Performance during XI Plan Period (2007-12)

NABARD Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd

Evaluation Study of Central Sector Scheme for Venture Capital Assistance for AgriBusiness Development: Performance during XI Plan Period (2007-12)

A Study Report prepared by NABARD Consultancy Services (NABCONS) Pvt Ltd. for the Small Farmer’s Agribusiness Consortium, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, New Delhi Study team from NABARD Consultancy Services (P) Ltd. (NABCONS) Overall guidance: Shri G. R. Chintala, Chief General Manager & Principal, NABARD Staff , College, Lucknow Shri P.V.S. Suryakumar, General Manager, NABARD & Principal Consultant, NABCONS, New Delhi

Team leader: T.K.Hazarika, Deputy General Manager Members: Shri Sadique Akhtar, Consultant Economist, NABCONS Shri Y.G.Milton, Consultant, NABCONS Shri S.S.Sarmah, Consultant, NABCONS  

 

i   

Disclaimer This document has been prepared by NABARD Consultancy Services (NABCONS) Pvt. Ltd for the Small Farmers' Agri-Business Consortium (SFAC), New Delhi based on the field study. The views expressed in the report are advisory in nature. It does not represent or reflect the policy or view of NABCONS/ National Bank for Agriculture & Rural Development (NABARD). NABCONS/ NABARD accepts no financial liability or any other liability whatsoever to anyone in using this report.  

ii   

Content Acknowledgement

iv

List of Abbreviations List of Tables List of Figures Executive Summary

v vii viii ix-xvii

CHAPTER 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 CHAPTER 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 CHAPTER 3

INTRODUCTION Background Salient Features of the Venture Capital Assistance Scheme Need for the Study Terms of Reference RESEARCH DESIGN & METHODOLOGY Sampling Design Data Collection Data Analysis Study Team CONTEXTUAL BACKGROUND AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SCHEME DURING XI PLAN PERIOD 3.1 Overview 3.2 Spatial Distribution 3.3 Bank wise Distribution 3.4 Activity wise Distribution 3.5 Term Loan and Venture Capital Assistance CHAPTER 4 STUDY OBSERVATIONS & FINDINGS 4.1 The Study Coverage 4.2 Sample Distribution by Type/ Legal Status of Units 4.3 Distribution of Sampled Units by Type of Activity 4.4 Nature and Size of Investment 4.5 Adequacy of Bank Credit for Capital Investment 4.6 Adequacy of VCA Support 4.7 Appraisal and Sanctioning Procedure of VCA 4.8 Delays in Commencement of Commercial Production 4.9 Knowledge and Awareness about the Scheme 4.10 Coverage of AEZ Districts 4.11 Capacity Building 4.12 Impact of implementation of Scheme CHAPTER 5 POLICY ISSUES & IMPLICATIONS CHAPTER 6 RECOMMENDATIONS & CONCLUSION 6.1 Recommendation 6.2 Conclusion Annexures I Profile of Sample Agri-business Units Annexure II List of Sample Project Studied Annexure III Questionnaire “A, B, &C” Annexure IV Zone wise, State wise, Year wise Distribution of Sanctioned Projects Annexure V Sanctioned Unit under VCAS by Activity Annexure VI Proceeding of State Level Consultation Meets iii   

1 1 3 4 5 7 7 11 13 14 15 15 16 20 23 24 26 26 26 28 28 29 30 32 32 34 35 35 36 41 44 44 49 51 89 97 112 113 114

Acknowledgements The Evaluation Study of Central Sector Scheme for Agri-Business Development through Venture Capital Assistance (VCA) was undertaken by NABARD Consultancy Services (P) Ltd. on behalf of Small Farmers’ Agribusiness Consortium (SFAC), Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India covering the period of XI Five Year Plan, with a view to assessing the scheme’s impact and evaluating operational roles of various stakeholders, identifying constraints and bottlenecks and suggesting areas for improvement. NABCONS would like to offer special thanks to SFAC for their financial support to this study.

We would also like to place on record our special gratitude to Shri Pravesh Sharma IAS , Managing Director, Small Farmers’Agri-Business Consortium for extending his supports, cooperation, and valuable suggestions during every stage of the study. We also thank Shri Ashok Pillai, the then Director, SFAC and Shri Dhruba Bhuyan, Project Coordinator, SFAC for their valuable inputs and contribution during the course of the study. We appreciate the cooperation given by Shri Sushil Kumar of SFAC in providing essential information and data on the VCA Scheme. The cooperation, support, valuable inputs and insights received from the following Senior Officials of NABCONS/NABARD and other distinguished persons in finalizing this study report, is gratefully acknowledged: Shri M.K. Mudgal, Chief Executive Officer, NABCONS, H.O. Mumbai Shri R.L.Jamuda, IAS Principal Secretary, Deptt. of Agriculture, Govt. of Odisha Shri B. M. Patnaik, General manager, NABARD, Odisha Regional Office, Bhubaneswar Dr. Amiya Sharma, Chief Executive Officer, Rashtriya Gramin Vikash Nidhi, Guwahati Shri S. Indirajith, Chairman, Gurgaon Gramin Bank, Gurgaon Shri Ved Prakash Yadav, CEO, Gurgaon District Central Cooperative Bank, Gurgaon The study team would like to thank all the promoters and agripreneurs of the sample units covered under the study in various states, Branch Managers of Financing Banks, State/District Level SFAC/ Govt. Officials and all participants in the two State Level Consultative Meets and Bankers Meeting held at Bhopal, Bhubaneswar and Guwahati respectively, for sparing their valuable time to provide necessary cooperation, information and various suggestions required for conducting the study and finalizing the report. The cooperation received from the Nodal Officers and Consultants of NABCONS and other Officers of various Regional Offices of NABARD in conducting the study, especially in data collection and compilation of preliminary study observations is also deeply acknowledged. The study team is thankful to Dr. A. K. Sood, AGM NABARD, Himachal Pradesh Regional Office, Shri B.D. Nayak, AGM, NABARD, Punjab R.O. for their support to the study by way of developing tools for data collection and support in structuring the draft report.

The study would not have been completed successfully but for the best efforts put in by the staff attached to the Zonal Office of NABCONS, New Delhi who deserve our appreciation.

iv   

List of Abbreviations AEZ APEDA BLBC CDB CII DCC DDM DER DIC DLRC DPR FAO FPO FPOs FYP IDBI IQF MAP MFP MOA MOFPI MOU MSME NABARD NABCONS NBFC NCDC NEDFi NER NHB NHM NIAM NMPB NOVOD NPA PDF PLP PSC

Agri Export Zone Agricultural & Processed Products Export Development Authority Block Level Bankers’ Committee Coconut Development Board Confederation of Indian Industries District Consultation Committee District Development Manager Debt Equity Ratio District Industries Centre District-Level Review Committee Detailed Project Report Food and Agriculture Organization Fruit Product Order Farmer’s Producer Organization Five Year Plan Industrial Development Bank of India Individually Quick Frozen Medicinal and Aromatic Plants Minor Forest Produce Ministry of Agriculture Ministry of Food Processing Industries Memorandum of Understanding Micro Small and Medium Enterprises National Bank for Agriculture & Rural Development NABARD Consultancy Services (P) Ltd. Non Banking Finance Companies National Cooperative Development Corporation North Eastern Development Finance Corporation Ltd. North Eastern Region National Horticulture Board National Horticulture Mission National Institute of Agricultural Marketing National Medicinal Plants Board National Oilseeds and Vegetable Oil Development Board Non Performing Asset Project Development Facility Potential-linked Credit Plan Project Scrutinizing Committee v 

 

RBI RO RoI RRB SBI SCDCC SFAC SIDBI SLBC TFO TOR VCA VCAS



Reserve Bank of India Regional Office Rate of Interest Regional Rural Bank State Bank of India Standing Committee for DCC Small Farmers’ Agri-Business Consortium Small Industries Development Bank of India State Level Bankers’ Committee Total Financial Outlay Terms of Reference Venture Capital Assistance Venture Capital Assistance Scheme



vi   

List of Tables Table

Particulars

No.

Page No.

Table 1.1 Progress of VCA Scheme during XI Five Year Plan Period (upto

2

31stMar 2012) Table 2.1 State-Wise Distribution of Sample Projects

9

Table 2.2 Year-wise Distribution of Sample Projects

9

Table 3.1 Bank wise projects under VCAS

22

Table 3.2 Activity wise sanctioning of VCA during XI FYP

23

Table 3.3 Zone wise average of Term Loan, VCA and VCA unit

25

Table 4.1 Frequency distribution of units by size of investment

29

Table 4.2 Breakup of assistance received by sampled units under VCAS

29

Table 4.3 Frequency distribution of VCA relative to total project cost

31

 

vii 

 

List of Figures Figure No

Particulars

Figure 2.1

Year wise distribution of Sample Projects

10

Figure 2.2

Activity wise distribution of Samples

11

Figure 3.1

Number of units versus sanctioned VC during XI FYP

15

Figure 3.2

State wise distribution of projects assisted under VCAS

17

Figure 3.3

Region wise distribution of projects assisted under VCAS

18

Figure 3.4

Region wise trend of VCA Sanctioned during XI FYP

19

Figure 3.5 Bank wise distribution of project sanctioned under VCAS

21

Figure 3.6

Activity wise percentage distribution of units sanctioned

23

Figure 3.7

Zone wise sanction & disbursement of VCA- XI FYP

24

Figure 4.1

Distribution of samples by legal status

27

Figure 4.2 Percentage distributions by type of legal status of sampled units

27

Figure 4.3

28

Activity wise distribution of Sampled Units

Figure 4.4 Share of assistance of total project cost

31

Figure 4.5 Location of agri-business units

37

Figure 4.6

39

Annual Incremental Income by types of farmers

viii   

Page No.

Executive Summary A. The VCA scheme at a glance. The Venture Capital Assistance (VCA) Scheme for Agri-Business is the flagship scheme of Small Farmers' Agri-Business Consortium (SFAC), Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, aimed at promoting investment in agri-business sector by encouraging institutional and private sector investments and linkages so as to ensure empowerment of farmers and sustainable development of the agriculture sector in the country. The scheme, implemented with the participation of nationalized Banks, SBI & Subsidiaries and the IDBI since 2005-06, provides for interest free venture capital assistance for agri-entrepreneurs for establishing agri-business units. The implementation of Venture Capital Assistance Scheme of SFAC primarily has broader perspectives of addressing the issues of inequalities and deepening poverty, and promoting economic growth through investments in agro based industries near farm gate. The broad objective of the VCA Scheme is to promote agri-entreprises for value additions to agricultural and allied produce so that the small and marginal farmers get benefit out of it. The specific objectives of the Scheme are: 1. To facilitate setting up of agri-business ventures in close association with banks. 2. To catalyze private investments in setting up of agri-business projects and, thereby providing assured market to producers for increasing rural income & employment. 3. To strengthen backward linkages of agri-business projects with producers. 4. To assist farmers, producer groups and agriculture graduates to enhance their participation in value chain through Project Development Facility. 5. Arranging training, field visits, etc. of agripreneurs setting up identified agri-business projects.

B. Evaluation Study by NABCONS. NABCONS was assigned in November 2011 the evaluation study of VCA scheme of SFAC implemented during the XI Five Year Plan, with the following terms of reference.

ix   

1. The projects assisted by SFAC during the XI Plan period under Venture Capital Assistance Scheme would be evaluated on purposive random sampling basis covering a minimum of 10% of the total projects. 2. The Study would bring out the impact of implementation of the scheme with reference to the various objectives such as, setting up of agribusiness units near the farm gates, catalyzing private investment, strengthening of backward linkages, training of stakeholders, utilization of PDF to encourage the progressive agripreneurs to involve in value chain; arrangement with the Farmers/Farmer Groups and metamorphosis of small farmers into agripreneurs. 3. To ascertain the trend in terms of regional spread, type / legal status of agripreneurs, size of units assisted, etc. and to ascertain the reason for slow off take of the scheme in certain regions/states of the country. 4. To study the timeliness in grounding of the project, identify the factors responsible for timely / delay in commercial production. 5. To examine the issue of extending implementation of the Scheme through RRBs, Cooperative Banks, NBFC, SIDBI, etc. and whether involvement of such agencies in the past could have impacted the outreach of the scheme. 6. To examine in detail whether there is any need to link the VCA scheme to availability/ quantum of central/state govt. subsidy for any particular scheme/activity and to make suitable variation of the quantum of VCA depending on availability of such subsidy subject to a cap or upper limit. 7. To examine whether the SFAC can stand as guarantee for any entrepreneur/unit in order to enable the latter to have better access to institutional credit, in the event of the latter’s failure to bring forth adequate security / fulfill other eligibility for institutional finance/credit support. 8. Review of/observations on the cap on project outlay and adequacy or otherwise of VCA assistance amount. 9. To look into the adequacies, initiatives/interventions required for policy measures, operational guidelines in respect of involvement of entrepreneurs and acceptability by the banks for enhancing credit flow to the agribusiness projects. 10. Issues, if any observed, related to the avenues for the FPOs to grow and thrive.

x   

C. Methodology NABCONS devised suitable research design and methodology to conduct evaluation Study and 41 units were shortlisted for detailed study. An effort has been made to collect relevant data from selected units supported with VCA and also to gather information from other stake holders e.g. financing banks and the farmers through appropriate research methods. The study is based on analysis of both primary and secondary data collected from different stakeholders of the project with a view to arrive at "accurate / nearest to accurate" level of information to evaluate the impact of the Scheme. Besides this, state level meets were organised with bankers, promotional organisations, select entrepreneurs etc. on behalf of SFAC at Bhopal and Bhubaneswar, a meeting with bankers in Guwahati, visits to RRB/Coop. Bank and a private Commercial Bank and desk scrutiny and consultations/ discussions with SFAC officials.

D. The Broad Findings of the Study: 1)

During the XI Five Year Plan 409 units had been sanctioned VCA amounting to Rs. 120.17 crore as against a projected number of 325 thereby achieving 126% performance. The average investment capital requirement of sample agribusiness units has been Rs.544.98 lakh per unit and the average term loan extended to these units by financing banks has been Rs.282.48 lakh (51.3%).

2)

The VCA has played the role of a catalyst to bring in capital to the agribusiness sector with its contribution on an average of Rs. 49.02 lakh (9.02% of the project cost) per unit. The average equity investment in terms of margin money of the entrepreneur is about Rs.168.85 lakh that accounts for 30.98% of the project cost.

The entrepreneurs

acknowledged the support of VCA in implementing the units. The VCA Scheme has also been successful in mobilizing private investment in agri-business sector. As regards the PDF it is observed that only three units out of the sample units covered have availed this facility which was the tune of Rs. 28.8 lakh. 3)

However, the spread of assisted units has been uneven with Southern and Western regions having shown very good performance, followed by the Northern region. The performance in the NER states, Eastern states and Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgargh in the central region is however far from satisfactory. xi 

 

4)

About 74% of the agribusiness units have been set up in rural areas and another 18% in semi urban areas and remaining 8% in urban areas, catering to the raw materials produced in hinterlands and creating both on-farm and off-farm employment opportunities for the rural work force.

5)

It was observed from the sample units visited that 37% of them were partnership concerns, 37% private limited companies, 17% proprietorship concerns and the remaining 9% are public limited companies and co-operative societies. Further, 50% of the units pertain to horticulture, 13% IQF, 11% plantation crops and remaining in the category of medicinal plants, fisheries and cold chain etc.

6)

During the study it has been observed that all the units that have started commercial production have been earning good income. The average annual income per unit of the operating agribusiness units has been estimated to be Rs.202.26 lakh.

7)

During the study it has been observed that on an average each unit has been procuring raw materials from 25 villages in and around the unit through informal arrangements and from 5 villages through formal arrangements.

8)

It has been estimated, on the basis of the information collected from the farmers benefited by the sample units that on an average 71% of the produce of the farmers are being sold to the unit. Almost 97% of farmers in the vicinity believe that the units are providing assured market to their produce.

9)

The units have benefitted 43000 farmers through selling theirs produce and provided gainful employment to 29000 families. The average employment per unit for the sample projects is estimated at 121 persons during the peak season, while it recedes down to 8 persons in slack or off seasons. Each unit on an average engages 6 managerial/supervisor cadre employee and 11 skilled labour while 104 are unskilled labourers.

10) On an average, 221 farmers provided raw materials to each agribusiness unit and mostly in raw form. The raw materials are procured from villages within a radius of 78 kms on an average. In most cases, the raw materials are procured from the hinterlands in around 30 km from the unit. In 58% cases, the units have made their own arrangements to procure raw materials and also to provide to and fro transport facilities to the workers engaged in the units. 11) The development of agribusiness units in rural areas has also induced ancillary activities and other support services in the vicinity and created a driving force for economic development of the regions concerned. xii   

12) Since, the projects have to be linked with a bank branch to avail term loan for grounding of project and to be eligible for availing the VCA, the role of banks becomes crucial not only in terms of extending the term loan and working capital requirement but also in terms of bankers’ awareness and knowledge of the scheme. Presently the VCA scheme is available through SBI and its associates, nationalised banks and the IDBI. During the XI FYP, it was observed that 36 banks participated in the project and among others, SBI and its associates financed 22% of the projects. The banks such as Regional Rural Banks, Cooperative Banks and Private Sector Banks are not covered under the scheme. It was observed during the field visit that the banks had taken due care as per the prescribed norms while appraising the projects / sanction of term loan before forwarding the VCA application to SFAC. 13) The knowledge and awareness of the scheme at branch level is not found to be satisfactory. In 44% of the cases, the information of the scheme is available only at Regional Office level. Since, Banks are the most important channel in promoting the VCA this underlines the need for greater efforts by the Banks at block, district and state level towards creating awareness of VCA Scheme 14) In 52% of the cases, the average number of days to get VCA sanctioned is more than 100 days. However, during the desk review it was observed that certain procedural changes have been made during the last two years which resulted in reduction of time taken for sanction to some extent. The introduction of Project Scrutinizing Committee Approach, properly designed check list and format of application to be received from the banks has enabled the process of preliminary scrutiny simpler and speedier. Yet there is a scope and need to further streamline the process of scrutiny and sanction of VCA assistance. 15) There is not much awareness about the scheme among the beneficiary agripreneurs as well; possibly because the whole work associated with VCA was attended by their consultants. Many of the agripreneurs were not aware of the objectives of the scheme or have only partial awareness of the objectives of the scheme. 16) Out of sample units studied, 14% are found to be located in notified Agri-export Zones. 17) The sample units have been processing the agricultural produce from an area covering about 95976 acres and out of this, 14198 acres have been brought under the crops afresh as crop diversification took place in these lands from other less remunerative crops. The change in cropping pattern effect and the price effect has caused incremental income of

xiii   

Rs.20875 per acre on an average for the farmers supplying raw materials to the agribusiness units.

E. Recommendations and Suggestions: State/ Region wise Focus I. It would be advisable that SFAC undertakes a quick assessment to identify state / region wise potential and even the pockets identified with specific agricultural produce, and then begin with a system of annual internal projections (not targets) to assist the units. The projections have to be arrived at in consistence with the other promotional efforts and be made flexible vis-a-vis progress in promotional efforts and other ground realities and be reviewed on a periodical basis.

Awareness Generation among Stakeholders II. In order to upscale the VCAS, it is necessary to create widespread awareness about the key features and benefits of the Scheme among the various stakeholders. In this regard it is recommended that SFAC may arrange to organise Bankers’ and other stake holders’ Meets from time to time; involve the SLBC Convenor and state level NABARD office and major banks; and to see that VCA scheme is a part of the review procees at SLBC, DCC, DLRC and other levels. Engagement of promotional organisations and a few entrepreneurs in state level meets can enhance the process.

Covering new FIs/ Banks III. The SFAC may consider to involve RRBs, Coop. Banks and Private Commercial Banks in the scheme and a beginning may be made with the RRBs. Similarly SFAC may explore extending the scheme through more financial institutions e.g. SIDBI, NEDFi, NCDC etc.

State SFACs IV. No state SFAC has sanctioned any VCA cases at their level, but, a couple of state SFACs have, however, forwarded a good number of project proposals to central SFAC. The SFAC should have a relook into the roles and responsibilities of the state SFACs. The SFACs presence at state level needs to be stregthened with exclusive staff with undivided focus or at least to give them annual programme of promotional activities and to monitor their performance periodically. xiv   

Sanctioning System V. As has been understood, at present the entire proposal is examined in detail at SFAC level, which in a way also involves re-examining what the financing bank has already examined for sanction of term loan. This can result in avoidable delay. The process can be expedited, if SFAC scrutiny commences with reference to the bank’s sanction order onwards. This will help expedite the process of sanction and release. It is suggested that once the requirements of preliminary scrutiny are met, the onward process of sanction should be completed within 30 days. However, if and when the proposal is to be covered under the suggested credit guarantee scheme and the SFAC becoming a major stake holder, a more detailed scrutiny may be done and the pre-screening and sanction process may go upto 45 days.

Threshold Limit for Project Outlay VI. During the meetings with bankers and promotional organisations etc. organized by NABCONS at Bhubaneswar, Guwahati and Bhopal it transpired that there is a need to suitably lower the present threshold limit of financial outlay on the project size.Such a lowering of the threshold limit for project outlay assumes significance in particular, in view of the 250 FPOs being promoted. The FPO units may require ancilliary infrastructure such as sorting and grading units, storage facilities, mini dal mills, vegetable dehydration units, vending units, kiosks etc. In tribal areas these could be rural godowns, wild honey processes units, herbal and medicinal units etc. involving investment less than Rs.25.00 lakhs.The study therefore recommends that under the Venture Capital Scheme the threshold limit could be reduced to Rs.10.00 lakh, for the units promoted by Farmer Producer Organisations, NE and hilly States, Eastern States, Tribal Areas and in backward areas. Threshold limit for others is recommended to be lowered to Rs.25.00 lakhs.While adopting the lowering of the threshold limit, SFAC may either have to decentralize the sanctioning and disbursal mechanism by involving partner financial institutions or will have to expand its present organization setup to meet the huge demand that this move will generate.

Quantum of VCA VII. The sampled units studied revealed that promoter’s contribution on average (including the VCA amount) is 40% of the project cost which is considered to be on a higher side. Further, the norms have to liberalised for the FPOs who may not have the adequate xv   

resources to the extent required towards the promotors contribution to avail the bank loans. It is therefore recommended that VCA amount may be revised to 25% of the project cost (provided the promoter’s equity is at least 15%) for the NER, Hilly states/ Eastern States/ Tribal areas/ Backward notified districts and FPOs with a ceiling of Rs. 100 lakh. For other categories VCA could be 15 % of the project cost or 35% of the promoter’s equity or Rs. 100 lakh, whichever is less.

Incentive to the Financing banks VIII. The banks partnering in the scheme have to incur additional expenditures in administering the scheme till the VCA amount is fully repaid. It would therefore be advisable to have some financial incentive, for the banks towards this, which will also encourage the banks to promote the scheme. The matter has been given a further thought and it is recommended that that there could be a provision for financial incentive to the financing banks.

Guarantee Cover IX. The SFAC is presently promoting 250 new FPOs and to be fully operational and successful these units may face constraints of no big resources to offer as collateral for bank loan, capital base to take up big units and lack of entrepreneurial experience etc. This necessitates the requirement of special consideration and handholding to the FPOs.To mitigate the likely problems of resource base for collateral and lack of enough entrepreneurial experience, which may deter the financial institution from financing such units, it will be necessary to have some sort of credit guarantee cover for the units set up by the FPOs. This can be a 100% cover (as compared to 75% in the credit guarantee scheme set up by the Ministry of Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises (MSME), Government of India and SIDBI. SFAC may consider making a cautious and small start and after gaining some experience and in accordance with the nature and size of FPO projects coming up, may gadually expand the cover. Further, the performance of the units covered under the proposed cover may have to be monitored closely on a regular basis.

