

9%

Got much worse

23%

Got slightly worse 37%

42%

No change Slightly improved Very much improved

69% 55%

49% 31%

Male

Female

36%

27%

33%

There was no major difference by gender.

28%

34%

25%

38%

30%

There was a slightly larger proportion of garment workers (6%) that said they were coping worse compared to agriculture workers (4%).

32%

29%

28%

32%

Male

Female

Confidence In Earning Income Garment workers and females were more likely to report improvements in confidence to earn an income, compared to agricultural workers and males, respectively.

8%

61%

57%

31%

35%

Agriculture Garments

Coping much worse

Coping same as others

Coping slightly worse

Coping slightly better

Aggregate

Coping much better

3. Provision of PPE kits (27%)

Sense of Safety, by Sector Q: How has your sense of safety and security at work changed because of the support you received, and safety measures implemented by (Employer name/ Partner Name)? (n = 796)

34%

33%

2. Awareness Campaigns (34%)

3. Provision of PPE kits (17%)

8%

Ability to Cope, by Sector and Country Q: Compared to others around you, who are not your colleagues, how are you coping with the impact of the pandemic?

Agriculture Garments

Got much worse

No change

Got slightly worse

Slightly improved

Aggregate

Very much improved

Overall, 63% reported improved confidence, 26% reported confidence very much improved.

Confidence in Earning Income, by Sector and Gender Q: How has your confidence to earn an income to meet your needs changed, compared to the start of the pandemic because of the support you received, and safety measures implemented by (Employer name/Partner Name)?

4%

6%

6%

27%

29%

29%

31%

32%

Go

Go

No

Sl

Women were more likely to report improved confidence (69%) compared to men (58%) .

33%

Garments sector workers had more confidence in earning income (71%) compared to agriculture sector workers (56%).

25%

41%

28%

32%

28%

49%

23%

Ve 38%

26%

Male Female Got much worse

Agriculture Garments Aggregate No change Very much improved

Got slightly worse

Slightly improved

ImpAct Report | Mott MacDonald | 39

38 | Mott MacDonald | ImpAct Report

Reasons for Confidence in Earning Income Top factors contributing to confidence include consistent stream of income by company’s payment/salary, enforcement of safety norms and awareness campaigns.

Workers were asked to express what measures taken by their companies led them to have an increased confidence in earning an income.The top reasons are listed on the right, segmented by gender and sector.

Females were far more likely to cite enforcement of safety norms as their reason compared to their male counterparts .

About half the agriculture workers valued the steady stream of income their employer provided, while garment workers found the enforcement of safety norms at their workplace to be most helpful in elevating their confidence in earning an income.

Confidence in Earning Income, by Gender and Sector Open-ended data, coded by 60 Decibels.

Men

Women

1. Consistent income (39%)

1. Consistent income (38%)

2. Awareness campaigns (18%)

2. Enforcement of safety norms (24%)

3. Enforcement of safety norms (16%)

3.Awareness campaigns (16%)

Confidence in Earning Income, by Sector Open-ended data, coded by 60 Decibels. (n = 501)

Agriculture 1. Consistent income (54%) 2. Awareness campaigns (14%) 3. Sanitized workplace (11%)

Garment 1. Enforcement of safety norms (42%) 2. Awareness campaigns (22%) 3. Wearing a face mask (20%)

Suggestions While half of workers felt no action was needed, the top suggested actions were financial aid in the form of payments or otherwise and norms around sanitizing hands.

Workers were asked to describe – in their own words – any other actions the company can take at the workplace during this crisis.

The top suggestions are listed on the right, segmented by gender and sector.

Top Suggestions by, Gender and Sector Q: Do you have suggestions for any other actions or measures that (Employer name/Partner name) can take at the workplace? Open-ended data, coded by 60 Decibels.

Men

Women

1. No action needed (47%)

1. No action needed (54%)

2. Financial aid (15%)

2. Financial aid (14%)

3. Sanitizing hands (12%)

3. Sanitizing hands (10%)

Women were more likely to not want any other changes made compared to their male counterparts.

Similarly, garment workers were more likely to feel no more action was needed compared to agricultural workers.

Agriculture 1. No action needed (43%) 2. Sanitizing hands (16%) 3. Financial aid (13%)

Garment 1. No action needed (63%) 2. Financial aid (17%) 3. Enforcement of safety norms (5%)

40 | Mott MacDonald | ImpAct Report

Business Partnerships as a Force for Good Learning Series VSCF Vision “To enable vulnerable people and supply chains to recover from and remain resilient to the economic and social impacts of COVID-19, by leveraging the reach and influence of responsible businesses through partnerships.”

VSCF Mission “To enable recovery and resilience from the COVID-19 pandemic by forming strategic partnerships with global businesses. Working within supply chains in Africa and Asia, we will test and scale approaches to provide additional health and safety support, increase incomes, safeguard jobs, and ensure continuing access to markets.

We will support vulnerable people within supply chains to recover from COVID-19, and support responsible businesses to build on these experiences to become more sustainable.”