Scope of Activities. X. SFAC may consider expanding the scope of activities for VCA facility. Specifically it may consider including dairy activities and farmer oriented poultry units with total capital outlay of, say, upto Rs. 500 lakh. SFAC may also study the VCF Scheme implemented through NABARD for subsidizing interest component on portion of the bank loan as an xvi   

incentive for prompt repayment, in view of present high rate of interest being borne by VCA beneficiaries.

Coordination / Collaboration with NABARD, NHB, MoFPI etc XI. It will be helpful in refining and increasing the outreach of the VCA scheme of SFAC if there is a regular coordination with Institutions / Ministries / Departments like NABARD, NHB and MoFPI etc. to keep updated with their schemes and policy initiatives. However, SFAC may not simply adopt the schemes of these institutions but maintain the identity of its unique intervention of VCA. ********

xvii   

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background Agriculture is the most important economic activity for about 70% of the population in India employing more than half of the total work force. However, nearly seventy five percent of total operational holding is small and marginal in nature which is spread to almost one fourth of the total area. Majority of small and marginal farmers who cultivate on these lands grow mainly low value, subsistence crops. Lack of adequate employment opportunities, both farm and off farm they are forced to live below poverty line. Land being scarce resource, the situation is expected to worsen because of growing population leading to further fragmentation which will limit the scope of further increase of additional production through subsistence farming. Out of several factors contributing to the present state of Indian agriculture, one important reason is lack of adequate market and value additions to agricultural and allied produce, which makes agriculture, a less attractive and low remunerative occupation for many in rural India. Retention of rural population, especially the youth, in agriculture and their place of domicile is also a challenge. In such a situation, there arises a need for diversification and commercialization of small farms within and outside agriculture, such as capital investment in value addition and marketing in the primary sector to ensure economic sustainability of small and marginal farmers and establishing proper integration with domestic and global markets. This is intended not only to bring the small and marginal farmers out of poverty trap but also to meet the country’s growing demand for processed food products such as fruits, vegetables, milk and its products, meat, fish, egg, etc. which is growing linearly with growing per capita income. In addition to unsustainable land holdings and low productivity, post harvest loss to an extent of upto 24% [conservative estimates] arising out of inadequate processing facilities is the major weakness in development of overall agriculture in the country. Efforts to bring capital and technology together for establishing agriculture based industries are seen as an opportunity not only to absorb surplus labour and provide relief to the problem of large scale disguise unemployment but also to establish efficient linkages between the producers and the consumers which will increase producer’s share of consumer’s income. 1   

The agribusiness activity which spans pre-harvest/post harvest/ post-farm function, including consolidation, storage, grading, packaging, transport, credit supply marketing, processing, retailing, export, investing on infrastructure for such value addition shall definitely provide a stimulus for boosting regional rural economy. Also, farming being the single largest private sector economic activity in the country, the growth potential in this key sector is immense in view of changes taking place in food consumption and growing demand for high value processed products. Success in such endeavour will require innovation and partnership The Venture Capital Assistance (VCA) Scheme of Small Farmers' Agri-Business Consortium (SFAC) is a step forward to promote agri-business and agripreneurs that link to the development of small and marginal farmers as well as contribute to the welfare of landless and weaker section of village communities by providing them employment opportunities in locale. SFAC has been extending interest free venture capital assistance to agri-entrepreneurs for establishing agri-business units since 2005. During the XI Five Year Plan period (upto 31st March, 2011) SFAC has sanctioned venture capital assistance of Rs.120.17 crore that resulted in establishment of 409 agribusiness units, benefitting about 43,000 farmers through selling their produce. These projects have also generated gainful employment opportunities for nearly 29,000 persons in rural areas. Year wise progress of VCA for the XI Plan Period is presented in table 1.1 below. Table 1.1: Progress of VCA Scheme during XI Five Year Plan Period (upto 31stMar 2011) Year

UB* 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Grand Total

Financial (Rs. in crore)

Physical (No.)

Projected Achieved

Projected Achieved

VCA (Rs. in crore)

Farmers Linked (No.)

Employment (No.)

6.97 15.64 17.20 16.24 26.31 36.30

19.51 18.43 20.34 24.01 37.88

65.00 65.00 65.00 65.00 65.00

68.00 58.00 77.00 85.00 121.00

179.06 173.68 260.47 353.18 290.48

19.51 7,827.00 18.43 8,979.00 20.34 4,828.00 24.01 11,003.00 37.88 10,210.00

4,820.00 4,833.00 5,932.00 7,689.00 5,690.00

118.66

120.17

325.00

409.00

1,256.87

120.17 42,847.00

28,964.00

Source: SFAC *Unspent balance of X Plan Period. 2   

Total Project Cost (Rs. in crore)

1.2 Salient Features of the Venture Capital Assistance Scheme The prime components designed by SFAC under its Venture Capital Assistance Scheme (VCAS) are its Venture Capital Assistance (VCA) to agri-business undertakings and its Project Development Facility (PDF) to assist producer, producer groups/ organization, units in AgriExport Zones and agriculture graduates in preparation of economically viable Detailed Project Report. The scheme also envisages single window approach in association of financing bank for extending venture capital with term loan and working capital to agribusiness applicants. Once the financing bank approves the qualified project, venture capital would be extended to the account of applicant which is interest free and could be repaid back after completing the repayment of term loan. Venture Capital extended as a soft loan is expected to supplement the financial gap existing under means of finance with respect to cost of project. However, the VCA could be availed subject to fulfillment of the following conditions:

i.

The project should be in agriculture or allied sectors promptly in product which are perishable in nature such as horticulture, floriculture, medicinal and aromatic plants, minor forest produce (MFP), apiculture, and fisheries. The projects in dairy and poultry sectors have been excluded.

ii.

The project should be able to provide assured market to farmer/ producer groups i.e catering the needs of supplier

iii.

The project should create potential in terms of diversification of high value crop and henceforth increase incomes both at the level of supplier and procurer, which in this case could be an agri-business unit.

iv.

Project should be viable in nature and should be accepted by bank for grant of term loan.

1.2.1 Objectives of VCA Scheme The broad objective of the VCA Scheme is to promote agri-entreprises for value additions to agricultural and allied produce such that the small and marginal farmers get benefit out of it. The specific objectives of the Scheme are: i)

To facilitate setting up of agri-business ventures in close association with banks.

3   

ii)

To catalyze private investments in setting up of agri-business projects and, thereby providing assured market to producers for increasing rural income & employment.

iii)

To strengthen backward linkages of agri-business projects with producers.

iv)

To assist farmers, producer groups and agriculture graduates to enhance their participation in value chain through Project Development Facility.

v)

Arranging training, field visits, etc. of agripreneurs setting up identified agri-business projects.

1.2.2 Venture Capital Assistance (VCA) Component Under VCA Scheme, SFAC provides equity support to qualifying projects on the recommendations of the bank financing the project. This equity capital is repayable to SFAC after the project has repaid the term loan to the financing bank as per the original repayment schedule or earlier. The quantum of SFAC’s VCA depends on the project cost and is the lowest of the following: 1. 10% of the total project cost assessed by the bank; 2. 26% of the project equity; 3. Rs.75.00 lakh The ceiling of VCA differs and cap is more, provided the project is located in the North-Eastern and Hilly States. In such a case the quantum of VCA could be the lowest of the following: 1. 25% of the total project cost assessed by the bank 2. 40% of the project equity 3. Rs 75 lakh whichever is the lowest Apart from the above criteria, SFAC could also consider high VCA to deserving projects on merit and/or to projects that are located in remote and backward notified districts, North Eastern and Hilly States recommended by the State Agencies subject to maximum of Rs 3.00 crore One mandatory provision for VCA is, the project seeking VCA from SFAC must be credit linked and currently the financing institutions like the Nationalized Banks, SBI & its subsidiaries and other commercial banks are eligible to recommend for VCA under the Scheme. 1.3 Need for the Study The VCA scheme of SFAC has been operational since 2005 and performed quite well during the XI Five Year Plan (2007-2012). Against a projection of extending VCA to 325 4   

projects during the XI Five Year Plan, SFAC has extended VCA to 409 projects thereby achieving 126% of the projected numbers. From Table 1.1, it can be observed that physical projections for each year of the five years plan have been successfully achieved. However, a preliminary review of the progress of the scheme reveals that the take-off of VCA has remained uneven across various states as well as different regions of the country. While, the Scheme has been successful in achieving its objective of bringing in private investment into agri-business and strengthening of backward linkages in the agriculture sector during the XI Plan period, there are regions/states where the scheme has not penetrated to the desired extent. For example, while there has been tremendous response for the VCA Scheme from states in the western and southern region like that of Maharashtra, Kerala and Karnataka, the same could hardly take off in several states in the northern and eastern region which include states like Punjab and Haryana having tremendous potential for agri-business, and those others in the eastern region viz. Orissa, West Bengal, Bihar, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, etc. . There is thus a need to look into the reasons for very low off-take of the scheme in certain states as also its spatial disparities across states and different regions of the country. Further, before entering the XII Five Year Plan, it is equally pertinent to evaluate the progress effectiveness and impact of the VCAS vis-a-vis the set objectives of the scheme with a view to carry out required policy changes in the scope of activities, coverage of institutions, quantum of assistance and refinement in the operational guidelines. Accordingly, SFAC has assigned the responsibility to NABCONS to conduct an elaborate and comprehensive evaluation of the scheme with given Terms of Reference. 1.4 Terms of Reference The terms of reference of the study are as under: a) The projects assisted by SFAC during the XI Plan period under VCAS would be evaluated on purposive random sampling basis covering a minimum of 10% of the total projects. b) The Study would bring out the impact of implementation of the scheme with reference to the various objectives such as, setting up of agribusiness units near the farm gates, catalyzing private investment, strengthening of backward linkages, training of stakeholders, utilization of PDF to encourage the progressive agripreneurs to involve in value chain;

5   

arrangement with the Farmers/Farmer Groups and metamorphosis of small farmers into agripreneurs. c) To ascertain the trend in terms of regional spread, type / legal status of agripreneurs, size of units assisted, etc. and to ascertain the reason for slow off-take of the scheme in certain regions/states of the country. d) To study the timeliness in grounding of the project, identify the factors responsible for timely / delay in commercial production. e) To examine the issues of extending implementation of the Scheme through RRBs, Cooperative Banks, NBFC, SIDBI, etc. and whether involvement of such agencies in the past could have impacted the outreach of the scheme. f) To examine in detail whether there is any need to link the VCA scheme to availability/ quantum of central / state govt. subsidy for any particular scheme/activity and to make suitable variation of the quantum of VCA depending on availability of such subsidy subject to a cap or upper limit. g) To examine whether the SFAC can stand as guarantee for any entrepreneur/unit in order to enable the latter to have better access to institutional credit, in the event of the latter’s failure to bring forth adequate security / fulfil other eligibility for institutional finance/credit support. h) Review of/ observations on the cap on project outlay and adequacy or otherwise of VCA assistance amount. i) To look into the adequacies, initiatives/interventions required for policy measures, operational guidelines in respect of involvement of entrepreneurs and acceptability by the banks for enhancing credit flow to the agribusiness projects. j) Issues, if any observed, related to the avenues for the FPOs to grow and thrive.

6   

CHAPTER 2 RESEARCH DESIGN & METHODOLOGY In order to evaluate the performance of the VCA Scheme, as required as per the Terms of Reference, the study has undertaken a holistic approach to collect reliable data on select parameters such as nature of business, investment, employment, procurement of raw materials, production, impact of production activities on cropping pattern of farmers, value addition, main saleable products, marketing cover and incremental income from the investment etc. as also to cover as many stakeholders as possible viz., agriprenuers, farmers, bankers, SFAC / Govt. officials, etc. with a view to arrive at the impact and to suggest measures, if any, for further refinement of the Scheme. For this purpose, the study devised suitable research design to conduct a comprehensive evaluation exercise across the country. In doing so, an effort has been made to collect relevant data from selected sample units supported under VCAS and to gather information from the stake holders through appropriate study tools. 2.1 Sampling Design The study is based on analysis of both primary and secondary data collected from different stakeholders of the scheme viz. beneficiary Agriprenuers, Farmers, Financing Banks, State SFACs, and concerned Govt. officials with a view to arrive at an "accurate / nearest to accurate" level of information to evaluate the performance of the Scheme implemented during the XI plan period and suggest measures, if any, for further refinement of the Scheme and strengthening operational procedures. Discussions were also held with other selected agencies [non-participants in the scheme] such as SIDBI, National Horticulture Board, MOFPI, Regional Rural Banks, Cooperative Banks, NBFCs, etc. to understand the peculiarities of the VCA scheme relative to other similar operational schemes and identify factors that deter the VCA Scheme from wider coverage. 2.1.1 Sample Selection To conduct an in-depth study for arriving at results with respect to objectives of the study, purposive stratified random sampling method was applied to select sample projects 7   

assisted under VCAS and Banks that provided term loan to the respective sample units. For detailed analysis, 41 sample projects, spread across 13 states (Annexure-II) were selected for conducting the detailed study. During the XI Five Year Plan Period, projects in as many as 25 states were supported under VCA Scheme. As a first step of sampling, the states have been stratified into groups according to geographic regions. States having maximum number of projects in respective region were identified for selection of project units. In the second step, the projects in the selected states were grouped into broad categories based on their activities and sample projects were selected from each and every major activity. From every major activity one or two projects have been selected randomly for collection of primary information for in-depth analysis under the study. Adequate care was taken in the sampling process to cover the spread of selected projects across the country as well as over a cross section of activities so as to give proper representation of regional and activity-wise spread of the agri-business units supported under VCA Scheme. The identification of sample projects was primarily based on the following criteria: i.

Minimum 10% coverage of the population of VCA during XI FYP.

ii.

Selection of sample projects from all geographic regions with concentration of projects sanctioned with VCA.

iii.

Coverage of all major categories of activities in selected States.

iv.

Subject to the ceiling of 50% in each State, coverage of all geographical regions/Districts in the State; and

v.

Maintenance of balance between units with high levels of Venture Capital Assistance (VCA), i.e., over Rs.25 lakh, and those with average levels.

2.1.2 Geographic Spread of Sample projects The sample projects were found to be spread over 13 states, with a minimum of one project from Haryana and with a maximum of five projects from Karnataka and Maharashtra states. States from all geographic regions of the country were covered. Sample projects were selected giving priority to include maximum categories/types of activities. distribution of sample projects has been given in Table 2.1.

8   

The state-wise

Table 2.1: State-Wise Distribution of Sample Projects Sl No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

State

No of Sample Projects

Andhra Pradesh Assam Gujarat Haryana Himachal Pradesh Jammu & Kashmir Karnataka Kerala Maharashtra Meghalaya Tamil Nadu Uttar Pradesh Uttarakhand Total

4 3 2 1 3 4 5 3 5 2 4 2 3 41

2.1.3 Year-wise Spread of Sample Projects Since, the broad objective of the study is to assess the impact of projects supported under the scheme during the XI Five Year Plan, sample units were selected from each year of the five years Plan period. Table 2.1 portrays the year wise spread of sampled projects. It can be seen that sampled projects constitute overall 10% of the total projects supported under the VCAS over the XI Plan Period (2007-2012). The sample size for 2010-11 and 2011-12 is relatively low because many projects supported during these two years were either not completed or not in operation after completion for a period enough to yield stabilized benefits and hence not considered. Table 2.2: Year-wise Distribution of Sample Projects Year 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Total

Total Units supported (No) 68 58 77 85 121 409

Sampled Units (No) 11 7 16 6 1 41

9   

Sample Percent 16% 12% 21% 7% 1% 10%

Figure 2.1 below presents the percentage distribution of sample spread over each year of XI Plan Period. (2011‐12), 1% (2010‐11), 7% (2007‐08), 16%

(2009‐10), 21%

(2008‐09), 12%

Figure 2.1 Year wise distribution of Sample Projects 2.1.4 Activity-wise Spread of Sample Projects The principal activities among the units supported under VCAS during the XI FYP were among categories belonging to horticulture such as pulp extraction from mangoes, processing and extraction of wine from grapes, pineapple processing-jam and jelly production, vegetable processing that includes both frozen food products with Individually Quick Frozen Technology (IQF), dry fruits processing including kernel extraction from cashew, walnut, almonds, coconut processing etc. While selecting the units based on the broad activities care was taken while sampling so that every type of units should get a proper representation in the sampling along with other activities such as cold storage, packaging and extraction and storage of medicines from Medicinal and Aromatic Plants, fish processing and packaging, honey extraction and processing, cut flower production, minor forest produce and export oriented units. Figure 2.2 below presents the distribution of sample based on the activities supported by VCAS and falling under the study sample.

10   

14

13 11

12

Numbers

10 7

8 6

3

4

3 2 1

2

1

0 Fruit  Vegetable  Deydration  Processing & Packaging

Nuts  Processing

Medicinal  Extracts

Cold  Storage

Aqua  Culture

Honey  Cut Flowers Processing

Figure 2.2 Activity wise distribution of Samples 2.2 Data Collection Both primary data and secondary data were collected and analysed during the study to arrive at desired conclusion with respect to specific objectives of the study. The secondary data source is mainly SFAC, select web-sites pertaining to the MoAC, MoFPI, National Horticulture Board, and SIDBI etc. Data collected from SFAC included, State-wise distribution of projects assisted under the scheme and other associated details such as location, particulars of the agripreneurs, types of commercial activities, names of the concerned financing Banks, and quantum of VCA approved and released etc. Primary data were collected through personal interview method by using structured questionnaires developed in synergy with the objectives of the study – one each for use in the course of interview with the agripreneurs/promoters, with the financing bank and with groups of farmers. This was developed to ensure coverage of all the aspects during the proposed discussions. The questionnaires were developed keeping in close view the core objectives of field visits - verification/revalidation of the initial indicators and markers delineated during the analyses of primary data with spotlight on realistically assessing the levels of actual achievement of the two key objectives of the Scheme – generation of employment and increasing incomes for

11   

the rural masses through backward linkages. The Questionnaires are enclosed as Annexure -II to this Report. Pre-visit discussions were held with SFAC’s top officials in New Delhi on the proposed list of identified projects for the actual study, raison d'être for each query in the three sets of the Questionnaires, visit programme to the 13 States. The List of the 41 projects for the visit and the Questionnaires were approved by SFAC. Field visits were conducted between December 2011 and January 2012 to the concerned 41 Projects in the 13 States for collection of primary/secondary data at the ground level through formal interactions/discussions/direct personal interviews with the stakeholders - the nodal agripreneurs, the financing bank and the farmers who have benefitted from the respective projects. However, detailed information could be collected from 38 sample units only due to non-availability of concerned promoters/agripreneurs of 3 selected units during visit by our field teams to the concerned locations. Discussions were also held with Lead District Managers of the concerned District and Technical/ Financial Consultants of the concerned SFAC assisted project subject to their availability on the date of visit. Subsequently, Delphi technique was applied in order to ascertain the accuracy of relevant data/information collected for the study. Post-visit discussions were held by the District Development Managers (DDMs) of NABARD posted in the concerned Districts on the following aspects: i.

Perception and understanding of the financing banks with regard to the objectives of the Scheme and the role played by them in popularization and dovetailing of the Scheme with regular financing of agrienterprises by them as priority sector lending under their normal business operations.

ii.

General level of awareness as well as responsiveness about the Scheme among bankers/ Lead Bank Officers/Lead District Managers of each covered District and the ways that could be devised and grounded for enhancing the outreach and efficacy of the Scheme deeper into the rural hinterland.

iii.

General appraisal of the ground level credit flow from the financing agencies towards rural farm/non-farm sectors in some sample districts, especially those having large potential for food and agro-processing, value-addition sectors that normally have the

12   

maximum scope for backward linkages with the farmers in rural areas, and determining the actual coverage of that potential by the real benefits of the Scheme. iv.

Informal perception/views of the local associations of agripreneurs such as Chamber of Commerce and Industries, Multi Activity Cooperative Societies, active Farmers’ Clubs, etc. on the possible areas where such backward linkages of the eligible units under the scheme with the farmers in the rural areas could be possible. This also covered the ways and means through which such formal/semi-formal entities could assist not only in popularization and effective grounding of the scheme but also in further strengthening of backward and forward (market support) linkages between the agri-enterprises and the farming communities; Independent reality check on the actual impact of the assisted projects, vis -à-vis the

intended objectives, based on the deductions and conclusions derived from the preceding stages have been done with a view to minimize biases in data. Evaluation of the extant operational guidelines of SFAC and an estimation of its ground friendliness from the view point of the beneficiaries and other stakeholders like bankers and then coming up with suggestions and desired modifications in the guidelines to make them more effective. State level workshops at three different regions, Bhubneshwar, Guwahati and Bhopal were also conducted as a part of evaluation of VCAS implemented during the XI Plan Period with objectives to obtain views and feedback on the scheme from various stakeholders such as banks, government officials, and promoter organization. In addition, visits were also made to a RRB, Cooperative Bank and Private Commercial Banks to gain their experiences and views on VCAS.

2.3 Data Analysis Data collected from both primary and secondary sources were tabulated in MS-Excel spread sheets that facilitated analysis of data using statistical tools like tabular presentation, graphical representation using pie diagrams and bar diagrams for the purpose of highlight various aspects pertaining to the study. In addition to this, subjective data collected during the

13   

period of information gathering were also used and analysed to arrive at conclusion with respect to the objective of the study. 2.4 Study Team The study was conducted by a team of Officers drawn from NABCONS Head Office/Regional Offices who have relevant expertise and experience. The overall team consisted of two structures - state wise Field Teams that collected the field data and assessed individual projects and a Core Team at NABCONS, Zonal Office, New Delhi which was in the charge of planning, carrying out discussions with the Client i.e. SFAC, development of analytical tools, finalization of questionnaires, writing of the reports and overall coordination. As for the field teams, its constitution was in sync with the specific demands of the subject assignment and, hence, were made multi-disciplinary in nature, comprising 2 Members – an Evaluation Expert and one subject Expert viz. Horticulturist, Expert in Bio-Technology, Civil/Agricultural Engineer, Expert in Food Processing etc., depending on the project(s) being identified for evaluation in a particular state.

14   

CHAPTER 3 CONTEXTUAL BACKGROUND AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SCHEME DURING XI PLAN PERIOD 3.1 Overview The efforts of SFAC towards promotion of the Venture Capital Assistance Scheme have been evenly focused and directed towards all the States of the country. This is well reflected in the presence of State-level SFACs and Nodal Agencies in most of the States in India which are directing their efforts on development of agri-business sector in the concerned States. The overall progress of the scheme during XI Plan period is found to be excellent in so far as the physical and financial achievements are concerned. During the period of 2007 to 2012, a total of 409 units were sanctioned VCA against the projected 325 units thereby achieving 126% of total physical projection. Similarly, as against a financial outlay of Rs. 118.66 crore, the total amount released during the period as VCA had crossed Rs. 120 crore, thereby achieving more than 100% of the projected outlay. Figure 3.1, indicates the growth pattern of agribusiness units during the plan period both in physical and financial terms. The positive growth in number of units and VCA availed; reflect the future demand of financial resources to be put in the sector and catalyze

140.00

40.00

120.00

35.00 30.00

100.00

25.00

80.00

20.00 60.00

15.00

40.00

10.00

20.00

VCA approved (in crore)

No of Ag‐Bus Units

agripreneurs private investor to take up activities under the agri-business sector.

5.00 0.00

0.00 2007‐08

2008‐09

Units (No)

2009‐10

2010‐11

2011‐12

VCA Approved (in Crore)

Figure 3.1 Number of units versus sanctioned VC during XI FYP (2007-2012) 15   

However, it has also been observed, that the response to the VCAS differed from region to region and state to state, which might be the result of several external factors other than the innate content and strength or weakness of the scheme itself. These factors could range from geo-spatial location of the state, general agro-climatic condition, available infrastructure such as power, water, market etc, availability of raw material to intrinsic entrepreneurial skills, interest of native population and prevailing policy of the respective states towards agriculture and the agri-business sector. Notwithstanding the critical influence of above mentioned factors on overall performance of the Scheme in a particular state, a close examination of the distribution pattern of the assisted projects reveals that there has been intra as well as inter-regional variations in distribution of projects. In subsequent paragraphs, the distribution of projects and the probable reasons for variations have been discussed.

3.2 Spatial Distribution During the XI Five Year Plan, 3 states, viz. Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka accounted for 52% of the total projects sanctioned with VCA, while 3 other states viz. Uttar Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh and Kerala accounted for another 20% projects that were sanctioned VCA. Out of 409 projects sanctioned with VCA during the entire plan period, 113 (28%) projects were sanctioned in Maharashtra alone followed by 56 (14%) in Karnataka and 43 (11%) in Tamil Nadu. This clearly indicates that more than 72% of the total projects sanctioned under VCAS are located in six states, while the rest 28% are shared among the other 19 states. Figure 3.2 below presents the state wise distribution of projects in a descending order. While analysing the data region wise, which is classified based on Reserve Bank of India (RBI) guidelines, the spread of VC assisted projects is found to be concentrated mostly in South and West Zone accounting for 67% of the total sanctioned projects approved during the XI Plan Period. South Zone states which consist Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Andhra Pradesh together accounts for 138 projects out of 409 which is 34% of the total sanctioned projects under VCAS during XI Plan. West Zone (Maharashtra, Goa and Gujarat) stands second next to the South Zone in terms of total number of projects assisted with a total of 135 projects which is 33% of the total projects. Similarly, in North Zone, a total of 106 (26%) projects were sanctioned during the period. However, during the same period, the three remaining Zones viz. the North East (Assam, Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Sikkim), East 16   

Zone (West Bengal, Orissa and Bihar) and Central Zone (Madhya Pradesh and Chattisgarh) have been able to get approval of only 30 projects under VCAS, which is 7% of the total VC assisted

120

113

projects (Figure 3.2) during XI Plan.

100

1

1

1

1

1

3

2

3

4

3

4

4

7

11

24

9

12

14

15

20

21

24

40

32

43

60

56

80

0

Figure 3.2: State wise distribution of projects assisted under VCAS (2007-2012) The above confirms that there has been an uneven spread of VCA assisted projects across different geographic regions of the country. The locational disadvantages in North Eastern Region may be the deterrent for investments under agribusiness in the region. The takeoff of the scheme is also far from satisfactory in the Eastern Zone states consisting of West Bengal, Orissa, Bihar, and Jharkhand as well as the states in the Central Zone such as Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh where only 10 projects were sanctioned over the period of five years (2007-2012). These states are primarily agriculture based states and have adequate investment potential for agro-based industries. Slow off-take of the VCA scheme in these regions and states as compared to other regions needs a separate and intensive study. Distribution of projects within the regions over the five years of the XI Plan Period has also remained skewed. For West and South Zone, the sanctioning of projects over five year has remained more or less even. The North Zone has shown a growth trend, however maximum number of projects (59) have been sanctioned during the 2011-12. In North East, maximum projects (8) were sanctioned during the first year of XI FYP, which afterwards declined over the 17   

next four years of plan period. In the Central and Eastern regions only 5 and 4 projects were sanctioned over five years of XI FYP and majority of which were sanctioned in the last year of the FYP. No projects were sanctioned during the year 2008-09 and 2009-10 in East Zone States namely West Bengal, Orissa, Bihar, Jharkhand and Sikkim could not avail the support of VCA during the stated period and only one project each during 2007-08, 2010-11 and three projects during 2011-12 were sanctioned (Figure 3.3).

North Zone,  106, 26%

North East,  20, 5% Central Zone, 5,  1% East Zone,  5, 1%

South Zone,  138, 34%

West Zone, 135,  33%

Figure 3.3: Region wise distribution of projects assisted under VCAS (2007-12) State wise, region wise and year wise distribution of projects during the XI Five Year Plan period is given in Annexure-IV.

18   

60

Numbers

50 40 30 20 10 0

2007‐08

2008‐09

2009‐10

2010‐11

2011‐12

West Zone

27

17

26

33

32

South Zone

23

27

31

36

21

North Zone

8

13

15

11

59

North East

8

1

4

3

4

Central Zone

1

0

1

1

2

East Zone

1

0

0

1

3

Figure 3.4: Region wise trend of VCA Sanctioned during XI FYP (2007-12) A close look into the intra-regional variation of projects distribution reveals that within the region also the distribution of projects remained highly skewed. In North Zone, maximum 32 projects during the XI FYP were sanctioned for Uttar Pradesh and 28 of them were sanctioned during 2011-12. The next state is Himachal Pradesh where 24 projects were sanctioned almost evenly during the Plan Period. Punjab has remained at the bottom of the ladder with just 4 projects. Among other Northern Region states/UTs, Delhi and Chandigarh could not avail a single project. States like Punjab and Haryana, despite being best performers in agriculture, horticulture production and allied activities, could achieve VCA level of just 4 and 11 units only, respectively. Even the off take in Jammu & Kashmir (with 14 units) is found to be far from satisfactory when the performance is judged in terms of huge potential of the state

in

horticulture, floriculture and dry fruit production and agro-processing. Similarly, in the West Zone, Maharashtra remained the leading state with 113 projects and sanctioning also took place more evenly during all the five years of XI FYP. Gujarat, which is another good performer state (21projects), showed steady flow of projects during the first 3 years but slowed down during the remaining two years. Comparatively, in South Zone, all the states which participated in availing VCA except Pondichery, has fair distribution of projects as can be seen in table presented in Annexure-IV. The details of region wise, state wise and year wise breakup of project sanctioned under VCAS can be seen in Annexure-IV. 19   

3.3. Bank wise Distribution One of the salient features of the VCAS is that, the project should be credit linked with Nationalized Banks, State Bank of India and its subsidiaries and IDBI to obtain term loan and become eligible for availing VCA. In view of above, the role of financing banks becomes crucial during project appraisal for assessing the viability of project, extending term loan and recommending to SFAC for VCA and finally to the success of the project. The awareness level of Banks as well as Branch Managers about the VCA Scheme also becomes crucial because, unless adequate information about the scheme is available with the financing bank branch, the scheme may not be linked to the eligible agri-business enterprise. Even though, all scheduled Commercial Banks are eligible under the scheme, as the data available (for XI FYP), 36 Banks have participated in the scheme during the XI FYP (Table 3.1). Although, Regional Rural Banks as such were not invited to participate in the scheme, the Uttar Bank Khetriya Gramin Bank in West Bengal has financed one unit along with NABARD under co-finance mode. During the XI FYP, 25 Scheduled Commercial Banks including the associate Banks of State Bank of India and five other Banks like IDBI, SIDBI, EXIM Bank, and one Gramin Bank & NABARD (through co-financing mode) participated across 25 states for grounding the VCAS. Among these banks, State Bank of India, the largest Commercial Bank of the country emerged as the largest sponsor of the projects under the Scheme sanctioning 54 (13%) projects followed by State Bank of Maharashtra with 51 (12%) projects and Canara Bank with 42 (10%) projects (Table 3.1). The State Bank of India and its five Associate Banks have sanctioned 20% of the total projects which availed VCA during the XI FYP.

20   

  State Bank of India

0 IDBI Bank

21 

Vijaya Bank

6 5 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Indian Overseas Bank Andhra Bank EXIM Bank AXIS Bank The Karnataka Bank  The Lakshmi Vilas Bank EXIM Bank/State Bank of India HDFC Bank NABARD/Bank of India NABARD/Uttar Banga Kshetrya Gramin Bank SIDBI/Syndicate Bank SIDBI/Punjab National Bank

3

State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur

State Bank of Saurashtra

6

Dena Bank

6

Allahabad Bank

6

State Bank of Travancore

7

State Bank of Hyderabad

8

UCO Bank

13 12 12 12 11 10 9

United Bank of India

State Bank of Patiala

Corporation Bank

Central Bank of India

Oriental Bank of Commerce

10

Indian Bank

15

Union Bank of India

20

The Jammu & Kashmir Bank Limited

Syndicate Bank

Bank of Baroda

30

Punjab National Bank

Bank of India

Canara Bank

Bank of Maharashtra

60 54

50 51

40 42

32 29 21 20

Figure 3.5: Bank wise distribution of projects sanctioned under VCAS (2007-12)

The distribution of banks with respect to number of VCA projects sanctioned during the XI FYP (2007-12) is given in figure 3.5.

Table 3.1: Bank wise projects under VCAS (2009-12) Sl 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

Name of Banks State Bank of India Bank of Maharashtra Canara Bank Bank of India Punjab National Bank Bank of Baroda Syndicate Bank The Jammu & Kashmir Bank Limited Union Bank of India Indian Bank IDBI Bank Oriental Bank of Commerce Central Bank of India Corporation Bank State Bank of Patiala United Bank of India UCO Bank Vijaya Bank State Bank of Hyderabad State Bank of Travancore Dena Bank Allahabad Bank State Bank of Saurashtra Indian Overseas Bank State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur Andhra Bank EXIM Bank AXIS Bank The Karnataka Bank The Lakshmi Vilas Bank EXIM Bank/State Bank of India HDFC Bank NABARD/Bank of India NABARD/Uttar Banga Kshetrya Gramin Bank SIDBI/Syndicate Bank SIDBI/Punjab National Bank Total

22   

No of Projects Sanctioned 54 51 42 32 29 21 20 15 13 12 12 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 6 6 6 5 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 409

% of project sanctioned 13.2% 12.5% 10.3% 7.8% 7.1% 5.1% 4.9% 3.7% 3.2% 2.9% 2.9% 2.9% 2.7% 2.4% 2.2% 2.0% 1.7% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.2% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.5% 0.5% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 100%

3.4: Activity wise Distribution During the XI FYP under VCAS, total of 409 units were sanctioned VCA. Different form of activities have been taken by the agri-business units which were sanctioned VCA. This on dividing falls mainly on broad categories such as Food/ Fruit Processing, Cold Chain, Medicinal value addition, Green House, Winery, Aquaculture, Plantation and Vermicompost. The data revealed that around 64% (260) of the units sanctioned VCA were those of Food/ Fruit Processing. Around 21% (87) of the total units were Cold Chain followed by 6% (24) Medicinal value chain establishments (Table 3.3, Figure 3.6). Table 3.2: Activity wise sanctioning of VCA during XI FYP (2007-12) Broad Activities Food/ Fruit Processing Cold Chain Medicinal Value Green House/Floriculture Winery Aquaculture Plantation Vermicompost Total

No of Units Sanctioned 260 87 24 20 7 7 3 1 409

Percentage 63.57% 21.27% 5.87% 4.89% 1.71% 1.71% 0.73% 0.24% 100.00%

A detailed list of sanctioned units, activity wise, is attached in Annexure-V.

Food/ Fruit  Processing 63%

Cold Chain 21% Plantation 1% Aquaculture 2% Winery 2%

Green  House/Floriculture 5%

Medicinal  Value 6%

Figure 3.6: Activity wise percentage distribution of units sanctioned

23   

3.5 Term Loan and Venture Capital Assistance Total of 25 states across the country during the XI FYP availed the VCA. The total 409 agri-business units were established during the period with total sanctioned VCA worth Rs 120.17 crore. The analysis of zone wise sanction and disbursement of VCA revealed that the West Zone consisting of 3 states viz. Maharashtra, Gujarat and Goa availed the highest VCA during the period with average of Rs 943.86 lakh per state. On an average each unit established during the period availed VCA of Rs 23.02 lakh in the West Zone. Similarly, South Zone consisting of 4 states Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh availed VCA worth Rs 933.53 lakh on an average. The average VCA per unit is Rs 29.4 lakh within the Zone. The Eastern Zone remained the most deprived availing the VCA of Rs 23.62 lakh on average, which is significantly different from other zones. Even the average VCA availed per unit in the Eastern Zone is found to be the lowest with Rs 17.72 lakh (Figure 3.7, Table 3.3).

1000.00

943.86

933.53

Average VCA/state (in lakh)

900.00 800.00 700.00 600.00 500.00

358.43

400.00 300.00 200.00

77.39

105.55 23.62

100.00 0.00 West Zone

South  Zone

North  Zone

North East

Central  Zone

East Zone

Figure 3.7: Zone wise sanction & disbursement of VCA- XI FYP (2007-2012) The data also revealed that per unit disbursement of VCA is found to be highest in North Zone followed by Central Zone with total value of Rs 36.36 lakh and Rs 35.18 lakh respectively. The details of average term loan, average VCA per state and average VCA per unit availed during the XI Plan period has been given in table 3.3 below.

24   

Table 3.3: Zone wise average of Term Loan, average VCA per state and VCA per unit (2007-2012)

Zone/ Region West Zone South Zone North Zone North East Central Zone East Zone

Units (No) 123 127 69 16 3 4

Average Term Loan (in lakh) 5560.31 5474.24 1980.30 271.21 721.60 210.97

Average VCA/state (in lakh) 943.86 933.53 358.43 77.39 105.55 23.62

Average VCA/ Unit (in lakh) 23.02 29.40 36.36 24.19 35.18 17.72

Note: The average term loan and average VCA shown in above table is based on the data available for 342 units

25   

CHAPTER 4 STUDY OBSERVATIONS AND FINDINGS 4.1 The Study Coverage As has already been pointed out in Chapter 2, the present study covers altogether 41 projects in 13 States across the country for collection of primary and secondary data at the ground level through formal interactions/discussions/direct personal interviews with the stakeholders of the select projects viz. the project promoters and agripreneurs, the financing Bank and the farmers who have benefitted from the respective projects. The study team members also interacted and held detailed discussions with various other stake holders of the scheme which included the Top Management and Desk Officials of SFAC, officials of State SFACs/Nodal Deptt.(s) of select states, select RRBs and Pvt. Banks, representatives of Entrepreneurs’ and Farmers’ Associations etc., with a view to having a deeper understanding of the operational and policy issues involved with the VCAS. Further, besides having a Bankers’ Meet at Guwahati, two State Level Consultative Meets were organized at Bhopal and Bhubaneswar with a view to have wider interaction with various stakeholders and senior State Govt. officials on key policy issues. The present chapter presents the detailed field observations and findings of the study based on evaluation of the sample projects and our interactions and discussions with major stakeholders. 4.2 Sample distribution by Type and Legal Status of Units The distribution of sample by type of legal status of units is presented in figure 4.1 below. Out of a total sample of 41, altogether 30 units were found to have been registered as Partnership and Private Ltd Co, and rest are Proprietorship, Public Ltd. Co. and Cooperatives.

26   

16

15

15

14 Numbers

12 10

7

8 6

3

4

1

2 0 Partnership

Private Ltd Co

Proprietorship

Public Ltd Co

Cooperative  Society

Legal Status

Figure 4.1: Distribution of samples by legal status It has been furthered observed that in terms of percentage, out of 41 units studied, 37% of them have been registered as Private Ltd Companies and equally under Partnership; 17% of the samples are under proprietorship, while the rest 9% are either Public Limited Cos. or Cooperatives (Figure 4.2). Public Ltd Co 7%

Cooperative  Society 2%

Proprietorship 17% Partnership 37% Private Ltd Co 37%

Figure 4.2: Percentage distribution by type of legal status of sample units.

27   

4.3 Distribution of Sampled Units by Type of Activity The sample also revealed that 50% of the total sample units pertain to horticulture based processing, 13% Individually Quick Frozen (IQF) Category, 11% pertaining to industry engaged in processing plantation crops and the remaining in the categories of medicinal, fisheries, and cold chain. Figure 4.3 below gives the details of sampled units by their types of activities. 20

19

18 16

12 10 8

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Polyhouse

Green House

1

Vermicompost

1

Organic Farm

2

Sericulture

2

2

MFP

4

Floriculture

4

4

Apiculture

5

6

Cold Chain

Numbers

14

Fishery

MAP

Plantation Crop

Others

IQF  Unit

Horticulture

0

Figure 4.3: Activity wise distribution of Sample Units This is evident from above that the distribution of sample units by type of activity, which indicate predominance of activities such as horticulture, food and fruit processing, medicinal and aromatic plants, cold chain, aquaculture, etc., are not significantly different from the sample frame, as around 63% of the total industries assisted under VCAS are those of horticulture and food processing, 6% of the industries processing MAP, 21% pertaining to value addition through cold chain, 2% in aquaculture (Figure 3.6). Therefore, this is expected, when findings are extrapolated at the level or sample frame, the observations and finding will be able to represent the population. 4.4. Nature and Size of Investment From the data it has been observed that VCA has played a catalytic role in bringing in private capital for investment in agribusiness sector. Seventy one percent of the units which have been provided VCA, have project cost less than or equal to Rs. 500 lakh. Only 13% of the 28   

industries established were having project cost ranging above Rs. 500 lakh to Rs. 1000 lakh. Rest 16% of industries has a capital investment above Rs 1000 lakh. Table 4.1: Frequency distribution of units by size of investment (N=38) Total Project Cost (in Rs. lakh) Upto 500 501- 1000 Above 1000

Cumulative Frequency 27 32 38

Frequency 27 5 6

Cumulative % 71% 84% 100%

The above directly implies that most of the units assisted under VCAS, as much as 71% were having investment worth Rs 5 crore or less. While, 29% units have investments above 5 crore. The above shows, how the SFAC has been able to support a wide range of units with varying levels of investments and and has assisted them to come up successfully. 4.5: Adequacy of Bank Credit for Capital investment As per relative guidelines under the VCAS, an agribusiness unit to be eligible for venture capital assistance from SFAC, should avail the term loan from any of the Nationalized Scheduled Commercial Banks, SBI and its Subsidiaries and the IDBI. The bank has to complete the appraisal and then calculate and recommend the VCA to SFAC for disbursement. Except in two cases, all the banks have accepted the total project cost as indicated in the DPR. The term loan sanctioned to units ranged between a minimum of Rs 21.84 lakh to a maximum of Rs 2355.5 lakh with average of capital requirement of Rs 544.98 lakh. The average term loan extended to these units by the financing banks has been Rs 282.48 lakh. The total capital requirement and assistance extended in the form of term loan, borrowers’ margin, VCA and external assistance from the studied sample are given in table 4.2 below. Table 4.2: Breakup of assistance received by Sample Units under VCAS (Amt. in Rs. lakh) Particulars

Total Average N

Project Cost

Term Loan

Borrower’s Margin

VCA

External Assistance

20709.22 544.98 38

10624.49 282.48 38

6416.17 168.85 38

1869.52 49.02 38

1800 60 30

29   

Almost 78% of the units have also availed external assistance in the form of capital subsidy from different sources such as Ministry of Food Processing Industries (MOFPI), National Horticulture Board (NHB), Coconut Board, Agriculture & Processed Food Export Development Authority (APEDA), District Industries Centre (DIC), National Horticulture Mission (NHM) etc. The average assistance obtained from these agencies is worth Rs. 60 lakh per unit (Table 4.2). In almost 50% of the cases, the assistance is extended by MOFPI followed by NHB. The average interest rate charged by Banks is found to be 13.5%. The maximum interest rate is found to be 18.75% on the term loan extend by State Bank of India to Sri Venkateshwara Agro Export Ltd in Karnataka. The minimum interest rate is found to have been charged by Axis Bank in Maharashtra, in respect of loan extended to M/S BAFNA Exports Ltd., which stood at 9.5% p.a. The rate of interest (RoI) has been found to vary from case to case and bank to bank which may be in coherence with the policy of financing banks. Some of the Banks were also charging found to have charged floating rate of interest which vary over time, as per the corporate decision of the Bank on RoI. The Banks have also been found to allow moratorium period to the borrowing units, which varied from minimum of 6 months to maximum of 18 months. In 34% of the cases studied, the moratorium allowed was 12 months. The repayment period also ranged between 5 years to maximum of 12 years depending on the size of industry. In most cases, the repayment period has been fixed as 7 years including the grace period. The repayment period has been fixed by the financing banks primarily keeping in view the commercial production, capacity utilization and the payback period of the unit. 4.6 Adequacy of VCA Support VCA to the projects has been sanctioned on the basis of prescribed eligibility criteria of the schme i.e. lowest of the three alternative options viz. 10% of the total project cost assessed by the Bank or 26% of the project equity or Rs.75.00 lakh. The VCA extended in respect of sample units ranged in between Rs 4.35 lakh (M/S Virgin Coconut Oil Manufacturing Unit, Kerala) to maximum of Rs 399.5 lakh (M/S Vinken Labs, Tamil Nadu). In term of percentage, VCA ranged between 4% to maximum of 25% of the total project cost accepted by bank. The frequency distribution reflects that in 58% cases the VCA extended to units are less than 10%, however in 26% of cases the VCA exceeded 10% but remained below 15%. In rest 16% cases, the VCA has 30   

exceeded 15% of the total project cost out of which in 8% cases VCA sanctioned is greater than 20% of the cost. Table 4.3: Frequency distribution of VCA relative to total project cost. % of VCA extended relative to Project Cost Less than 10% 10.1-15% 15.1-20% > 20%

Frequency 22 10 3 3

Cumulative Frequency 22 32 35 38

Cumulative % 58% 84% 92% 100%

All the sample entrepreneurs have profusely acknowledged the support of VCA for establishing the units. However, they have suggested that there may be an increase in the limits of VCA from existing 10% of the project cost to at least 25% and that the cap of Rs.75 lakh may be removed. As it is evident from figure table 4.2 above, VCA has played a role of a catalyst in bringing in private investment in agri-business sector to an extent of 31% which in terms of equity capital is worth Rs 169 lakh per unit. The average contribution of VCA is found to be Rs. 49.02 lakh per establishment which is approximately 9.02% of the total project cost.

Borrowers  Margin, 31%

VCA, 9%

Term Loan, 51%

External  Assistance, 9%

Figure 4.4: Share of assistance of total project cost. The average equity capital in term of Borrower’s Margin money is found to be to the extent of 31% of project cost which is considerably high by any standard and sometimes difficult to be arranged by an entrepreneur. In addition, the entrepreneurs also have to manage operating 31   

costs to commence commercial production. This in case of agro processing always remain high owing to the need for maintaining stock of raw materials, which are generally available for a short duration after its harvest. Thus a higher VCA may be required lowering proportion of equity capital from entrepreneur, which in turn can be used by entrepreneur in meeting other variable costs of unit. 4.7 Appraisal and Sanctioning Procedure of VCA Most of the beneficiaries appreciated the sanctioning procedure of VCA by Central SFAC, which was done quite expeditiously without any protracted correspondence or any need to visit Delhi on several occasions. All had very high regards for the professional approach of SFAC and its remarkable swiftness in sanctioning the VCA without any bureaucratic approach. However, in six cases (15%) out of 38, it was found that the release of VCA took more than six months time from the date of application. It would be beneficial for the units if the VCA is released within a specific duration. The average time taken for release of VCA from the date of application for VCA is estimated to be 122 days, which is slightly over four months. In 52% cases the time taken to release the VCA was found to be more than 100 days, which is more than 3 months from the date of application. The process of releasing the VCA need be quickened and a time frame, say within a maximum of 45 days (one and half months) from the date of application, may be fixed for releasing the VCA The appraisal process of VCA cases during the Plan period was reviewed on sample basis which revealed that certain procedural changes made during the last two years of the period under review resulted in considerable reduction of the time taken for sanction, as compared to time taken for sanction and release of such cases during the earlier period. Introduction of the Project Scrutinizing Committee (PSC) approach has helped expediting the preliminary scrutiny of the proposals received. 4.8 Delays in Commencement of Commercial Production There has been delay in commencement of commercial production in some of the cases as observed from the sample. In respect of 6 cases, it has been observed that either the units established have not yet started commercial production on the day of visit to the units or there has been delay as compared to the time stipulated for such commencement. There were multiple reasons for delays. A few specific cases are presented below: 32   

a. M/S Trout Fish Canning and Preservation - The delay in case of M/S Trout Fish Canning and Preservation, Himachal Pradesh has been due to natural calamities such as land slide and flood. The time gap from the date of application to release of VCA is also found to be 122 days. Further, the time taken for obtaining proper and valid license for running commercial production was also found to be very long, which delayed start of commercial production. b. M/S Sultan Agrotech, J&K - In this case, the delay has been mainly due to lack of proper technical and economic appraisal of project which led to lowering the limits of sanctioned amount which in turn created hindrance from both technical and economic point of view. The unit could not avail the amount required for technical up-gradation as there was more than 50% curtailment from the original cost of project. Later, further disbursement was also stopped by the Bank after release of Rs. 155.8 lakh against the sanctioned limit of Rs 265.76 lakh. Further, an amount of Rs. 50 lakh capital subsidy obtained from MOFPI was also adjusted towards the recovery of interest. The unit is yet to commence commercial production even after four years of initial sanction of the project. This puts a serious question mark on the procedure followed by bank as regards appraisal of project and sanction & disbursement. c. M/S Brahmaputra Forest Product (P) Ltd - The reason for delay in commencement of production in respect of M/S Brahmaputra Forest Product (P) Ltd., Assam was found to be failure of the machinery supplier to supply the machinery in time. Another reason was reduction in subsidy which resulted in shortage of adequate fund for running the unit. Against a proposed subsidy of Rs 87.5 lakh from DIC, which was also accounted for as source of fund in the DPR, the actual amount limits of subsidy made available was only Rs. 52 lakh. d. Vinkem Lab Pvt Ltd in Tamil Nadu - The process and time over run has resulted in costover-run, which finally resulted in delay in commencement of production in respect of Vinkem Lab Pvt Ltd in Tamil Nadu. Unable to import required machinery for production and lack of timely clearance from USFDA delayed the whole process. The initial term loan of Rs 2433 lakh later on got revised to Rs 3318 lakh where the interest portion had to be recapitalized as term loan. This unit has also been released VCA worth Rs 399.5 lakh as special case. The unit was expected to start production by February 2012. 33   

In all the cases referred above, inadequate investment capital and bank finance have remained key to delay of commercial production. Once there is time overrun, cost overrun becomes inevitable pushing the unit into debt trap. The initial capital investment therefore is of paramount importance for successful grounding of a unit and VCA has been playing a crucial role. There has been increasing demand unanimously by all the entrepreneurs for increasing the contribution in form of VCA. 4.9 Knowledge and Awareness about the Scheme The Central SFAC and State-level SFACs both have been making focused efforts for creating adequate awareness about the VCAS throughout the country. MOUs have been also been signed by the SFAC with Public Sector Banks in this regard and several “Interface with Banks” have been held across the country, while periodical advertisements in newspapers are also regularly brought out. Despite such efforts by SFAC, one aspect that has come out uniformly during the field study was very low level of awareness among the bankers and the Government Departments about the Scheme and its benefits to agri-business development. As per the information collected from Bank branches, the detailed awareness and information was available with only 57% of bank branches while in the remaining 43% cases, the information are available only at Regional Office level or no information even at RO and Branch level. There could be several reasons for such low level awareness at Bank Branch level, which include, frequent shifting of the officers and staff of the banks at branch and regional levels, priority of daily work over developmental issues, non-percolation of the information about the Scheme from the Zonal or Regional levels of the Bank to its branches, non-involvement of the Lead Bank or the Lead District Manager of the concerned Districts in the awareness campaign, lack of proactive role on part of the Government Departments like Agriculture, Horticulture and District Industries Centers (DICs) in the promotion of the Scheme or its implementation, non-availability of the details of the Scheme in the local language at District levels, etc. There is not much awareness about the Scheme among the beneficiary agripreneurs as well, possibly because the whole work associated with VCA was attended by their Consultants or Chartered Accountants. In fact, even at the time of the field visits for the present study, 16% promoters stated that they did not know about the scheme and another 38% reported that they only knew as to how much they had obtained interest-free loan from SFAC; they were not aware

34   

of the objectives of the Scheme or the basis on which the amount of assistance was worked out as these facts were known only to their Consultants. 4.10 Coverage of AEZ Districts With a view to promote agriculture export from the country and improve upon the international competitiveness, the concept of agri-export zone (AEZ) was floated. These zones have been set up for end to end development for export of specific product from geographically contiguous area. The sample data indicates 14% of the units are located in the districts notified under AEZ, it can be well justified that SFAC’s VCA scheme has played a significant contributory role to achieve AEZ objectives. The total investment in AEZ locations is worked out to be approximately 28% of the total investments of the sample units, which is to the tune of Rs 4599 lakh. This is therefore no denying of the fact that the VCAS within a short period of its existence has significantly contributed to the effective grounding of notified AEZs in the country. 4.11 Capacity Building One of the objectives of the scheme is also to enhance the skill and knowledge of entrepreneurs through capacity building initiatives. The study reveals that only 42% of the entrepreneurs have been imparted with skill development and capacity building initiatives and 60% of them expressed that the training helped them in managing the unit in a better way and this has resulted in improvement in quantity and volume of production. However this training has been imparted only at the level of enterprise itself, and not at the project level. The study findings further revealed that capacity building initiatives have been taken up by only two of the State Nodal Agencies, one in Himachal Pradesh and one in Assam. Other than that none of the sampled units reported the conduct of any capacity building program by State Nodal Agency. To bring in and maintain the motivation, enthusiasm and also to popularise the scheme, the State Nodal Agency needs to actively participate in capacity building of entrepreneurs, their employees and staffs and information dissemination of the scheme. The skill analysis of agripreneurs clearly indicates that the most vulnerable to failure among all categories of entrepreneurs are those who are neither formally trained nor held any experience in handling any enterprise. They are found to be almost 20% of the sample agripreneurs.

35   

4.12 Impact of the Scheme The scheme is expected to have both direct and indirect impacts. Direct impact is seen in areas such as catalyzing private investment to agri-business units, direct employment generation by the unit, strengthening backward linkages of agri-business projects with producer, increased return to units. The spillover effect is expected to generate indirect impacts in the form of crop diversification, generate on-farm employment opportunities etc. These impacts with respect to different indicators are presented below: 4.12 (a) Catalyzing Private Investment The average investment requirement of sample agribusiness units has been Rs.544.98 lakh per unit and the average term loan extended per units by financing banks has been Rs. 282.48 lakh (i.e. 51% of total project). This shows that someway or other, the VCA has played the role of a catalyst to fill in the shortfall in capital in the agribusiness sector with its contribution on an average of Rs.49.02 lakh (9% of project cost) per unit. The average equity investment of the entrepreneur is about Rs.168.85 lakh that accounts for 31% of the project cost. It can therefore be concluded that, the VCAS has been successful in mobilizing huge private investment in agribusiness sector to an extent of 31%. 4.12 (b) Setting up Agri-business Units near Farm Gate VCA has definitely facilitated establishing agri-entreprises in rural areas near to the production centres. About 74% of the agribusiness units have been set up in rural areas and another 18% in semi urban areas and rest 8% in the urban area (Figure 4.5). These units have been able to cater to raw materials produced in hinterlands and creating both on farm and offfarm employment opportunities for the rural work force.

36   

Rural, 74%

Semi Urban,  18% Urban, 8%

Figure 4.5: Location of agri-business units Further, development of agribusiness units in rural areas has also induced ancillary activities and other support services in the vicinity and created a driving force for economic development of the region. 4.12 (c) Strengthening backward linkages Setting up of agri-business units has strengthened the backward linkages with producers. The analysis of data also revealed that each unit on an average is procuring raw material from 25 villages, within an average radius of 78 kms. In most of the cases, it is observed that procurements are happening within the radius of 30 kms. However, the mode of procuring raw material generally remained informal in nature. On average, each unit is procuring raw material under formal arrangements only from 5 villages out of 25 villages from which the unit normally procures raw material. In other words, in percentage terms while 20% of villages in a cluste, used to have formal arrangements for procurement of raw material by a sample unit, the rest 80% villages supplied their produce to the unit without any formal agreement. The raw material provides by the producers were mostly in raw form without any processing involved at primary level. In 58% cases, the units made their own arrangements for procurement and also provided to and fro transport facilities to the workers engaged in the units. Thus, need based transport systems and development of roads to the hinterlands and interior areas have also taken place.

37   

These agribusiness units have provided assured market to the farmers for their produce, whether they sell the produce directly or indirectly to the units. It has been estimated on the basis of the information collected from the farmers benefited by the sample units that on an average 221 farmers are selling 71% of the produce to each unit. Almost 97% of farmers in the vicinity of a sample unit believed that the units were providing assured market to their produce. In 31% cases, the entire produce of the farmers were found to have been sold to the agribusiness units. Establishment of agribusiness units also encouraged farmers in nearby villages to diversify into high value crops. It is estimated that an area of around 14,000 acres has been diversified with new crops which are being bought by the units. These produces range from fruits and vegetable like peas, gherkin, capsicum, pine apple, to medicinal and aromatic plants, such as Aloe Vera, Tapioca etc. The resultant changes viz. change in cropping pattern and more remunerative prices for the produce, have resulted in per acre increase in farm income, which is estimated at Rs. 20,875 for selected sample cases. 4.12 (d) Employment Generation With establishment of new industries, the probability of generating new opportunity to employment of local people also increases and so has happened with the Scheme. The Scheme has been able to generate additional employment to both skilled and unskilled labour force. All 409 units assisted during the XI plan taken together have been able to provide a gainful employment to around 29,000 people. On average, each unit has been able to provide employment to about 121 persons during peak season. During the slack season, the figure used to come down to minimum of 8 person per unit. The agribusiness units appeared to have benefitted mostly the unskilled rural workforce. Almost 85% of the total workforce were those belonging to the unskilled category, while about 9% were skilled; the rest 6% belonged to managerial and supervisory categories. 4.12 (e): Increased Wage Rate With increased employment opportunity, the wage rate has also gone up as observed from the sampled data. Before establishment of units, the average daily wage rate was Rs. 56/which has increased by factor of 3 over the period to approximately Rs. 156 per day. This has benefitted the most deprived category belonging to unskilled labour force in the vicinity of agribusiness projects.

38   

4.12 (f) Incremental Income by type of farmer The farmers who have found an assured market for their producers due to establishment of new agribusiness units have immensely benefitted from the Scheme by way of receiving better return by selling their produce to the units. An analysis was carried out to estimate the incremental income pre and post project establishment for three different types of producers viz. marginal producer (land holding less than 1 ha), small producer (1-2 ha) and producer with more than 2 ha of land. It is found that the incremental income for a small farmer was to the extent of 48%, followed by a marginal farmer (28%) and other category i.e. farmer having land more than 2 ha (14%). This indicates that the scheme has been successful in meeting the objective of benefitting the small and marginal farmers more than the large farmers and is certainly helpin in addressing the issue of rural poverty to a great extent. Average level of incremental income for

59244.7 13674.0

20000.0

28762.5

40000.0

6262.5

60000.0

37656.3

80000.0

22000.0

Annual Income

100000.0

11650.0

82807.7

120000.0

110178.6

each category of producer is given in figure 4.6 below.

0.0 Before  After ChangeBefore  After ChangeBefore  After Change Land holder  5acre) acre)

Figure 4.6 Annual Incremental Income by types of Farmer. 4.12 (g) Incremental Income of Agripreneurs An agribusiness unit, in principle, is a commercial venture and the entrepreneurs in this sector invest their money, time and skill for putting in value addition to the locally available resources with a view to earn maximum possible return.. During the study it has been observed that 85% of the units have started the commercial production and are earning incremental income. The average annual income per unit of the operating agribusiness units has been estimated to be Rs.30.86 lakh after the establishment of units. 39   

The estimated average

incremental returns from VCA are almost 30%. This means a Re. 1 lakh worth VCA investment has led to a return of almost Rs 30,000 in terms of total income to an agribusiness unit.

40   

CHAPTER 5 POLICY ISSUES & IMPLICATIONS The implementation of Venture Capital Assistance Scheme of SFAC has broader perspectives of addressing inequalities and deepening poverty, especially at the national level and realizing its importance due to international policies of liberalization, globalization and marketization bringing in change in business environment in which the industries are operating. Globally, over the period of time, inequalities and world poverty in the recent years has increased rather than decreased, largely due to general global financial and economic crisis as well as the food crisis felt by rising food prices even for essential commodities. This has caused the agriculture development to become prominent again in development and poverty alleviation agenda which has been brought to the forefront by various publications by World Bank (2008, 2009) followed by FAO and others (Agro-Industries for Development, 2009). Looking into the agricultural scenario of India, coupled with low productivity, Indian agriculture suffers from substantial wastage which differs from crop to crop. Nearly 10-15 percent of the grain and 20-25 percent of fruit and vegetables in India perish each year. This is substantial in terms of quantum and also as percentage of national agriculture output. In a country like India with 30-40 percent people living below poverty line, we certainly cannot afford such a huge wastage. Systematic efforts are therefore needed to minimize wastage of farm output and to encourage adoption of best practices and technology available that would cut down processing loss. Efforts to improve quality and capacity of warehousing for grains and expansion of cold storage facilities for fresh vegetables and fruits are at best a part answer. Some of the hard fact related to agribusiness and small enterprises in India is that they employ 90% of India’s workforce in approximately 29 million units and manufacture more than 6000 products ranging from apple juice to pickle. However, they receive a fraction, may be 10% of the total loans. In addition, delayed payment by clients, climbing interest rates impact this small business harshly. The implication of the above situation for the SFAC is perhaps how to remain relevant to the context and face the challenge of assisting more and more agribusiness and at the same time remain strong enough. The intervention designed in form of VCA and PDF has found greater relevance to assist agripreneurs/ producer groups, supporting agribusiness 41   

units, however needs to move with greater impetus towards value chain establishment in which its clients will operate. This will require all encompassing interventions along with adequate resources to implement the program with support from different stakeholders such as Banks, MOFPI, APEDA, NHB etc which have supported the scheme with their assistance to the extent of 10% of the total project cost. The assistance is extended in the form of subsidy/ loans carrying very low rate of interest and is mostly back ended. In other words, promoters of the agri-business enterprises are expected to invest first and claim the subsidy later. While there is no doubt that the support from these agencies, meets a considerable proportion of the project cost, the promoter may still have to arrange fund from different sources to tide the time lag to qualify for the release of subsidies. In many cases the capital subsidy is not made available by banks even after release by the supporting agency and the promoters are forced to avail unsecured loans which may attract very high rates of interest. It therefore depends on the financial standing of the promoter or his ability to plough own funds in advance to be able to avail the subsidy. The implication is that entrepreneurs, who can barely bring in their share of the equity, are either are not able gather courage to invest in agri-business units or fail to take advantage of the benefits provided by schemes. Presently most of the units assisted by SFAC have availed subsidies from the following agencies: a. Ministry of food processing industries (MoFPI): The units involved in production of frozen food, vegetable and fruit concentrates, ready to eat/serve food, snacks and pickles etc. have been availing subsidy to the tune of 35-50% which works out to be the proportion of the costs towards technical civil works and plant and machinery (with an upper ceiling based on the activity). b. National Horticulture Board (NHB): Cold storages, pack houses, ripening chambers and protected cultivation units for exotic fruits and vegetables and floriculture have been availing back ended subsidy 25-40%(with an upper ceiling based on the activity). c. Coconut Development Board: Units producing coconut oil, virgin coconut oil, vinegar, and coconut desiccated powder have been availing subsidy to the tune of 20% of the project cost (with an upper ceiling). Other agencies that also support agribusiness projects in the horticulture sector are National Horticulture Mission (NHM), Agriculture and Processed Food Products Export

42   

Development Agency (APEDA), National Fisheries Development Board and Marine Products Export Development Authority for fisheries and National Bamboo Mission for bamboo products. Private entrepreneurs with sound financial status have been able to avail benefits from both SFAC for the venture capital assistance and the agency providing the subsidy and these proposals are scrutinized by the two institutions separately. Therefore the decision for considering venture capital may or may not affect the unit from getting grants and subsidies from other agencies and vice versa. This is because while SFAC provides venture capital based on the promoter's equity and the project cost, the subsidy is based on the cost of the technical civil works and plant & machinery. In other words the criteria consideration for venture capital and subsidy do not overlap. In view of this, SFAC and institutions providing grant/subsidy may not work in tandem or in coordination. This situation may not affect current strata of entrepreneurs assisted by SFAC (i.e. individuals/partnership firms, private companies) from availing benefits from the two agencies; however farmer producer cooperatives/organizations/companies may not be able to reap the benefits of both the agencies due to paucity of funds. In order to ensure that maximum benefits reach Producer organizations, SFAC could consider extending financial cover or bridge loan assistance (apart from venture capital assistance) to ensure that the preliminary requirements of the agencies providing grants are fulfilled as well the unit being established by them are not delayed for want of funds. This assistance could be interest free and repayable as and when subsidy/grants are released by the agencies providing the same. The criteria for assessing the bridge loan could be as per the amount of grant/subsidy sanctioned by the institution and releases may be in proportion to the terms and conditions of release stipulated by it.

43   

CHAPTER 6 RECOMMENDATIONS & CONCLUSITON 6.1 Recommendations Based on the findings of the study, feedback and responses received from stakeholders of the project during the course of the visit to sample units as also during the two state level Stake Holders Meets and one Bankers meet, their objective analysis and subsequent collocation of core and supplementary objectives of the scheme, suitable recommendations, with rationale for each are derived, which are placed below. The suggestions and recommendations are intended to strengthen the scheme in addressing major operational issues as well as issues relating to policy guideline supporting the operational issues. State/Region Wise Focus I. As observed and the analysis revealed, the spatial distribution of the projects are mostly concentrated in few of the states such as Maharashtra, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. Also, region wise analysis revealed that the performance of scheme is appreciable in regions such as West and South compared to North East, East and Northern Region. These variations may have arisen out of region and location specific comparative advantages and disadvantages, prevailing policies relating to credit policies, agro-industrial development policies of states, state of available infrastructure, availability of raw material etc. Therefore, it would be advisable that SFAC undertakes a quick assessment to identify state/region wise potential and even pocket with specific agriculture produce and then begin with system of annual internal projections (not targets)to assist the units. The projections have to be arrived at in consistence with the other promotional efforts and be made flexible vis-a-vis progress in promotional efforts and other ground realities and be reviewed on a periodical basis. Awareness Generation among Stakeholders II. From the findings, this becomes obvious that lack of adequate knowledge and awareness of the scheme among the stakeholders remained a major factor which have acted as a deterrent to balanced regional spread of projects under VCAS as was expected. In 44% cases it has been found that information regarding VCA is not available at bank branch level which is more crucial frontline promoter of the scheme. In order to upscale the VCAS, it is necessary to 44   

create widespread awareness about the key features and benefits of the Scheme among the various stakeholders. In this regard it is recommended that SFAC may arrange to organize Bankers’ and other stake holders’ Meets from time to time; involve the SLBC Convenor and state level NABARD office and major banks; and to see that VCA scheme is a part of the review process at SLBC, DCC, DLRC and other levels. Engagement of promotional organisations and a few entrepreneurs in state level meets can enhance the process. Covering new FIs/ Banks III. As per relative guidelines under VCAS, any project to avail VCA must be credit linked with a Nationalised Scheduled Commercial Bank, SBI and their subsidiaries and the IDBI. Thus the role of bank becomes crucial not only in terms of extending the term loan but also in terms of bankers awareness and knowledge of the Scheme. During the XI Plan Period, as many as 36 Banks participated in scheme. The Banks such as Regional Rural Banks, Cooperative Banks and Private Banks almost remained out of picture during period. Similarly Government financial institutions such as Small Industries Development Bank of India (SIDBI), North Eastern Development Finance Corporation Ltd., (NEDFi), National Cooperative Development Corporation, State Development Corporations etc. are actively promoting large number of agribusiness units in rural areas and in the cooperative sector by extending loans. The units assisted by these institutions have not been able to receive the support of venture capital from SFAC as the VCA scheme can only be implemented through Nationalised banks and IDBI. The SFAC may consider to involve RRBs, Coop. Banks and Private Commercial Banks in the scheme and a beginning may be made with the RRBs. Similarly SFAC may explore extending the scheme through more financial institutions e.g. SIDBI, NEDFi, NCDC etc. State SFACs, Planning, Monitoring and Reporting IV. No State SFACs have sanctioned any VCA cases at their level, but a couple of State SFACs have, however, forwarded a good number of projects proposals to central SFAC. The SFAC should have a relook into the roles and responsibilities of the state SFACs. The SFACs presence at state level needs to be strengthened with exclusive staff with undivided focus or at least to give them annual programme of promotional activities and to monitor their performance periodically. This has come out during the State Level Consultation Workshop of different Stakeholder organized on behalf of SFAC in Guwahati, Bhubneshwar and Bhopal, that the divided attention among various schemes is somewhat hampering in achieving the 45   

scale. To take the scheme further effectively at faster rate, there is need to do proper planning in consultation with banks, farmers and prospective entrepreneurs and organize Entrepreneurship Development Program. The SFAC should also draw annual plan of work and monitor the progress on regular intervals, may be quarterly. This could be done by formalizing the progress reporting system and visits as well. Sanctioning System V. From the sample cases, delays have been observed in release of VCA in almost to 15% cases with an average time lag of of 122 days. As was understood during scrutiny of appraisal system, at present, the entire proposal is examined in detail at SFAC level, which in a way also involves re-examining what the financing bank has already examined for sanction of term loan which might have resulted in delay in sanctioning. The process can be expedited, if SFAC scrutiny commences with reference to the bank’s sanction order onwards. This will help expedite the process of sanction and release. It is suggested that once the requirement of preliminary scrutiny are met, the onward process of sanction should be completed within 30 days. However, if and when the proposal is to be covered under the suggested credit guarantee scheme and the SFAC becoming a major stake holder, a more detailed scrutiny may be done and the pre-screening and sanction process may go upto 45 days. The committee consisting of SFAC officials meets twice a month based on the pace of inflow of the proposals, prima facie to scrutinize the proposals received keeping in view the prescribed guidelines, to reject ineligible cases and to identify the gaps in the required information from the applicants/banks if any, so that the same may be obtained quickly to further processing of the eligible cases. The proposals cleared by the PSC would then be put up to the Investment Committee consisting of the MD, representatives from NABARD, and select PSU Banks which meets once in two /three months. Proposals which require higher quantum of VCA more than their eligibility as per the stipulated norms and where there is a need for a policy decision, the proposals are then referred to the Executive Committee chaired by the Secretary, MoAC, GoI. Time taken for preparation of agenda notes for the internal PSC/IC meetings may be reduced by resorting to well designed check list including project/borrower profile.

46   

Threshold limit of Project Outlay VI. During the meetings with bankers and promotional organisations etc. organized by NABCONS at Bhubaneswar, Guwahati and Bhopal, it transpired that there is a need to suitably lower the present threshold limit of financial outlay on the project size. Such a lowering of the threshold limit for project outlay assumes significance in particular, in view of the 250 Farmers’ Producer Organizations being promoted. The FPO units may require ancilliary infrastructure such as sorting and grading units, storage facilities, mini dal mills, vegetable dehydration units, vending units, kiosks etc. In tribal areas these could be rural godowns, wild honey processes units, herbal and medicinal units etc. involving investment less than Rs.25.00 lakh. The study therefore recommends that under the Venture Capital Scheme the threshold limit could be reduced to Rs.10.00 lakh, for the units promoted by FPOs, NE and hilly States, Eastern States, Tribal Areas and in backward areas. Threshold limit for others is recommended to be lowered to Rs.25.00 lakhs. While adopting the lowering of the threshold limit, SFAC may either have to decentralize the sanctioning and disbursal mechanism by involving partner financial institutions or will have to expand its present organization setup to meet the huge demand that this move will generate. Quantum of VCA VII. The sampled units studied revealed that promoter’s contribution on an average (including the VCA amount) is 40% (31% Borrowers’ Margin & 9% VCA) of the project cost which is considered to be on a higher side. Further, the norms have to liberalized for the FPOs who may not have the adequate resources to the extent required towards the promoters contribution to avail the bank loans. It is therefore recommended that VCA amount may be revised to 25% of the project cost (provided the promoter’s equity is at least 15%) for the NER, Hilly states/ Eastern States/ Tribal areas/ Backward notified districts and FPOs with a ceiling of Rs. 100 lakhs. For other categories VCA could be 15 % of the project cost or 35% of the promoter’s equity or Rs. 100 lakh, whichever is less. Also, in a number of cases it was observed that while processing the applications the quantum of VCA amount has been reduced on account of applying various parameters either at the level of scrutiny or sanction. In this regard some of the project stakeholders interviewed opined that such deduction has caused them operational difficulties at various fronts especially in the absence of the reasons for the deduction. SFAC may consider 47   

communicating the reasons thereof so that the promoters may accordingly implement the project. Incentive to Financing Banks VIII. The Banks partenering in the scheme have to incur additional expenditures in administering the scheme till the VCA amount is fully repaid. It would therefore be advisable to have some financial incentive, for the banks towards this, which will also encourage the banks to promote the scheme. The matter has been given a further thought and it is recommended that that there could be a provision for financial incentive to the financing banks. Guarantee Cover IX. The SFAC is presently promoting 250 new FPOs and to be fully operational and successful these units may face constraints of no big resources to offer as collateral for bank loan, capital base to take up big units and lack of entrepreneurial experience etc. This necessitates the requirement of special consideration and handholding to the FPOs.To mitigate the likely problems of resource base for collateral and lack of enough entrepreneurial experience, which may deter the financial institution from financing such units, it will be necessary to have some sort of credit guarantee cover for the units set up by the FPOs. This can be a 100% cover (as compared to 75% in the credit guarantee scheme set up by the Ministry of Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises (MSME), Government of India and SIDBI. SFAC may consider making a cautious and small start and after gaining some experience and in accordance with the nature and size of FPO projects coming up, may gadually expand the cover. Further, the performance of the units covered under the proposed cover may have to be monitored closely on a regular basis. Scope of Activities X. SFAC may consider expanding the scope of activities for VCA facility. Specifically, it may consider including dairy activities and farmer oriented poultry units with total capital outlay of, say, upto Rs. 500 lakh. SFAC may also study the VCF Scheme implemented through NABARD for subsidizing interest component on portion of the bank loan as an incentive for prompt repayment, in view of present high rate of interest being borne by VCA beneficiaries. Co-ordination/Collaboration with NABARD, NHB, MoFPI etc. XI. It will be helpful in refining and increasing the outreach of the VCA scheme of SFAC if there is a regular coordination with Institutions / Ministries / Departments like NABARD, NHB and 48   

MoFPI etc. to keep updated with their schemes and policy initiatives. However, SFAC may not simply adopt the schemes of these institutions but maintain the identity of its unique intervention of VCA Clarifying Operational Guideline XII. As per para 3 A (j) of the Operational Guidelines, the venture capital is to be repaid to SFAC in lump sum immediately or in four quarterly instalments together with the amount of interest at the same rate as was applicable on the term loan of the lending bank. In this regard it was gathered during the study that the banks sometimes increase the rate of interest on the term loan during the tenure of the project period and insist that the beneficiary must pay the enhanced rate of interest while opt for repayment in four instalments. SFAC may revisit this aspect of the guidelines and the banks need to be advised suitably. XIII. While issuing the sanction advice to the Banks it is indicated in para 2 as under: “In this connection ……the funds received from SFAC will be credited to a separate account styled ‘SFAC a/c -

xxxx (Beneficiary’s name)’ and released to the beneficiary for the project

implementation as and when required” as indicated in para 3 A (n) of the Operational Guidelines. It is also indicated in para 3 A (i) that the venture capital would be in the nature of soft loan, till the bank’s term loan is fully repaid and would automatically be converted into a term loan. However, during the study it was observed that the banks were not clear about the accounting procedure to be followed in regard to servicing of the VCA. This has resulted in the case of Sach Herbotech Products, Sirsa, Haryana, where there is no accounting entry in the bank’s books of accounts to the effect that the VCA amount is outstanding and to be repaid by the beneficiary after repayment of the term loan. The VCA was credited to a current a/c on receipt and the amount paid to the supplier of the plant and machinery with “nil” balance in the account. This may lead to the risk of non- recovery of the VCA from the beneficiary by the bank. 6.2 Conclusion The SFAC’s VCA scheme has done exceptionally well as far as strengthening backward linkages and creation of rural employment is concerned but its contribution to poverty reduction was not clearly revealed. Its role in creation of rural infrastructure and catalysing private investment into agribusiness and its successful role in ensuring better price for the small farmer’s produce are strong justifications for extending the project to the XIIth Plan period. However 49   

changes in the policy guidelines particularly to ensure VCA is available to low investment projects particularly those set up farmer collectives and also to bring on board more financial institutions through which VCA could be routed, strengthening the operational guidelines need to be undertaken. As per the findings of the sample units, the observations made during the visits and opinions of different stakeholders of the Scheme, many of these units would have never come into existence without SFAC’s VCA support.

50   

ANNEXURE‐I Profile of Sampled Agribusiness Units Sri Tara Agrotech  

 

Location:

Block: Kurnool Road, District: Prakasham, State: Andhra Pradesh

Plant Capacity

20000 coconut per day, 500 ltr of coconut water per day, 2 tons of coconut shell per day 29 October, 2008

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC: Financing Bank :

Punjab National Bank Particulars

Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO

252.10

Bank Loan – Term Loan WC SFAC - VCA

118.00 40.00 63.00

Margin Money

71.10

Subsidy Sector / Activity / Major products: Brief description of Project performance: Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Major observations:

Plantation Virgin Coconut Oil, Low fat Desiccated Coconut Powder, Shell Charcoal The factory consists of 4 units viz. Oil extraction, Storage unit, Packing unit and Charcoal unit. The unit has started commercial production in 2008.  Preliminary processing of the de-husking is taken up by the farmers for which the farmers are paid and allowed to retain the husk for their additional income.  Provided employment to 20 persons from the rural areas.  Instead of the traditional extraction of oil from Copra, oil is extracted from coconut milk through Centrifugal action to fetch higher prices and export potential.  Presently the produce is sold in generic form to large buyers and the unit is planning to develop its own brand for marketing.

51   

Srivarsha Food Products India Limited  

Location:

Village: S.N. Puram, Block: Renigunta, Chittoor Road, District: Chittoor,State: Andhra Pradesh

Plant Capacity

19800 MT/P.A

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

12 February 2010

Financing Bank :

Indian Overseas Bank Particulars Cost of the Project TFO Bank Loan

Sector / Activity / Major products: Brief description of Project performance:

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Major observations:

1523.80

SFAC - VCA

1000.00 (enhanced to 1865.00) 65.00

Margin Money

553.80

Subsidy from APEDA 21.99 MoFPI 25.00 Horticulture Mango Pulp, Tomato Paste, Banana Paste, Papaya & Guva Juice  The unit is working to full capacity by collection of Alfanso, Thotapuri and Sindoori varieties of mango.  During slack season the unit is manufacturing Tomato paste, Banana Paste, Papaya Juice and Guava Juice for companies viz. M/s. Godrej, Parle, Pepsi, Nestle etc.  The unit covers 100 farmers informally for supply of raw material.  The farmers who were incurring loss on account of wastage in the absence of ripening chambers were benefitted due to setting up of the processing unit.  The unit provided employment to 70 persons permanently and seasonable employment about 500. The project was visited by SFAC during pre and post sanction period.

 

52   

Amount Rs. lakh

Farm and Bio Natural Products  

Location:

Village: 8-4-343/B/5, Viswakarmanagar, Block: Erragadda, District: Hyderabad, State: Andhra Pradesh

Plant Capacity

600 MTs

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC: Financing Bank :

January 2009 State Bank of Hyderabad Particulars

Sector / Activity / Major products: Brief description of Project performance: Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Major observations:

Cost of the Project TFO 144.00 Bank Loan 66.00 SFAC - VCA 12.35 Margin Money 78.00 Subsidy Horticulture - Vegetable processing Sweet Corn, Baby Corn, Green Peas and Mushroom The unit is working to full capacity. Green peas pods are processed during 2 months in the year while Sweet corn and Baby corn throughout the year.  200 farmers are covered with informal arrangement.  The unit has resulted in employment of 12 permanent employees and indirect employment is significant.  A fast food outlet is established to market the products.  The farmers are benefited to the range of Rs. 25,000 to Rs. 27,000 per acre.  There was deviation from the DPR as the unit is not processing vegetables such as Carrot, Cauliflower, Lettuce and Broccoli.  The project was visited by SFAC during pre and post sanction period.

     

53   

Amount Rs. lakh

Sri Samundeeswari Food Products Pvt Ltd

 

 

Location:

Block: Vellore, District: Vellore, State: Tamil Nadu

Plant Capacity

5200 tons / year

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

06 June 2007

Financing Bank :

Lakshmi Vilas Bank Particulars Cost of the Project TFO

406.00

Bank Loan

289.00

SFAC - VCA

30.42

Margin Money

117.00

Subsidy from MoFPI

50.00

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Mango Pulp and Other fruit pulp

Brief description of Project performance:

Commercial production has started after one year of installation. The unit presently processes 9,000 tonnes against the capacity of 20,000 tonnes of mango.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

The unit has provided employment to 300 unskilled labours during peak season. The mango growers have got assured market and their income level has almost doubled. Increase in income has led to infrastructure development such as drip irrigation and proper maintenance of mango gardens and helped farmers children to go for higher education. Prompt repayment of term loan was observed. The additional investment of Rs. 2.5 crore for construction of covered drying yard, effluent treatment plant and removal of pulp with minimum wastage of 0.5%, packaging in air tight containers and adoption of latest technology for ripening of fruits to meet the requirement of the exporters.

Major observations:

54   

Amount Rs. lakh

Vinkem Labs Pvt Ltd  

Location: Plant Capacity Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC: Financing Bank :

Block: Annanagar,District: Chennai, State: Tamil Nadu Vinroelbine tartrate - 14000 gm, Vinblastine sulfate - 7000 gm Vincristine sulfate - 5000 gm 05 March, 2008 Bank of India Particulars

Sector / Activity / Major products: Brief description of Project performance:

Nature of benefits/ Impact: Major observations:

Cost of the Project TFO Bank Loan SFAC - VCA Margin Money Subsidy Medicinal and Aromatic Plants Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients (API) - Vincristine, Vinblastine and Vinorelfine The unit was earlier supplying the API to Dabur India. In 2008 when Dabur India stopped procurement. Instead of API in powder form the unit shifted to injectable product through modernization with revised project cost. The revised term loan was sanctioned in 2009. The project is yet to commence commercial production. It is expected to commence trial run of production in the first quarter of 2012. 300 farmers who cultivated Vinca Rosea were benefitted and the processed products were exported to France and Belgium. The project is the unique one specializing in manufacture of anti-cancer drug using sophisticated technique. There was delay in opening up of buyer’s credit for the import of machinery and there was also improper planning on the part agripreneur as the applications for comfort letters were not issued on time. Due to delay in furnishing of required details sanction of additional term loan by the financing bank got delayed. 55 

 

Amount Rs. Lakh (figures in parentheses indicate the revised amount) 3260.00 (4731) 2355.50 (3318) 399.50 850.00 (1413) 32.46

Amman Food Products  

Location:

Block: Dharmapuri, District: Dharmapuri, State: Tamil Nadu

Plant Capacity

1600 MT

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

19 April, 2010

Financing Bank :

Bank of India Particulars

Financial details:

Cost of the Project TFO

86.37

Bank Loan

48.00

SFAC - VCA

7.80

Margin Money

26.89

Subsidy from MOFPI

18.72

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Mango Pulp and Tomato Puree

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit is started commercial production and completed two seasons. Processing of mango for pulp and extraction of tomato puree was undertaken. The unit has employed 150 persons during peak season.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Major observations:

As there is no problem with regard to availability of raw material farmers have assured market for their products. The unit has been granting need based short term advances for the farmers without interest to carryout agricultural operations. No agreement between the unit and the farmers regarding supply of raw material. Neither the Bank nor the farmers were aware of VCA under the SFAC Scheme.

56   

Amount Rs. lakh

Newgen Agro Processor Pvt Ltd  

Location: Plant Capacity Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

Block: Karuthamarampatty,District: Krishnagiri, State: Tamil Nadu 10800 MT / P.A. 07 July 2011

Financing Bank :

Corporation Bank Particulars Cost of the Project TFO Bank Loan

1200.00 820.00

SFAC - VCA

66.30

Margin Money

340.00

Subsidy from MoFPI

50.00

Sector / Activity / Major products: Brief description of Project performance Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Fruit processing Mango, Guava pulp Commercial production is yet to start without trial run was completed during 2011 season. The unit proposes to employ 10 skilled and 400 unskilled persons during 2012 season.

Major observations:

There is no shortage of raw material and as the area is a mango belt. No agreement has so far with farmers.

 

57   

Amount Rs. lakh

Venkateswara Agro Exports

Location: Plant Capacity Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

Block: Bellary, District: Bellary, State: Karnataka 2500 MT per annum 01 July, 2009

Financing Bank :

State Bank of India Particulars Cost of the Project TFO

228.72

Bank Loan

80.00

SFAC - VCA

22.80

Margin Money

40.00 26.00

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Subsidy State Government (S-21 value addition scheme) Horticulture Gherkin, Chillies and Squash processing

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit is selling around 3,000 to 4,000 MT Gherkin every year. Due to better price realization and regular orders the company is running profitably.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Major observations:

 Around 30 technical staff from the company gives technical information to the farmers.  Financing of borewells is made by the company.  Crop rotation takes place.  110 people get employment in peak season and 50 during slack season.  Around 2,500 farmers from 30 villages are covered under formal contracts.  About 1,000 acres are under cultivation of Gherkin.  Level of income of farmers increased to Rs.20,000 to Rs.70,000.  Company representative regularly visits the farmers to meet their technical and financial requirements.  The farmers wished to have continued relationship with the project.

58   

Amount Rs. lakh

Indian Ambience Vineyards Pvt. Ltd  

Location:

Block: Bidar, District: Bidar, State: Karnataka

Plant Capacity

200000 liters per batch

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

09 December, 2009

Financing Bank :

State Bank of Hyderabad Particulars

Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO

400.00

Bank Loan

200.00

SFAC - VCA

29.43

Margin Money Subsidy Sector / Activity / Major products:

Horticulture Wine (pure Grapes)

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit was first in the district and is in good condition. As the technology was new and imported there was delay in implementing the project. It is capable of producing export quality wine.  Agreement has been entered with 7 farmers.  Delayed and non-payment by the company was reported by the farmers.  Wine stock is piling up.  The management is not professional and not in the position to market the product in domestic and international market reportedly due to lack of funds to pay excise duty.  Due to pest attack and non-payment by the company some farmers have changed the crop.  There is need for bringing fresh equity and professional management team.

Nature of benefits/ Impact: Major observations:

59   

Rico Winery Pvt. Ltd  

Location:

Village: Bijapur,Solapur Highway,Block: Kannal Post, District: Bijapur, State: Karnataka

Plant Capacity

1.5 lakh liters / annum

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

21 March 2011

Financing Bank :

Syndicate Bank Particulars Cost of the Project TFO

408.48

Bank Loan

200.00

SFAC - VCA

23.54

Margin Money

Sector / Activity / Major products: Brief description of Project performance: Nature of benefits/ Impact: Major observations:

133.16 (32.6%)

Subsidy from National Horticulture Mission Horticulture Wine

46.00

The unit was first in the district to avail SFAC assistance. Due to prolonged paper work for import of machineries there was delay. The plant is in good condition and professionally managed.  25 farmers have entered to formal contract with the unit.  Assured market to the grape growers in and outside the Bijapur district.  The company entered into MOU with another company for sale of its products.  The unit is having sophisticated machinery and has sufficient storage capacity.  As per the bank, the account is a standard account.

 

60   

Amount Rs. lakh

Sri Ganesh Cashew Industries  

Location:

Block: Udupi, District: Udupi, State: Karnatka - 576212

Plant Capacity

45 Qtls (60 Bags)

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

17 December, 2009

Financing Bank :

Canara Bank Particulars Cost of the Project TFO

Amount Rs. lakh 120.00

Bank Loan

45.00

SFAC - VCA

10.48

Margin Money

45.00

Subsidy Sector / Activity / Major products:

Horticulture Cashew Kervels

Brief description of Project performance:

Started with the capacity to process 36 bags (27 Quintals) the unit has increased to 80 bags (60 Quintals).

Nature of benefits/ Impact: Major observations:

    

Assured maximum prevailing market price. Elimination of middle man. Provided employment to around 200-250 local youth. Formal agreement has been entered into with the farmers. The unit has grown in terms of its output.

   

61   

Sri Laxmi Devi Cashews  

 

 

Location:

Block: Mangalore, District: Dakshina Kannada, State: Karnataka

Plant Capacity

1125 tons/ annum

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

02 August, 2007

Financing Bank :

Corporation Bank Particulars Cost of the Project TFO

Amount Rs. lakh 120.00

Bank Loan

56.00

SFAC - VCA

15.00

Margin Money

38.82

Subsidy Sector / Activity / Major products:

Cashews

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit was started with installed capacity to process 50 bags (3.5 tonnes) against which the present level of utilization 35 bags.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Major observations:

 The farmers get assured market for their product without any preliminary processing of their produce.  VCA is reportedly reduced the interest burden.  Provided employment opportunities to the rural people.  The unit was a blessing to the farmers as there were no processing unit in the vicinity.  The farmers were able to get an increased price of Rs. 70-75 per kg. The project eliminated middlemen in trading.  The entrepreneurs have adequate experience in the industry and the unit is well managed.  No formal agreement with the farmers. 62 

 

Banarasi Agro Fresh  

Location:

Block: Kangra, District: Kangra, State: Himanchal Pradesh

Plant Capacity

3732 MT

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

30 August, 2010

Financing Bank :

State Bank of India Particulars

Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO

276.35

Bank Loan

100.00

SFAC - VCA

22.14

Margin Money

116.71

Subsidy from MoFPI Sector / Activity / Major products:

Horticulture Capsicum, Cucumber, Broccoli and Tomato

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit step up in 2010 for preservation of fruits and vegetables was damaged by a flood and promoters are planning to shift the unit to the new location. Before affected by a flood the unit could not reach its maximum potential / commercial operation though it had informal arrangement with 27 farmers in the project area. Presently around 10 people are working and it is expected that once the unit is shifted to the safer area it can employ more staff for its activities.

Nature of benefits/ Impact: Major observations:

 

63   

37.50

Dev Bhumi Cold Chain Pvt. Ltd  

Location:

Village: Matiana, Block: Theog,District: Shimla, State: Himachal Pradesh

Plant Capacity

Deep Freeze Storage - 1000 MT, Controlled Atmoshpher - 100 MT

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

NA

Financing Bank :

Bank of Baroda Particulars Cost of the Project TFO Bank Loan

Amount Rs. lakh 1140.00 429.00

SFAC - VCA

59.28

Margin Money

651.72

Subsidy Sector / Activity / Major products: Brief description of Project performance: Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Major observations:

Cold Chain (Apple)  The unit has a capacity of 1,000 MT and an additional 1,000 MT is under construction.  Through informal arrangements unit gets its stock.  On an average 75 persons are employed on contract basis.  The farmers besides realizing higher income have reduction in the cost of transportation of their produce to the unit which is in their vicinity.  The unit tried to pursue the farmers for strawberry cultivation by giving their training and other inputs but the farmers were not inclined to take up the activity.  No training was given to Apple growers.

 

64   

Trout Fish Canning & Preservation  

Location: Plant Capacity Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

Block: Manali, District: Kullu, State: Himanchal Pradesh 1 Ton/day, 300 ton/annum 15 December, 2009

Financing Bank :

Canara Bank Particulars Cost of the Project TFO

271.23

Bank Loan

146.63

SFAC - VCA

36.76

Margin Money

84.85

Subsidy from MoFPI

56.78 

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Fisheries Marketing of raw fish, tandoori fish, Biryani, smoked and fried fish

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit has conducted the trial run for canning and processing of the harvested fish. Presently the unit is not carrying out any canning and processing activities because of damage in its structure due to land sliding and flood. The project sources raw material such as feed and fingerlings from 40 local farmers under informal arrangement.  The project area is not well connected with the cities.  Marketing of finished products is a constraint hence the scope of higher income is limited.

Nature of benefits/ Impact: Major observations:

 

65   

Amount Rs. lakh

Sach Herbotech Products Private Limited

 

Location:

Village: Nejia Khera, Bajekan-Nejia Khera Road,Block: Sirsa District: Sirsa,State: Haryana

Plant Capacity Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

2000 kg of aloe vera 11 November 2009

Financial details:

Cost of the Project TFO : Rs. 318.97 lakh Bank Loan: Rs. 114 lakh Financing Bank : Oriental Bank of Commerce SFAC Assistance : Rs. 41 lakh Margin Money : Rs. 86.97 lakh Subsidy from MoFPI : Rs. 25 lakh

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Processing of Medicinal & Aromatic crops – processing and manufacturing of Aloevera products.

Brief description of Project performance:

The project unit has since been established and commercial production has started. The unit has graduated from proprietorship to a private limited company. Setting up of the project unit in the rural area has resulted in crop diversification in the project area of in an around 50 Kms in Haryana and Rajasthan. About 105 acres sandy land has been brought under the cultivation of Aloevera. The farmers are able to get incremental income ranging from Rs. 25,000/- to Rs.35,000/- per harvest. However, in view of the limited supply of raw material the unit is presently not functioning to its maximum capacity installed. No accounting entry relating to the outstanding VCA amount is available in bank records as such the bank officials are unaware of their responsibilities to recover the VCA from the borrower and repay to SFAC. Under the circumstances, the borrower is free as and when the bank loan is repaid. This is a serious lapse on the part of the bank.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Major observations:

66   

Natural Green Food Products Pvt Ltd

Location:

Block: Badaun, District: Badaun, State: Uttar Pradesh

Plant Capacity

1 MT per hour

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

01 December, 2008

Financial details:

Cost of the Project TFO : Rs. 946.2 lakh Bank Loan: Rs. 400 lakh Financing Bank : Canara Bank SFAC Assistance : Rs. 75 lakh Margin Money : Rs. 471.2 lakh Subsidy from : Nil

Sector / Activity / Major products:

IQF processing Vegetable and Fruit

Brief description of Project performance:

Commercial production has successfully been undertaken.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

The farmers have assured market and better price offered by the unit. This also eliminated Mandi Commission or brokerage. 30% to 40% increase in the annual income of the farmers. Resulted in the introduction of new crop namely sweet corn about 100 acres. Due to successful functioning of the unit one more unit has reportedly come up in the locality. 100 to 150 farmers have informal arrangement for supply of raw material to the units.

Major observations:

67   

Hi-Tech Natural Products (India) Ltd  

 

Location:

Block: Beerakheri, District: Saharanpur, State: Uttar Pradesh

Plant Capacity

5400 MT / Year

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

21 December, 2008

Financing Bank :

Oriental Bank of Commerce Particulars

Sector / Activity / Major products: Brief description of Project performance: Nature of benefits/ Impact: Major observations:

Cost of the Project TFO

262.00

Bank Loan

124.65

SFAC - VCA

49.01

Margin Money

62.50

Subsidy from National Horticulture Board Apiculture Honey, Polleu, Propolis and Equipments

24.90 

The unit, besides honey extraction and processing, is also engaged in selling Bee colonies, Bee boxes, extractor, Bee-veil etc. The unit is doing well.  Unit has employed 100 persons.  The company has trained 3,000 Bee keepers.  The income level of the Bee keepers has gone up.  The VCA was kept unutilized for 2 years at bank’s level and not released to the unit.  There was cost over-run and working capital requirement of the unit was not met by the bank.

68   

Amount Rs. lakh

BAFNA Exports Location: Plant Capacity Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC: Financing Bank :

  Village: Gate No. 468, Devi, Block: Daund, District: Pune, State: Maharashtra Cold storage - 60 MT and pre-cooling - 8 MT 28 February, 2008 Axis Bank Ltd. Particulars

Sector / Activity / Major products: Brief description of Project performance:

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Major observations:

Cost of the Project TFO

268.00

Bank Loan

135.00

SFAC - VCA

26.80

Margin Money

106.20

Subsidy from National Horticulture 24.45 Board Maharashtra Horticulture Fresh Grapes  The grape garden owned by family members, relatives, friends of Agripreneur and other farmers. At the other side the unit also deals in export of Pomegranate which is sufficiently available in the area.  Banks in the District had specially appointed an officer of Manager rank to look after the demand for this sector.  The impact on rural employment by unit is not very significant as the unit requires a labour force of about 150 persons per season for 3 months.  Before the unit started, the farmers were forced to sell their produce at farm gate for the price of Rs 10-20 per kg. But now due assured market for quality product they have been able to get the price upto Rs 70 per kg. The unit deals with exports of grapes and pomegranate. After the unit is established, the farmers in the area have started growing exportable quality of grapes. However, due to prevailing economic crisis in Europe, the unit could not generate incremental income to the agripreneur.

69   

Amount Rs. Lakh

Parshva Food International Location: Plant Capacity Date of Sanction of VCA by SFAC: Financing Bank :

  Village: At Bidgaon, Naka No.5 (B), Block: Tehsil Kamptee, District: Nagpur, State: Maharashtra 2200 MT  28 January 2011 Bank of India Particulars

Amount Rs. Lakh

Cost of the Project TFO

332.00

Bank Loan

175.00

SFAC - VCA

27.30

Margin Money

124.60

Subsidy from MoFPI Sector / Activity / Major products: Brief description of Project performance: Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Major observations:

50.00

Horticulture Mango Pulp, Pineapple Slice, Guava Pulp, Fruit Jam (Orange, Mango, Papaya), Awala, Karvand, Cashew and Tomato  The unit was established well within the time limit and commercial production was commenced in October, 2010.  Financing bank is satisfied with the performance of the unit.  The Agripreneur income has increased about 50% after the establishment of the unit.  The unit has eliminated middlemen through direct purchase from famers and almost farmers from 65 villages are directly selling their produce to the unit.  Setting up of unit has provided assured market and stability in price of produce providing market, throughout the year.  The unit processed 275.22 MT finished product, of which 248.48 MT (90.3%) is exported and has earned foreign exchange to the extent of Rs. 56.02 lakh in the year 2010-11.  The unit has not initiated any specific effort to establish backward linkages to acquire raw materials for its operations as the raw material is made available at the gate of the factory.  The requirement of raw material there is different fresh fruits has increased to great extent and farmers in the locality have felt the need for crop diversification.  Interest rate hiked from 12% p.a. to 14.5% p.a. which may affect the viability of project.

70   

Trimurti Foodtech Pvt. Ltd Location:

  Village: Nagar-Kalyan Road, Wadgaon Amli, Block: Parner, District: Ahmednagar, State: Maharashtra

Plant Capacity

1200 MT

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

29 October, 2008

Financing Bank :

State Bank of India Particulars

Cost of the Project TFO Bank Loan

400.00

SFAC - VCA

84.60

Margin Money

316.73

Subsidy

Sector / Activity / Major products: Brief description of Project performance:

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Major observations:

50.00 (yet to be received) Frozen green peas, sweet corn, Frozen mango pulp, Guava pulp, Frozen mix vegetables, ready to eat snacks - Vada Pav, Veg. Burger, Punjabi Samosa, Pav Bhaji, Misal, French Fries etc. The project is started in the year 2004 as a private limited company and performing good enough to yield profit. The unit is generating an annual income of approximately Rs. 12 lakh. The unit is providing assured market for sweet corn and vegetables. Generated employment for 400-500 people. Post project wage rate has gone upto Rs. 200 - Rs. 250 per day as against Rs. 50 per day. The acreage under crop has also gone up by 50-100% depending on crop. The income of marginal farmers has also increased to an extent of 75% from the produce sold to the unit. Since women are more employed at local level which has resulted increase in the family income. Cost of transportation is borne by unit. The support price of the product is mutually fixed in every season. If the market is high then the unit fixes quantity to be purchased from each farmer. The products left with farmer are directly sold to market by farmers themselves. Since there is no other unit in the area farmers are encouraged to tie up with the unit. The unit has also potential to increase its activities.

71   

Amount Rs. Lakh (figures in parentheses indicate the revised amount) 851.33

VLSS Foods Pvt Ltd Location:

  Village: Plot No. 88, B.U. Bhandari Industrial Estate, Block: Sanaswadi, District: Pune,State: Maharashtra

Plant Capacity

1 MT per day

Date of receipt of VCA from SFAC:

04 May, 2009

Financing Bank :

Indian Bank Particulars

Amount Rs. Lakh (figures in parentheses indicate the revised amount) 159.04

Cost of the Project TFO Bank Loan

55.00

SFAC - VCA

13.59

Margin Money

55.00

Subsidy Sector / Activity / Major products: Brief description of Project performance:

35.45 (yet to be received)

Food and Fruit processing Mango juice / Pulp (ready to serve), Fig Spread Jam, Awla Drink and Mineral Water  The unit was not setup on scientific lines though the promoters are sincere.  The unit was working for few months but presently not functioning.  Till 30th November, 2011 the account was not an NPA.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

-NA-

Major observations:

 No formal contracts with farmers, poor fund management, liquidity crunch, weak marketing were reportedly the reason for nonfunctioning of the unit.  The promoters need to bring in required additional funds.  The plant and machinery need to be maintained in good condition when the factory is not functioning.  Proper marketing team need to be employed.

72   

Dara Enterprises  

  Location:

Village: Dara, Block: Harwan, District: Srinagar, State: Kashmir

Plant Capacity

1600 tonnes of walnuts / annum

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

16 April, 2008

Financing Bank :

Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd. Particulars

Cost of the Project TFO

Sector / Activity / Major products: Brief description of Project performance:

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Major observations:

Bank Loan

40.80

SFAC - VCA

16.40

Margin Money

39.00

Subsidy from MOFPI as a grand and 24.03 aid Horticulture Walnut Kernnels M/s. Dara Enterprises is a proprietorship engaged in Walnut processing and Almond processing. The unit was established in the year 2008-09. The unit has provided extension services in form of training and credit. The unit is performing well and generating profits.  The unit could generate employment 110 people and the promoter has planned to upgrade the present unit which is expected to provide employment upto 500 people.  The Agripreneur income has been increased from Rs. 29,750/- to Rs. 46,000 after the establishment of the project.  On an average there is an increase in income by Rs. 3,500/- to marginal farmers and Rs. 12,000/- to small farmers.  There is no formal agreement for purchase of raw material but farmers have revealed that very good backward linkages have been established by the promoter.  Department of Horticulture and Agriculture University (SKUAST) located near the unit are creating awareness among farmers and bankers about benefits of agribusiness development.  Promoter and the bank were of the view of increasing the limit of VCA upto 50% which will reduce the loan burden of promoter.

73   

Amount Rs. Lakh (figures in parentheses indicate the revised amount) 122.51

Kashur Doon Enterprises

Location:

Block: I.G.C. Lassipora, District: Pulwama, State: Kashmir

Plant Capacity

Walnuts, Kernels, Almonds, Kernels - 456000 Kgs

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

September, 2009

Financing Bank :

Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd. Particulars Cost of the Project TFO

Sector / Activity / Major products: Brief description of Project performance:

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Major observations:

206.78

Bank Loan

45.00

SFAC - VCA

41.00

Margin Money

50.00

Subsidy from MOFPI as a grand and aid

69.75

Horticulture Walnut kernnel and Almond.  The unit is established in partnership in the year 2010. The unit is operational and making profits. It has been procuring raw materials of nearly 40 farmers directly from 4 villages procuring 75-80% of their produce.  Because of the units established there has been increased in acreage under hybrid varieties of walnut and almond.  The unit has also provided training and credit services to the farmers.  The unit is providing employment to 30 people.  On an average there is increase in income of farmers by Rs. 10,500/-.  The units profit has also increased by Rs. 20,000 per annum.  Introduction of hybrid varieties of walnut and almond in the area.  95% of employees in the unit are women.  There is no formal agreement for purchase of raw material but farmers have revealed that very good backward linkages have been established by the promoter.  Department of Horticulture and Agriculture University (SKUAST) is located near the unit are creating awareness among farmers and bankers about benefits of agri-business development.  The promoters have shown interest in benefitting women employees through formation of their self-help groups.

74   

Amount Rs. Lakh

Sultan Agro Tech Pvt. Ltd  

Location: Plant Capacity

Block: Food Park SIDCO Industrial Complex Khonmoh, District: Srinagar, State: Kashmir 80 tons / day

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

11 September, 2009

Financing Bank :

Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd. Particulars

Amount Rs. Lakh

Cost of the Project TFO

755.66

Bank Loan

265.76

SFAC - VCA

88.90

Margin Money

91.00

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Subsidy from MOFPI as a grand 139.34 and aid Horticulture Concentrates of Apple Apricot, Plum, Carrot, Peach and Pear

Brief description of Project performance:

The project has not been able to start as a result the impact of the implementation of the scheme could not be visualized.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

-NA-

Major observations:

 The reason being the unit could not receive the full financial assistance seeked from different institution. Also, the bankers revealed that the promoter wanted the change in proposal for upgradation of unit by installation of latest machinery and technology after the project was already sanctioned. The permission to change the plan for other agencies like SFAC and MOFPI was made available. This led to a kind of deception in the mind of the banker on the intention of the promoter that delayed the grounding of project. Still no decision has been taken, venture as per project report submitted to bank or a revised project needs to be submitted.

75   

Vibrant Dehydro Foods Pvt Ltd

Location:

Block: Mahuva, District: Bhavnagar, State: Gujarat

Plant Capacity

1600 MT per annum

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

21 July 2008

Financing Bank :

Bank of Baroda Particulars Cost of the Project TFO

325.69

Bank Loan

140.40

SFAC - VCA

27.79

Margin Money

35.29

Subsidy from MoFPI

50.00

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Horticulture Dehydrated Onion and Dehydrated Garlic

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit is performing well enough to yield annual income worth Rs. 40Rs. 50 lakh. As per the owner after the project the income has increased by Rs.10 lakh p.a. The unit is processing around 1600 MT of onions.  The unit has provided employment to 150 persons in which 30 are permanent while 120 are seasonal.  On average the income of farmers selling their produce to the unit has increased by Rs. 10,000/- to Rs. 30,000/- p.a.  The unit has created assured market for nearly 15000 MT of onions.  The wage rate also increased to Rs. 150 person days.  The unit also provides seed to farmers under the agreement of selling their produce to the unit.  The promoters are keen to see policy changes with respect to export of dehydrated onions and reducing import duty from western country.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Major observations:

  76   

Amount Rs. Lakh

Amul Dehydration Pvt Ltd  

  Location:

Block: Mahuva, District: Bhavnagar, State: Gujarat

Plant Capacity Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC: Financing Bank :

1200 MT per annum 07 April 2009 Bank of India Particulars Cost of the Project TFO Bank Loan SFAC - VCA Margin Money Subsidy

Sector / Activity / Major products: Brief description of Project performance: Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Major observations:

229.60 100.80 22.96 56.65 5% Interest subsidy from DIC

Horticulture Onion  Prevailing terms and condition of VCA and its procedural aspects are helpful for smooth implementation of scheme.  There is no delay in commencement of commercial production by unit.  The unit has generated additional employment for 25 persons.  Wage rate increase by 25%.  Increase in net profit of Amul Dehydration Unit by 17% (Rs. 4.31 lakh per annum).  There is approximately 20% incremental income to farmers due to net saving in transportation.  VCA received to an extent of 25% proved helpful and adequate. The procedural aspects of VCA proved helpful in smooth implementation of project.  The unit started in time and there was no delay in commencement of commercial production.  Transportation cost is borne by the unit and therefore farmers have net savings on cost of transportation.

77   

Amount Rs. Lakh

R K Frozen Food

Location:

Block: Kashipur, District: Kashipur, State: Uttarakhand

Plant Capacity

3000 MT/annum ,300 MT/annum

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC: Financing Bank :

-NAPunjab National Bank Particulars Cost of the Project TFO

900.00

Bank Loan

490.00

SFAC - VCA

48.28

Margin Money

225.00

Subsidy

292.00

Sector / Activity / Major products:

IQF processing unit Frozen Peas

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit is in partnership started in the year 2009. However, the unit is not found to be working. The unit is located in Agi Economic Zone. -NA-

Nature of benefits/ Impact: Major observations:

-NA-

 

78   

Amount Rs. Lakh

Samridhi Bio Energy Pvt Ltd

 

 

Location:

Block: Udham Singh Nagar, District: Udham Singh Nagar, State: Uttarakhand

Plant Capacity

2.5 MT/hr.

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

01 February, 2010

Financing Bank :

SIDBI Particulars Cost of the Project TFO

Amount Rs. Lakh 1350.00

Bank Loan

800.00

SFAC - VCA

73.06

Margin Money

454.00

Subsidy

400.00

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Fruit processing Frozen fruit, vegetable, Canned fruit and vegetable

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit is a private limited company started in the year 2010 financed by SIDBI. The unit is running in profit. The post project agripreneur’s income has also increased by Rs. 5 lakh. Income of farmers has increased by 25-30%. There is increased in acreage of vegetables like Peas, tomato, mustered leaf ranging between 10 to 100%. Provide assured market and better price. Almost 150 farmers started cultivating Peas in the area. The company has also provided seeds to the farmers. The VCA has helped bridging the resource gap, encourage setting up of project and facilitated higher production and better technology. The farmers who provided raw material in bulk are also reimbursed transportation cost.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Major observations:

79   

Gopal Foods  

Location:

Village: Beriya Road,Block: Udham Singh Nagar, District: Udham Singh Nagar,State: Uttarakhand

Plant Capacity

2000 kg/hour of peas pods

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

28 January, 2010

Financing Bank :

Oriental Bank of Commerce Particulars Cost of the Project TFO

919.25

Bank Loan

300.00

SFAC - VCA

58.65

Margin Money

229.81

Subsidy from MoFPI

399.50

Sector / Activity / Major products:

IQF Processing (Frozen Peas, Frozen Cauliflower and Frozen Carrot)

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit is partnership established in the 2010. The unit is located in Agri-Export Zone. The unit is running under profit with expected income of around Rs. 20 lakh in the year 2011-12 There is expected increase in income of farmers by 25%.The unit has been able to provide employment to around 41 people in the unit. The wage rate has increased marginally by 10%. There is increase in the acreage under peas by around 2000 acres. -NA-

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Major observations:

80   

Amount Rs. Lakh

Brahmaputra Forest products  

Location:

Block: Lakhimpur, District: Lakhimpur, State: Assam

Plant Capacity

1417500 sq. ft. per annum

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC: Financing Bank :

-NAUnion Bank of India Particulars Cost of the Project TFO

Sector / Activity / Major products: Brief description of Project performance Nature of benefits/ Impact: Major observations:

232.00

Bank Loan

64.50

SFAC - VCA

30.00

Margin Money

50.00

Subsidy

52.00

Forest Products Bamboo Mates and Bamboo Corrugated sheet  The project has not been operationalized yet. Therefore, the performance of unit could not be discernible at this stage.  The project is yet to be operationalized after that it will be able to provide employment and enhance substantially rural income in the area through marketing of the new product.  The credit flow from banks to agriculture sector was not so encouraging.  As per the survey two factors are responsible for the delay in commencement of commercial production.  Non-receipt of entire committed amount of Rs. 87.5 lakh subsidy in time. Only Rs. 52 lakh has been released by DIC.  Inability of B. S. Engineering Co, Kolkata, to supply the Pressure Machine in time. 81 

 

Amount Rs. Lakh

Madhu Food Product  

Location:

Block: Lokra Chariali, District: Guwahati, State: Assam

Plant Capacity

310 MT

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

05 January, 2010

Financing Bank :

United Commercial Bank Particulars Cost of the Project TFO

Amount Rs. Lakh 200.00

Bank Loan

95.25

SFAC - VCA

29.75

Margin Money

75.05

Subsidy Sector / Activity / Major products:

Food Processing Jam, Jelly, Pickle, Squash, Fruit Juice and Sauce

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit is proprietorship and started commercial production, however the unit is not performing well enough as there is a problem of marketing of product.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Employment to approximately 15 persons as per the owner of unit.

Major observations:

Funds received for the project appears not to be utilized exclusively for the project rather diverted a portion of it for construction of first floor for other purpose. The project appears to be sick one. Although, the entrepreneur claim increase in income of unit by 100% but infact this information seems not to be true. Even it become obvious from the observation that even rural income may not have increased.

82   

Sakshi Agro Beverages

  Location: Plant Capacity Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

Block: Amingoan, District: Guwahati, State: Assam 2000 liter per hour 03 February, 2010

Financing Bank :

Union Bank of India Particulars

Amount Rs. Lakh

Cost of the Project TFO

874.78

Bank Loan

583.00

SFAC - VCA

75.00

Margin Money

216.78

Subsidy Sector / Activity / Major products: Brief description of Project performance:

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Major observations:

Information not available.

Horticulture Carbonated Fruit beverage prepared from fruits like mango, litchi, pineapple and orange. The unit has started commercial production and VCA has a positive impact as it helped in bridging resource gap, encouraged setting up project, facilitated higher investment for production and promoted overall development of agribusiness unit. Credit flow from banks has remained smooth.  There is slight increase in rural employment which has helped in enhancement of rural income.  There is also increase in wage rates and marginal increase in crop acreage is also observed.  General awareness among the farmers are created through State Agriculture and Block level officials about the benefits of agri-business development.  The objectives of the scheme could be strengthened through extension by KVKs and local agriculture department which can encourage taking up crops such as pine apple and other horticulture crops.

83   

Megha Cashew Pvt Ltd  

 

Location:

Village: EPIP,Block: Byrnihat, District: Byrnihat, State: Meghalaya

Plant Capacity Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

40 QT./ Day Not available.

Financing Bank :

IDBI & EXIM Bank Particulars Cost of the Project TFO

484.00

Bank Loan

189.00

SFAC - VCA

50.00

Margin Money

78.00

Subsidy from MoFPI

100.00

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Cashew Processing Processed Cashew, CSNL Liquid and Husk and Cake

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit is a Private Limited Company involved in cashew processing. This is the first industry of its kind.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

The unit is ploughing back profits. The VCA has led to some positive impact in terms of helping entrepreneur for higher investment towards better production and better technology.  There is some difficulty faced by the unit in procurement of raw material as it is mainly procured during rainy season which makes it difficult to sun dry leading to spoilage. The production is also observed to be falling down as farmers are switching to rubber due to incentive.  The receipt of VCA has taken more than 7 month from the date of application.

Major observations:

  84   

Amount Rs. lakh

K D Agro Industries  

Location:

West Garo Hills, State: Meghalaya-794001

Plant Capacity

2120 MT/annum

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

2008

Financing Bank :

State Bank of India Particulars Cost of the Project TFO

179.28

Bank Loan

40.79

SFAC - VCA

35.00

Margin Money

46.08

Subsidy from MoFPI

56.91

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Horticulture (Fruit Processing) Canned Pineapple slice, Pine apple pulp, green chilly and Pickle

Brief description of Project performance:

The company is of proprietorship type started in 2008. The project is prepared by SFAC notified consultant under PDF and Rs. 0.5 lakh was paid. The unit is setup because of the availability of raw material which provides scope to make profits. The project has also provided extension services in form of training and credit to more than 40 farmers.  Though, there is no information available on exact area however, there has been expansion in area of cultivation under Pineapple.  There has been twice the increase in rates received by the farmers who are selling their produce to unit (from Rs. 200/tonn to Rs. 600/tonn.  The wage rate has also doubled from Rs. 60/day to Rs. 120/day. -NA-

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Major observations:

 

85   

Amount Rs. lakh

Vittal AGRO Industries  

Location:

District: Kasargod, State: Kerala

Plant Capacity

20 tons of coconuts/day (50000 nuts)

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

03 April, 2009

Financial details:

Cost of the Project TFO : Rs. 339.25 lakh Bank Loan: Rs. 180 lakh Financing Bank : Syndicate Bank SFAC Assistance : Rs. 12.28 lakh Margin Money : Rs. 84.50 lakh (25% of total cost) Subsidy from Coconut Board : Rs. 50 lakh

Sector / Activity / Major products: Brief description of Project performance: Nature of benefits/ Impact: Major observations:

Coconut processing Desiccated Coconut Powder, by products Charcoal and Testa (Paring) There was no delay in commencement of commercial production. Though the project reported marginal loss during the first year now it is running in profits. In the absence of purchase tie-up no direct benefit accrued to SF/MF. However, the project has created employment for 120 workers majority are unskilled migrant labours. Though the project envisaged purchase of Coconut from identified marginal and small farmers in the locality in actual practice the purchases are made either from market are procured from traders.

86   

Kulanada Agricultural Marketing & Processing Co-operative Society Ltd

Location:

District: Pathanamthitta - 689503, State: Kerala

Plant Capacity

5000 coconuts a day

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

13 July, 2010

Financial details:

Cost of the Project TFO : Rs. 54.6 lakh Bank Loan: Rs. 21.84 lakh Financing Bank : SBI Pandalam SFAC Assistance : Rs. 4.35 lakh Margin Money : Rs. 32.76 lakh Subsidy from

:

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Virgin Coconut Oil, Coconut Pariugs and Coconut Viuelar

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit has not started commercial production though trial run was reported to have been conducted in June, 2011 by the society. All the equipments have been installed, power supply obtained and sale arrangements have also been made. However, production has not started due to want of working capital for which the society has applied to SBI. -NA-

Nature of benefits/ Impact: Major observations:

The amount of VCA was utilized for purchase of machinery. As the working capital requirement was not included in the proposal the unit faced the problem of fund constraint and commercial production not started.

    87   

Kerala Aqua Ventures International Ltd

Location: Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC: Financing Bank :

District: Eranakulam - 683102, State: Kerala 31 November, 2010 Canara Bank Particulars

Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO

1027.95

Bank Loan

155.45

SFAC - VCA

75.00

Promoters Equity / Share of Private Entrepreneurs

442.50

Government Share of Equity Government Grant Sector / Activity / Major Fisheries products: Ornamental fishes

240.00  115.00 

Brief description of Project performance:

Import of breeder stock of ornamental fish varieties with high market value multiply them locally through satellite units run by private entrepreneurs.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

The employment pattern has been of the nature of direct and indirect employment. About 600 persons are reportedly engaged in the activity. It has also helped employment generation in the ancillary activities, such as production of fish feed, packaging and transportation.  The homestead units visited have not reported having availed institutional credit though 150 units have been identified. 124 such units have received subsidy of Rs. 50,000/- each from NFDB.  The supply of seed materials is reported to be highly inadequate for the current and emerging requirements.

Major observations:

   

 

88   

ANNEXURE‐II List of Sampled Projects Studied Sno. 

NAME OF  PROMOTER 

ACTIVITY 

CAPACITY 

1 

Sh. N.P.Madan  Mohan Reddy,  Mrs. N. Sridevi,  Sh. N.P.  Chandralekha and  Sh. K. Prasad  Reddy 

Manufacturing of  herbal extracts  and aromatic oils  

15000  kg/annum. 

2 

Smt. K.Rekha  Reddy and Sh. K.  Satynanarayana  Reddy 

Processing sweet  corn and baby  corn and other  English producing  vegetables viz.  Broccoli, Lettuce,  Cauliflower, Peas  etc. 

3 

Sh. T.V. Srinivasa  Rao and Sh. D.  Ramakrishna  Reddy 

Shri K. Viswanada  Naidu, Shri r.  Sivaji Rao and Shri  V. Umapathy 

NAME OF PROJECT &  ADDRESS 

CONTACT TEL  NO 

DETAILS OF BANK                                         

Factory: Ground Floor,  75‐7‐26, Sri Amrutha  Heights,Near Prakash  Nagar Round Park,  Rajahmundry ‐ 533103, Office: Excel  Technologies (ET),  Plot no. 148,. Sector‐8,  MVP Colony,  Visakhapatnam ‐  530017.(A.P) 

0883‐ 2466660,  2466664,  2466665,  2466668,  09849338899,  9849130009 

SIDBI, 47‐15‐5, Gupta Building, II Floor,  Dwarakanagar, Visakhapatnam ‐ 530 016 ‐ Term Loan   Ph. 0891‐2540303, 6630313  Syndicate Bank, Rajahmundry Branch ‐  Working capital 

600 MTs 

Office:  8‐4‐343/B/5,  Vishwakarma  Nagar,  Erragadda,  Hyderabad,  Andhra  Pradesh.   Factory:  3‐4‐343/B75,  Vishwakarma  Industrial  Estate,  Erragadda,  Andhra Pradesh. 

040‐27761358   09394305006 

State Bank of Hyderabad, Commercial Branch,  Surya  Towers,  Secunderbad‐03, Ph.  27841161  /  27846654, 277020813 

Integrated  Coconut  Processing Unit 

20000  coconut  water  per  day,  500  ltr  of  coconut  water  per  day, 2 tons of  coconut  shell  per day 

Office:  G1,  Tip  Top  Towers,  Opp.  Power  Office  Road,  NGO  Colony,  Ongole  ‐  523002    Factory:  Plot  No.  244,  245  APIIC,  Growth  Center,  Gundlapalli  ‐  523211  Maddipadu  Mandal,  Parkasam  Dist., Andhra Pradesh 

08592‐ 282366,  9246463118,  9246461666,  9246191999 

Punjab National Bank, Ongole Branch, Andhra   Pradesh  

Fruit  Pulp  Manufacturing  unit  of  especially  mango pulp 

19800  MT/P.A. 

Office: 19‐3‐13/9, 4th  Floor, Ramanuja Circle,  Tiruchanoor Road,  Chittoor Dist., Tirupati,  Andhra Pradesh‐ 517501Factory: S.N.  Puram, Puttur Road,  Renigunta Chittor  DistrictAndhra Pradesh  ‐ 517 520 

0877‐ 2227304,  2221298,  09490777935 

Indian  Overseas  Bank,  Tirupathi  Branch,  630,  V.V.  Mahal  road,  Tirupathi  ‐  512501,  Andhra  Pradesh0866‐ 2220445                             

Andhra Pradesh

4 

89   

Tamil Nadu  5 

Sh.  S.  Mohan,  Sh.  S.  Kavita,  Smt.  S.  Gangadhevi  and  Smt. S. Kala 

Mango and other  fruits  pulp/juice  processing unit 

1600 MT 

M/s.  Amman  Food  9843287191 Products                               Factory:  Thellana  Halli  (Vill),  Dindal  (PO),  Palacode  (TK),  Dharmapuri  (Dist)  ‐  635111, Tamil Nadu 

Bank  of  India,  Dharmapuri  Branch(8172),  72,  Nethaji  Bye‐Pass  Road,  Dharmapuri  ‐  636701  Tamil Nadu, Tel No. 04342‐262880, 262870 

6 

Sh. M. Perumal,  Sh. M.  Swetaranyam, Sh.   V. Haridoss, Sh.  M. Palani and  Mrs. P. Mallika 

Processing and  exports of life  saving anticancer  drug  

Vinroelbine  tartrate ‐  14000 gm,  Vinblastine  sulfate ‐  7000 gm  Vincristine  sulfate ‐  5000 gm  

044‐ M/s. Vinkem Lab Pvt.  Ltd                                          26201796,  AH‐29, Shanthi Colony,  26201781  4th Avenue, Anna  Nagar, Chennai ‐  600040  Factory: Plot G‐58,  SIDCO Industrial Estate  Kakkalur‐ 602 003,  Thuruvallur Dist. 

NABARD and   Bank of India, Chennai Corporate Banking  Branch, IV Floor, Tarapore Towers, 826, Anna  Salai, Chenai‐ 600 002 

7 

Shri  K.Remesh  Kumar,  Shri  V.  Sharav,  Shri  K.Sreedharan  and  Smt.  Rina  Venugopal 

Mango  pulp  processing  

10800  MT  /  P.A. 

 M/s.  Newgen  Agro  044‐ Processors  Pvt.  Ltd.   42627778,  “Leelavathi”,  69/5,  09841024277  Level  5,  Armenian  Street,  Chennai  –  600001,  Tamil  Nadu   Factory:  Karuthamarampatty  Chaparthi  Post  Sokkadi  Village Krishnagiri Taluk  635106 Tamil Nadu 

Corporation Bank,. Krishnagiri Branch, No. 65,  Second  Cross,  Co‐operative  Colony,  Krishnagiri  –  635001,  Dist.  Krishnagiri,  Tamil  Nadu Tel No. 04343‐235994, 235995 

8 

M. Thangamani,V.  Jaya, S. Kamalraj,  K. Muniraj, P.  Kalalvani, T.C.  Chinnarasu and  K.M. Muniyappan.  

Production of  fruit pulp from  Mango & Other  fruit   

5200 tons /  year 

M/s. Sri  04179‐ Samundeeswari Food  294500,  Products Pvt. Ltd                9842317630  Factory: Narinyanri (Vill  & PO), Tirupattur Taluk,  Vellore District. ‐  635901Office:  Muthagoundanoor  Puthagaram Post  Pudupettai Via  Thirupatthur Taluk  Vellore Dist. 

The Lakshmi Vilas Bank Ltd., Kandili Branch  18/1, Chavadi Street, Kandili ‐ 635 901, dist:  Velllore Ph. 04179 ‐ 48205 

9 

Sh. A. Vittalaraya  Hegde and Smt.  Geetha G. Hegde 

Cashew  processing  

Karnataka  1125 tons/  annum  

 M/s. Sri Laxmi Devi  9880726395 Cashews                               S. No. 158‐2‐A, Nellikar  Village, Mangalore  Taluk, Karnataka  

90   

Corporation Bank, Salmar, Karkala Branch,  Main Road near, S V temple Dist. Udupi,  Karnataka 574104,  ph. 08258‐730225 

10 

Smt.  Kini 

B.Sharada 

Processing of raw  cashew nuts 

45  Qtls  (60  Bags) 

  M/s.  Sri  Ganesh  08259‐ Cashew  Industries    283217,  Tarikatte  Cross  Road,  9740730317  Belve  ‐  576212,  Kundapura,  Udupi  Dist.  Karnataka 

Canara  Bank,  UDUPI‐  576  Tel Phone : 08259 283222 

Belve 212

11 

Sh.  Baburao  Wadikar  &  Mrs.  Shalini Wadikar 

Production  /  Sale  of grape wine 

200000  liters  per batch 

M/s.  Indian  Ambience  Vineyards  P.  Ltd    69/B,  N.H.  9,  Tadola‐ Taluka  Basavakalyan‐ 585327,  Dist.  Bidar,  Karnataka  

08481‐ 258666,  09902846659,  09423975430 

State Bank of Hyderabad, Basvakalyan Branch  (20238),  Dist. Bidar, Karnataka Tel No. 08481  250358, 251343 

12 

Sh. Gurunath Rao,  Sh.  Mallesh,  Sh.  K.V.  Jadar,  Sh.  T.  Shantappa and Sh.  R. Raju 

Cultivation,  Processing  and  Export  of  Gherkins 

2500  MT  per  annum 

 M/s.  Venkateshwara  Agro  Exports    Sy. No. 374 B, Holalu to  Hadagali  Road,  Hire  Hadagali  Hobli,  Knatebennur,  Havinahadagali  Tq.  Bellari  Dist.  Karnataka Office: No. 40/3/16, 1st  Main,  2nd  Floor,  Maruthi  Extn,  Devaiah  Park,  Bangalore  ‐  560021 

080‐ 23328028,  09008189396,  09900900168 

State  Bank  of  India,  Kumara  Park  Branch(1626),  Badaganadu  Sangha  Bldg.,  Seshadripuram, Kumara Park West, Bangalore  ‐  560020  Tel  No.  (080)  23444280,  23444370,  080‐23564370 

13 

Dr.  Basavaraj  Girennavar  and  Shri  Shashikanth  Math 

establishment  of  grape juice based  wine  production  unit. 

1.5 lakh liters  / annum 

M/s.  Rico  Winery  Pvt.  Ltd                                          th Km,  NH‐13  14   (Bijapur‐Solapur  Highway)  Kannal  Post,  Tq  &  Dist.  Bijapur  –  586119 

09741414048,  08352‐ 208079,  080‐ 41140532 

Syndicate  Bank,  Bijapur  Branch,  Gulab  Plaza,  Siddeswara  Road,  Bijapur  –  586101,  Karnataka. Tel No. 08352‐250120, 251251 

14 

Sh. Sanjay  Aggarwal and  Smt. Sunita  Aggarwal 

Processing and  preservation of  fruits and  vegetables with  state of art  technology 

Deep Freeze  Storage ‐  1000 MT,  Controlled  Atmoshpher  ‐ 100 MT 

 M/s. Dev Bhumi Cold  Chain Pvt. Ltd                      Inraprastha Bhawan, 17  & 18, New Subzi  Mandi, Azadpur, Delhi ‐  110033 

27122277,  27242994,  27112592,  27441616,  9810243326,  27465517 / 16 

Bank of Baroda, 17/18, New Sabzi Mandi,  Indraprastha Bhawan Azadpur, Delhi ‐ 110033 

15 

Shri Sobha Ram 

Trout  Fish  Canning  and  Preservation 

094180‐ 62237,  098160‐83688 

Canara  Bank,  Akhara  Bazar,  Kullu  ‐ 175101,  Tel No. 01902‐222134 

16 

Shri  Rishi  Arora  and  Shri  Bhanu  Mahajan 

Preservation  of  fruits  and  vegetables  (like  peas,  cucumber,  capsicum,  tomatoes  etc.)  after dehydration  and packing  

1  Ton/day,     M/s. Trout Fish  300  Canning &  ton/annum  Preservation                        Office & Unit location:  Village Shanag, P.O.  Bahang, Teh. Manali,  Dist.Kullu ‐ 175 103,  Himanchel Pradesh  3732 MT   M/s. Banarsi Agro  Fresh                                     Office: Main Bazar,  Near Post Office,  Pathankot, Punjab  Site: Village Bhogrwan,  Tehsil Indora, Distt.  Kangra, Himanchel  Pradesh. 

9815314141   092164‐59301 

State  Bank  of  India,  Main  Branch,    Dhangu  Road,  Pathankot‐  145001  Punjab,  Tel  No.  0186‐2226751                   

Himachal Pradesh 

91   

Haryana  17 

Dr.  Shann‐E‐Meet  Singh Insan 

Processing  and  manufacturing  of  aloe  vera  and  allied proudcts 

2000  kg  of  aloe vera 

M/s.  Sach  Herbotech  09254000175,  Products                               09996133333   Village‐Nejia  Khera,  Bajekhan‐Nejia  Khera  Road,  Sirsa  Taluk  Sirsa,  Dist. Haryana ‐ 125055 

Oriental Bank of Commerce, City Thana Road,  Sirsa  ‐  125055,  Tel.  No  01666‐228744,  220611, 220031 

18 

Sh. Dev Vrat  Sharma, Sh. Sudha  Ram Sharma, Sh.  Priyavrat Sharma,  Smt. Swati  Sharma and Sh.  J.P. Sharma 

Processing of  honey 

5400 MT /  Year  

M/s. Hi‐Tech Natural  Products (India) Ltd.          Regd. Office: 205,  Jawahar Gali, Farsh  Bazar, Shahdara Delhi ‐  110032, Factory: Vill &  P.O. Beerakheri  (Saharanpur) U.P‐ 247  340 

22304407,  22135556,  9811794789,  9868119855 

Oriental Bank of Commerce, Gangoh Branch  Saharanpur0132‐ 232144,236075 

19 

Sh.  Ravi  Agarwal,  Sh.  Satish  Kumar  Agarwal,  Sh.  Dinesh  Kumar  Agarwal  and  Sh.  Nitin Agarwal 

Frozen  fruits  &  vegetables  processing  with  IQF Technology 

1  MT  per  hour 

 M/s.  Natura  Green  Food  Products  Pvt.  Ltd    Bisauli  Gate,  Chandausi  ‐ 202412 Uttar Pradesh   Works  and  Office:  4.  KM,  Chandausi  Badaun  Road,  Village  Pasmanandpur,  Dist:  Badaun U.P 

05921‐ 250133,  266133,  09897536822,  09897641106,  09927016233 

Canara  Bank,  Chandausi  Branch,  Hussaini  Bazar,  Chandausi    Uttar  Pradesh‐  202412.   05921‐250099 

20 

Shri  Rajesh  Lalxminarayan  Mundada 

Pre‐cooling,  pack  house  &  cold  storage  unit  and  processing  of  raisin (bedana) 

1000 MT 

M/s.  Rohini  Agrotech    9923254540 19/A,  Opp.  Shah‐Lulla  Mahanagar,  Kupwad‐ Miraj,  M.I.D.C.  Road,  Kupwad  Distrct  Sangli,  Maharashtra 

21 

Mrs.  Vibhavari  N.  Ingale,  Mrs.  Sandhya  Mahadik,  Mrs.  Lata  Deshmukh  &  Mr.  Saurabha  N.  Ingale 

Processing  of  fruits  &  manufacturing  of  juices, jams etc 

1 MT per day 

M/s.  VLSS  Foods  Pvt.  Ltd                                          Office:  C/2,  Ashoka  Tripex,  S.  No.  209/4,  Kalyani  Nagar,  Pune  ‐  411006  Site:  Plot  no  88,  B.U  Bhandari  Industrial  Estate  Sanswadi,  Tal.  Shirur,  dist.  Pune  ‐  412  208 

Uttar Pradesh 

Maharashtra 

92   

IDBI  Bank,  Sangli  Branch,  Vyankatesh  Embassy,  Opp.  Sangli  Zilla  Parishad,  Sangli‐ 416416                                    Tel No.0233‐ 2326861 

020‐ Indian  Bank,  Kalyaninagar  Branch,  Pune    64016406,            Tel  No.  020‐26650105  40045801,            020‐26650106  952137‐ 646815 

22 

Smt.  Manju  Choudhary 

Processing  of  fruits  and  manufacturing  of  pulps, jams etc. 

2200 MT 

 M/s.  Parshva  Food  917122778824 International                       Office:  Plot  No.  239,  Old  Bagadgani,  Small  Factory  Area,  Dist.  Nagpur  ‐  440008Site:  Gat No. 119, PH No. 33,  Mouza  Bidgaon,  Tal  Kamptee,  Dist.  Nagpur,  Maharashtra 

Bank  of  India,  Nagpur  Corporate  Banking  Branch,  Bank  of  India  Bldg,  Mezzanie  Floor,  S.V.  Patel  Marg,  Nagpur  ‐  440001  Tel  No.  0712‐2527191, 2542899 

23 

Shri  Atul  D.  Banginwar and Sh.  Vikas  D.  Banginwar 

Frozen  fruits  &  vegetables  processing  with  IQF Technology 

1200 MT 

M/s. Trimurti Foodtech  0240‐ Pvt.  Ltd    2349819,  Office: A‐5, MIDC, Near  2242130/31  Railway  Station,  Aurangabad  ‐  431005 Site:  Wadgaon  Amli,  Post‐Jamgaon,  Tal.  Parner,  Dist.  Ahmednagar  ‐  414103  (MS) 

State Bank of India, Industrial Finance Branch,  Aurangabad 

24 

Sh. Praful Prakash  Bafna 

Infrastructure  facility for pre‐ cooling, grading,  pack house and  cold stroage for  grapes  

Cold storage  ‐ 60 MT and  pre‐cooling ‐  8 MT 

M/s. Bafna Exports            Head Office: 32,  Market Yard, Gultekdi,  Pune ‐ 411037.  Site: G. No. 468/3, A/p,  Dewkarwadi, Tal.  Daund, Dist. Pune ‐ 412  207. 

25 

Shri Bashir Ahmad  Rather 

Setting up  processing /  grading and  packing walnut/  walnut kernels  nut 

1600 tonnes  of walnuts /  annum  

     M/s. Dara  0194‐246338,  Enterprises                           2462348,  Site: Village Dara,  9858483196  Harwan, Srinagar,  Kashmir (J&K) 

The Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd, SKUAST  Branch, Shalimar Srinagar,  0242‐2464366 

26 

Miss.  Reshma  Fayaz  and  Miss  Vasifya Fayaz 

Processing  of  fruit  and  vegetable  unit  like  apple  culls,  cheery,  pears,  plums  apricots  etc. 

80 tons / day 

 M/s. Sultan Agro Tech  Pvt.  Ltd    Office:  Opp.  SKAUST,  Mirakabad  Shalimar,  Srinagar,  Kashmir‐ 191121Factory:  Food  park  SIDCO  Industrial  Complex,  Khonmoh,  Sriagar, Kashmir. 

The  Jammu  &  Kashmir  Bank  Ltd.,  Maulana  Azad Road, SrinagarPh. 2474043, 2452716 

27 

Ms.  Syed  Masarat  Bashir 

Cut  flower  production  (under controlled  conditions), value  addition  &  marketing 

60000  Lillium  Flowers  per  year,  120000  Bulblets,  70000  Carnations  per year 

M/s. Eternity                       9419018980,  Office: M/s Eternity,  9906601849  198, Jawahar Nagar,  Srinagar, Kashmir ‐  190008, J & K  Site: Lal Nagar,  Channapora, Srinagar,  Kashmir 

020‐ 24261393,  24261394,  24272809 

AXIS Bank, Bund Garden Branch, Ashoka  Galaxy, Plot No. 1, Galaxy Society, Dhole Patil  Road Pune‐ (020) 66016270 / 71 / 72 

Jammu &    Kahsmir 

93   

0194‐ 2461528,  9858060052,  9906965997,  9858082525  

The Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd., Business  Development Promoterion Centre, Maulana  Azad Road, Srinagar  Ph. 2480692, 2452658, 2471723 

28 

Sh.  Shah  Mohd  Iqbal,  Sh  Mahmood  Riyaz,  Sh Ali Mohd. Shah  and  Sh.  Javid  Ahmad Shah. 

Grading  and  packing  of  walnuts  and  almonds  and  their kernels  

Walnuts,  Kernels,  Almonds,  Kernels  ‐  456000 Kgs. 

M/s.  Kashur  Doon  09469215789,  Enterprises                           09419536721,  I.G.C.  Lassipora,  Dist.  0194‐2436063  Pulwama  Kashmir  ‐  192301 

The  Jammu  &  Kashmir  Bank  Ltd.,  Shopian  Main  Branch,  Dist.  Pulwama,  Kashmir Ph. 01933‐260229 

Gujarat  29 

Sh. Hamid  Abdulbhai  Kalaniya and Sh.  Imran  Sulemanbhai  Kalaniya 

Dehydration of  onions, garlic and  other vegetables 

1600 MT per  annum 

M/s. Vibrant Dehydro  2844‐222884,  Foods Pvt. Ltd                     Site: Survey No. 154,  Paikee, Mahuva  Bhadrod Road, O  pp. Reliance Petrol  Pump, Mahuva ‐  364290 Dist. Bhavnagar 

Bank of Baroda, Mahuva Branch ‐ Kumar  Complex, Nr Old Bus Stand, Mahuva‐ 364 290, Dist. Bhavnagar, Gujarat, India   Ph: 91 02844_223504. 

30 

Sh.  Kapadiya  Ranchhodhbhai  Haribhai,  Sh.  Vliya  Bhupatbhai  Raghabhai,  Sh.  Vliya  Manjibhai  Bhuthabhai  and  Sh.  Khodifad  Babubhai  Madhabhai 

Dehydration  of  onions, garlic and  other vegetables 

1200  MT  per  annum 

 M/s. Amul  9825918606  Dehydration                        Registered Office and  Factory: Survey No. 49,  Paikee 2, Village : Siloj,  Ta Una, Dist. Junagadh,  Gujarat, 

Bank of India, Una Branch, Veraval Road, Una,   Dist. Junagadh Junagadh ‐ 362560, Gujarat Tel  No. 02875‐222529 

31 

Shri    Ajay  Kumar  Agarwal  and  Smt.  Priti Agarwal 

Frozen  peas  and  vegetables  processing  with  IQF Technolgoy 

3000  MT/annum  300  MT/annum 

M/s. R.K. Frozen                 Office and Site: R.K.  Puram, Manpur Road,  Kashipur, Dist. Udham  Singh Nagar,  Uttarakhand 

32 

Shri  Shiv  Kumar  Sawalka,  Shri  Kailash  Kumar  Sawalka,  Smt.  Asha  Sawalka  and  Smt.Uma Sawalka 

Fruits  and  vegetables  processing  with  IQF 

2.5 MT/hr. 

M/s. Samridhi Bio‐ 0124‐ Energy Pvt. Ltd.                   2346368,  Office: 624, Udyog  2348739  Vihar, Phase‐V,  Gurgaon ‐ 122016  Site: Village Garhinegi,  Tehsil Jaspur, Dist.  Udham Singh Nagar,  Uttarakhand. 

SIDBI, D‐1 & D‐2/8, Civil Line, Near Janta Inter  College,  Rudrapur,  Dist.  U.S.  Nagar‐263153,  Uttarakhand, Tel No. / Punjab National Bank,  (0262)  Kashipur  Branch,  Kashipur,  Dist.  U.S.  Nagar‐244713,  Uttarakhand,  Tel  No.  05947‐ 274033 

33 

Shri Keshav Singla,  Shri  Amit  Singla,  Smt  Veena  Singla,  Smt. Shefali Singla  and  Smt/  Chanchal  Chaudhry 

Processing  and  preserving  of  peas,  fruits  and  vegetables  with  IQF Technology. 

2000 kg/hour  of peas pods 

 M/s. Gopal Foods              Registered Office: 4  Model Colony, Kasipur  Road, Rudrapur, Dist.  U.S. Nagar,  Uttarakhand  Site: Beria Road,  Bazpur ‐ 262 401, Dist.  Udham Siingh Nagar,  Uttarakhand. 

Oriental Bank of Commerce, Bajpur Branch,  Dist. Udham Singh Nagar, Uttarakhand and  Regional off. C‐18/B, Deen Dayal Puram,  Bareilly ‐ 243122, Tel No. 2302473, 2302474,  2302475                           

Uttrakhand 

94   

05947‐ 275300,  276300,  9837046878,  9837309878 

05949‐ 281245,  281859,  282759 

Punjab  National  Bank,  (0262)  Kashipur  Branch,  Kashipur,  Dist.  U.S.  Nagar‐244713,  Uttarakhand,  Tel  No.  05947‐274033,05942‐ 260792 

Assam  34 

Shri  Basanta  Kumar  Gogoi,  Shri  Dipek  Kr.  Gogoi,  Shri  Dipen  Saikia,  Shri  Sekhar  Jyoti  Gogoi  and  Shri  Madhuya Gogoi 

Manufacturing  of  bamboo  mat  corrugated  sheets 

1417500  sq.  ft.  per  annum 

   M/s. Brahmaputra  Forest Products Pvt.  Ltd.                                        Madhabpur ‐ 784164,  Narayanpur, P.O.  Dikrong, Dist.  Lakhimpur, Assam    Factory: C/O Basanta  Gogoi, P.O. Dhalpur  Dist. Lakhimpur  Pichalaguri, Assam  India ‐ 784165 

03752‐ 262145,  242882,  244007,  09435085638,  09435084684 

United  Bank  of  India,  Narayanpur  Branch,  Dikrong,  Lakhimpur,  Dist‐Lakhimpur,  Assam,  Pin  ‐  784164,                    Ph.  No.  (03752)  262240   

35 

Ms.  Pathak 

Kshirada 

Food  processing  unit  of  fruits  and  vegetables  to  produce  jam,  jelly,  sauces,  pickles,  ketchup,  squash 

310 MT 

  M/s.  Madhus  Food  097062‐ Products                               36378,  0361‐ Betkuchi,  Lokhra  2133411  Chariali, P.O. Sawkuchi,  Guwahati‐ 781 034 

UCO  Bank,  Rajgarh  Road    Branch  (1669),  Bhangagarh,  Guwahati‐781005,  Assam    Tel  No. 0361‐2460144, 2529444  

36 

Shri  Amitesh  Kumar  Bajaj,  Shri  Ashok  Kumar  Bajaj,  Shri  Krishan  Kumar  Bajaj,  Smt.  Sujata  Bajaj  and  Shri Shorav Bajaj 

Processing  of  carbonated  natural fruit juice  viz.  oranges,  pineapples,  litchis,  mangoes  etc. 

2000 liter per  hour 

M/s.  Sakshi  Agro  Beverage                              SITE:  Plot  No.  D,  Silver  Drop  Industrial  Complex,  Village‐Sila  Mohekhati,  Mouza‐‐ Sila  Sinduri  Ghopa,  N.H.#  31,  Amingaon,  Guwahati  ‐  781031,  Dist.  Kamrup,  Assam Office:  Station  Road,  PO & Dist. Nalbari ‐ 781  335 

0361‐ 2680093,  2680822,  09435042214,  09435184079 

United  Bank  of  India,  Guwahati  Branch(Opp.  Sheikh  Brothers)  Hem  Baruach  Road,  Panbazar, Guwahati ‐ 781001 (0361‐2540281,  2540043, 2540041, 2540042) 

37 

Mr. Ali Asgar, Mr.  Sunil Kumar and  Mr. Kejendro D.  Sangma 

Cashew nut  processing unit  

40 QT./ Day 

M/s. Megha Cashew  03638263176      EXIM & IDBI Bank  Private Limited,                  09436103077  Industrial Development Bank of India Limited,  Rajabagan EPIP,  Northern‐Eastern Zonal Office : G.S. Road,  Byrnihat, RI‐Bhoi Dist. –  Guwahati ‐ 781 005  793101, Meghalaya      Ph. 0361‐2529520 / 21 / 22 

38 

Sh. Kailash  Agarwal 

Processing of  Pineapple,  Passion Fruit 

2120  MT/annum  

 M/s. K.D. Agro  9436112092  Industries                             C/o, Maruti Centre,  T.D. Road, Tura, West  Garo Hills, Meghalaya‐ 794001    Prop. Sri Kailash  Agarwal, Village  Bangalkatta, P.O.  Chibinang West Garo  Hills,  Meghalaya ‐ 794001. 

Meghalaya 

95   

State Bank of India, Tura Bazar (E) Branch, T.D  Road, P.O ,Tura, Dist: West Garo Hills,  Meghalaya ‐ 794001.    Ph. 03651‐222288, 221554                       

 Kerala  39 

Sh.  H.  Satish  Kamath,  Sh.  H.  Gokuldas  Kamath,  Sh.  H.  Santhosh  Kamath,  Sh.  H.  Ganesh  Kamath  and  Sh.  H.  Guruprasad  Kamath.  

Manufacturing  of  desiccated  coconut powders 

20  tons  of  coconuts/day  (50000 nuts) 

 M/s.  Vittal  Agro  09447773548,  Industries                             09447100548  Office:  KM‐VIII‐577,  Govt.  Hospital  Circle,  Hosdurg,  Kanhangad,  Kerala  Factory:  S.No.  175  /  1A1  &  1A2,  99  Belur  Village,  Hosdurg,  Taluk,  Kasargod  Dist,  Kerala. 

Syndicate  Bank,  Kanhangad,  Kerala  KMC  II/1204,  Main  Road  Near  Bus  Stand,  Kottachery, Kerala ‐ 670315Ph. 0467‐2204123 

40 

Sh. S. Venugopal 

Processing  of  coconut  for  production  of  virgin  coconut  oil  and  coconut  vinegar 

5000  coconuts  day 

      M/s.  Kulanada  9447399927,  Agricultural  Marketing  04734262350  &  Processing  Co‐ operative  Society  Ltd.    Co‐Operative  Society  Ltd.  Madhushudhalayam  Buildings,  Panangadu  P.O.,  Kulanada,  Pathanamthitta  Dist.  ‐  689503, Kerala 

State  Bank  of  India,  Pandalam  Branch  (10703),  Koloothara  Building,  MG  Road,  Pandalam, Dist Kerala Tel No. 04734‐254755 /  207400 

Aqua  Technolgy  Park 

  

M/s.  Kerala  Aqua     Ventures  International  Ltd.                                        Office:  O/o  Firma,  Fisheries  Complex,  Building No. XL. II, Door  No.  1,  Dr.  Salim  Ali  Road,  Behind  High  Court,  Kochi,  Kerala  ‐  682018  Site: Kadungalloor, U.C.  College,  P.O.  Aluva,  ErnaKulam, Kerala 

Canara  Bank,  M.G.  Road  Branch,  Ernakulam,  ‐  682  035 Kochi    Ph. 2371921, 2354374, 2371921 

41 

Sh. Kapila Tissera 

 

a 

 

96   

ANNEXURE‐III Questionnaire “A, B & C” “QUESTIONNAIRE‐A”  (FOR THE PROMOTER/S)  Date of Visit:  Sr No  A  i  ii 

iii 

iv 

v 

vi  vii  viii  ix 

B  (i) 

Queries  Details / Response  GENERAL >  Name of the Unit    Location (Full Address)      Nature/Type  of  the  Unit  (Proprietary  /Partnership  /  Tick as applicable Pvt. / Public Limited Company  i. Proprietorship   ii. Partnership  iii. Pvt. Limited Company  iv. Public Limited Company  v. Cooperative Society  vi. Federation of Farmer Groups  vii. Any Other (specify)  Name of the Owner / Key Persons & their designations a. Owner/Partner (s)  (i)  (ii)  (iii)  b.  Key Person/Official(s), if any  (i)  (ii)  (iii)    Agripreneurs (promoter/s) are (Please tick the correct  i) Experienced  in  the  line,  though  no  formal  explanation) ‐    degree  ii) Formally  trained  (  having  technical  degree  in  the activity)  iii) Neither  formally  trained  nor  experienced  when the unit was set up  iv) Other  businesses  undertaken  prior  to  taking  up VCA assisted agribusiness  Contact  Numbers  of  the  owners  (Mobile  /  Landline  /  Fax/ email)    Year of Establishment of the Unit Name of the Financing Bank  Address of the Financing Bank      FINANCIAL >  Total Cost of the Project   (i) As per DPR: Rs.  

97   

Sr No  (ii) 

(iii)    (iv) 

(v)  (vi)  (vii)  (viii)  (ix)  (x) 

(xi)  (xii)  (xiii)  (xiv)  (xv) 

C  (i) 

Queries 

Details / Response  (ii) As accepted by the Bank: Rs. 

SFAC  notified  Consultant  /  Agency  that  prepared  the  DPR  (Name  &  Address,  including  phone  numbers  of  the contact person)      Amount of assistance under PDF paid, if any Rs.   OR  If the DPR was prepared by the promoters themselves. Yes / No         Whether it was appraised by any other agency before  Yes/ No  being submitted to the Bank?          If  yes,  the  name  and  contact  numbers  of  the  said  agency    Borrower’s Margin @     %  Rs. Total Amount of Loan availed of  Rs.   Rate of Interest charged by the Bank   % Repayment Period (in years)               Years Moratorium, if any (in months/years) ________Months / Years  Repayment Installments (Pl tick) Quarterly / Half‐yearly / Annual    Amount of each installment: Rs.  Date of Application to SFCA for VCA Date of Receipt of Sanction of VCA from SFCA  Amount  of  Venture  Capital  Assistance  (VCA)  Rs. committed by SFAC  Amount of VCA received by 30 November 2011 Rs. Details  about  assistance  /  subsidies  received  from  other sources    PROJECT‐SPECIFIC >  Broad  Nature  of  business  of  the  unit  (Please  tick  the  (a) Horticulture correct explanation) ‐    (b) Floriculture  (c) Medicinal & Aromatic Plants  (d) Minor Forest Produce  (e) Sericulture  (f) Organic Farming  (g) Vermicompost  (h) Apiculture  (i) Plantation Crops  (j) Fishery  (k) Polyhouses  (l) Greenhouse  (m) Cold chain  (n) IQF processing unit 

98   

Sr No 

(ii) 

(iii) 

(iv) 

(v)  (vi)  (vii)  (viii)  (ix) 

(x)  (xi) 

(xii) 

(xiii) 

(xiv) 

Queries 

Details / Response  (o) Other (Pl specify)    Specific  activities  undertaken  by  the  unit  (Please  tick  (i)  Food  processing  (incl.  vegetable  processing)  the correct explanation) ‐    (ii) Fruit processing (iii) Processing of Medicinal &    Aromatic crops  (iv) Agro‐processing  (not coming    under (i), (ii) and (iii) above) (v) Cold Storage (vi)  Pack House (viii) General PHM Facility (ix)  Other  (Pl specify)      Main saleable product(s) of the project (i) (ii)  (iii)      Project  location  area  (Please  tick  the  correct  Urban (Population above 1 lakh)  explanation) ‐    Semi‐urban: More than 5000 but less than 1 lakh    Rural: Population less than 5000  Is  the  project  location  coming  under  any  AEZ?  If  yes,  for what products?  Is  the  project  related  to  the  products  notified  under  AEZ?  Was  it  the  first  agribusiness  project  of  its  kind  in  the  Yes / No area/District?  If  no,  how  many  projects  were  already  there  before  this unit came up?  If yes, what from the following would best explain the  (Please tick the right choice/choices  reason for setting up the project?  (a) Availability of subsidies.  (b) Availability of VCA?  (c) A new product having potential market?  (d) An old product with unsatisfied market?  (e) Old  product  but  better  technology  /  more  environment‐friendly?  (f) Other (Pl specify)    Average total number of people employed in the unit  (considering both slack and peak levels)  Of the above, the number in ‐  (i) Managerial/Supervisory category ‐ (i) Skilled Category (Technician) –  (iii) Unskilled category (Labourers) –  (iv) Others (Specify) –    Of  the  total  employees,  how  many  are  permanent  &  Permanent: Skilled:          /Unskilled:  how many temporary (seasonal employment)    Seasonal: Skilled:          /Unskilled:  Are  the  employees  in  skilled  and  “others”  category  Yes / No commute from nearby “rural” areas?    If yes, the number that does it:      Main raw materials used by the unit 1.

99   

Sr No 

Queries 

(xv) 

How  is  the  raw  material  procured?  Please  tick  the  most appropriate explanation 

(xvi) 

If raw materials are procured directly from the farmers  under  an  informal  arrangement,  the  number  of  such  farmers covered & the villages   If raw materials are procured directly from the farmers  under a  formal contract, the number of such farmers  covered & the villages  If raw materials are procured directly from the farmers  under  a  formal  contract,  has  a  copy  of  the  same   collected by the interviewer?     Whether the farmers organised into Farmer Groups Yes/ No If answer to above is yes, then  (a) Whether  such  groups  existed  before  the  project  OR  came  into  existence  after  the  project  as  an  impact  thereof?  (tick  as  applicable)  (b) Role of the Farmer goups ( tick as applicable)  i) Negotiating prices  ii) Collecting produce from members  iii) Intermediate processing, if any ( specify)  iv) Transport  v) Any other ( specify)    How are the raw materials procured from the sources?  (a) Raw  form  without  any  primary  processing by  Please tick the correct choice.   the farmers at the village level   (b) After some primary processing by the farmers  themselves at the villages  (c) After  some  primary  processing  at  the  village  levels by some third party  (d) After  some  primary  processing  by  the  Company at the villages    If primary processing done at the village level itself by  > the farmers/Company, briefly indicate its nature    Approximate  Radius  (Kms)  of  the  area  from  within          Kms which, the raw materials are procured  If raw materials are procured directly from the farmers  1. under a formal contract, what are the key features of  2.  the backward linkages?  3. 

(xvii) 

(xviii) 

(xix)  (xx) 

(xxi) 

(xxii) 

   

100   

Details / Response  2. 3.        a) From open market  b) Directly  from  farmers  under  informal  arrangement  c) Directly  from  farmers  under  formal  contract  farming  d) Other method (Please explain)    Farmers:   Villages:  Farmers:   Villages:  Yes    / No

Sr No 

Queries 

 

Did  the  setting  up  of  the  unit  directly  resulted  in  the  introduction  of  some  new  crop  (crop  diversification)  in the covered villages? 

 

If  yes,  indicate  the  type  of  extention  services,  if  any,  privided by the promoters. 

 

If  the  unit  did  not  result  in  crop  diversification,  how  were the concerned farmers marketing their products  before the unit came up? 

 

Has  the  setting  up  of  the  unit  provided  an  assured  market to the concerned farmers for their produce? 

 

What  approximate  %  of  the  total  marketable  surplus  of the farmers is procured by the unit?  If it is less than 75%, where are the farmers selling the  balance produce? 

 

   

D  (i) 

(ii) 

Has  the  setting  up  of  the  unit  resulted  in  higher  incomes to the farmers for their produce?  If yes, the details please  Narration:       Financing Bank‐specific (From agripreneurs’ point of view) Were the promoters themselves aware of the Venture  Yes/ No  Capital  Scheme  when  they  approached  the  bank?  (Please rick the correct choice)  If yes, what was the source of their knowledge? (i) Newspapers (ii) Bank/s  (iii) Friends  (iv) NABARD’s DDM  (iv) Some other Govt. Dept. (Pl specify) 

101   

Details / Response  4. 5.  6.  7.    Yes / No If yes, please indicate the new crop/s & area      Crop                         New Area (Acres)        Please tick as applicable;  a) Information/ awareness  b) Training/ technical know how.  c) Credit  d) Seeds  e) Fertilizers  f) Insecticides/pesticides  g) Any other ( specify)  Narration:           Yes / No If no, please indicate the reasons:         %   (i) Local APMC/Society:  (ii) Directly to Other Processors  (iii) Directly to traders/agents  (iv) Other (pl specify)    Yes / No

Sr No 

(iii) 

(iv)  (v)  (vi)  (vii) 

(viii) 

(ix)  (x)  (xi) 

E  (i) 

(ii)   

Queries 

Details / Response 

(v) Website  Were the Bank’s branch officials aware of the Venture  (i) Yes, awareness was at the Branch level itself. Capital Scheme when the promoters approached them  (ii)  Yes,  but  the  awareness  was  only  at  the  RO  for the loan? (Please tick the correct choice)  level, not branch level  (iii) No, there  was  no  awareness at both  the RO  and branch levels  If  yes,  did  the  Bank  provide  the  full  details  of  the  (i) No Scheme to the agripreneurs?  (ii) Yes, with written guidelines & literature  Month/year of submission of DPR to the Bank Month/Year of sanction of Bank Loan Was  VCA  projected  in  the  DPR  itself  when  submitted  (i) Yes to the Bank? (Please tick)  (ii) No, it was subsequently included      Are the financial terms of the VCA clearly understood  Yes / No by the agripreneur/s?      [Note:  If  the  answer  is  yes,  the  interviewer  may  ascertain  the  exact  basis  on  which  the  VCA  was  worked  out.  Please  also  indicate  whether  VCA  terms  were fully or partly understood/not understood.]   Are  the  agripreneurs  aware  of  the  objectives of  the  Yes / No VCA?  (Objectives could be asked tactfully)  If  yes,  to  what  extent,  according  to  them,  have  the  said objectives been achieved?  What,  according  to  the  agripreneurs,  are  the  positive  (a) It helped in bridging the resource gap impacts of VCA on the project?  (b) It encouraged setting up of the project  (c) It  facilitated  higher  investment  for  higher  production/better production technology  (d) It  promoted  overall  development  of  agribusiness in the project area  (e) All of the above  (f) None of the above (Pl specify)  Impact of the Project – Hard & Soft Parameters Sr  Parameter Before the  After the Project  Difference No  Project  (+ / ‐)  1  Level of Employment (Number) 2  Level of Wage Rate (Rs./per day) 3  Acreage  under  the  concerned  crop/s  1. 1. 1.  (Acres)  2.  2.  2.  3.  3.  3.    Reasons for increase in the area under different crops:          Increase in the annual income of farmers (Rs.) > Marginal Farmers ( 2.5 acres &  5 acres)    Skill Upgradation > 

Details / Response  Before:             After:              Change:    Before:             After:              Change:   

  In  case  of  farmers,  how  many  imparted  direct  skill  Number:  upgradation inputs by the Company?     How many more farmers were trained by the farmers  Number:  trained directly by the Company?      In  case  of  agripreneurs,  how  many  received  skill  Number:  upgradation inputs through running of the Company?       How  many  more  agripreneurs  were  trained  by  the  Number:  core agripreneurs of the Company?          Increase in the income of Agripreneurs (Rs.) >     Income before the establishment of the project >  Rs.      Income after the establishment of the project >  Rs.      Incremental Income   Rs.              Supplementary Benefits of the Project >

103   

Sr No   

Queries 

Details / Response 

  Sr  Parameter Improvement  No  (Please narrate briefly)  1  Road  connectivity  (laying  of  new  roads, widening of old roads, etc.)  2  Electricity  (new  electrification,  improvement in supply, etc.)  3  Communication  (availability  of  phone  facility,  network  towers  for  mobile  communication)  4  Emergence  of  some  new  NFS  activities  (ancillary  units,  processing  of bye‐products, etc.)  5  Credit Flow (increase in GLC flow after  the setting up of the unit, financing of  new units, etc.)  6  Banking  branch  network  (opening  of  new bank branches in unbanked area  due to increased economic activity)  7  Any  other  change  brought  about  by  the project (pl specify)        State Nodal Agency‐specific (From agripreneurs’ point of view) Are the agripreneurs aware  of the name and location  of  the  State  SFAC  /  State’s  Nodal  Agency  for  the  VCA  Scheme?  If yes, its name and location    Had  an  official  from  the  State  SFAC  /  State’s  Nodal  (i) Yes, he had visited on his own  Agency  visited  the  project  before  the  VCA  was  (ii) Yes, he had visited for pre‐sanction survey on  sanctioned? (Please tick)  SFCA’s advice    (iii) No, he did not visit  Has  the  Nodal  Agency  revisited  the  project  after  Yes / No sanction/release of the VCA?    Any other assistance like training or guidance received  from the State Nodal Agency? If yes, please specify       

F  (i) 

(ii)  (iii) 

(iv)  (v) 

  (Signature of the Promoter interviewed)                            Name & Designation of SFAC Coordinator / Interviewer  Name & Designation:                  Contact Phone Numbers:       Contact Phone Numbers:  ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 

        104   

Observations of the Interviewer   (Please attach a separate sheet)    Impact of implementation of Scheme in terms of intended benefits ‐  (i)

Backward Linkages 

(ii) Credit Flow from banks in Agri‐business sector  (iii) Creation of Awareness among farmers and bankers about benefits of agri‐business development  (iv) Generation of rural employment  (v) Enhancement in rural incomes  (vi) Evaluation of adequacy and effectiveness of the existing operational guidelines of the SFAC Scheme  (vii) Extent to which VCA assistance was relevant, adequate and helpful  (viii) Suggestions, if any, on the terms and conditions of VCA and its procedural aspects  (ix) Suggested  modifications  in  existing  policy  guidelines  /  operational  support  and  other  initiatives  with adequate reasoning  (x)

Factors  responsible  for  the  delay  in  commencement  of  commercial  production  by  the  Units  (if  applicable) 

(xi) Any  other  aspect,  especially  those  concerning  objectives  of  the  Scheme  as  also  the  Terms  of  Reference.        (Signature of the Interviewer)  Name & Designation:  Contact Phone Numbers:                                                                             

105   

“QUESTIONNAIRE‐B”   (FOR THE FINANCING BANK)  Date of Visit:  Sl.No.  1  2 

4  5  6 

7  8  9  10  11 

12  13 

14 

15 

16 

Queries  Name of the Financing Bank / Branch

Details/Response 

  Name & Designation of the Official interviewed Name: Designation:  Location: Branch / RO  If RO, address:        The financing branch is headed by  AGM  /  Chief  Manager  /  Senior  Manager  /  Manager / Branch Manager  Is the Bank Lead Bank in the concerned District? Yes / No From  where  did  the  financing  branch  hear  about  the  (i) Directed by the Controlling Office  SFAC and the VCA Scheme?  (ii) Entrepreneur himself informed  (iii) LDM intervened and guided  (iv) NABARD’s DDM guided  (v) Some State Govt. Department   (vi) Website  (vii) Other (Pl specify)    Month  & Year of the  first  Application  to  SFAC  for  the  VCA by the Bank  Month  &  Year  of  receipt  of  sanction  letter  for  VCA  from SFAC  Month & Year of receipt of  VCA  amount from SFAC Amount of  VCA received by 30 November 2011 Amount of VCA sanctioned & received Sanctioned: Rs.   Received thus far: Rs.    Has  the  Bank  also  provided  assistance  to  the  unit  Yes / No under Project Development Assistance component?  If yes, the amount: Rs.  Has  the  financing  of  the  unit  by  the  Bank  resulted  in  Yes/ No more similar proposals coming forward?    If yes, what, in the opinion  of the Bank, is the reason  (i) Availability of VCA Assistance  therefor?  (ii) Unsaturated market for the product  (iii) Any other reason    What  are  the  steps  the  Bank  is  taking  for  the  (i) popularization of the Scheme?  (ii)  (ii)  (iv)    Has  the  RO/ZO  conducted  any  Awareness  /  Yes / No

106   

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22  23 

24  25 

Sensitization  Programme  on  the  VCA  Scheme  for  the  If yes, how many conducted and when? Branch Managers?      Are the details of the Scheme available at the Branch  (i) Only at the RO level  levels or only at the level of RO?  (ii) Also available at the Branch level  (iii) Available at both the places  (iii) Not available in either of the places  Has  the  Bank  signed  any  MOU  with  SFAC  for  (i) Yes, heard but no documents available. participating  in  the  implementation  of  the  VCA  (ii) Yes, Bank has issued a Circular and the same  Scheme? (Please tick the correct choice)  is available in Branch records.  (iii) Yes, Bank has issued a Circular and the same  is available in RO’s records.  (iv) No, no MOU has been signed.  (v) Do not know.  What,  in  the  opinion  of  the  Bank,  are  the  strong  (i) features of the Scheme?  (ii)  (iii)  (iv)  What,  in  the  opinion  of  the  Bank,  are  the  features  of  (i) the Scheme that require improvement?  (ii)  (iii)  (iv)  If  yes,  what  are  the  specific  improvements  that  are  (i) required?  (ii)  (iii)  (iv)  Is  the  VCA‐linked  Loan  Account  regular  as  at  the  end  Yes / No of November 2011?  If  no,  what  are  the  reasons  for  the  account  being  (i) irregular/NPA?  (ii)  (iii)  If the Account is irregular/NPA, has the Bank informed  Yes / No SFAC?  If yes, obtain a copy of the advice  Outstanding Position ( As on 30.11.11) Bank Loan VCF Rs. Rs.   

26  27 

28  29 

30 

Has  the  Bank  maintaining  separate  Account  for  SFAC  funds?  How  is  the  Bank  treating  the  VCA  received  thus  far?  (Please tick the correct choice) 

Yes / No   (i) Crediting it to the Loan Account  (ii)  Credited  to a  separate  Account and  released  to the unit as per the progress  Is  the  Bank  aware  of  the  PDF  component  of  the  Yes / No Scheme?  Has  the  Bank  appointed  a  Nodal  Officer  to  deal  with  Yes / No / Not aware  SFAC?  If yes, the name, designation and location of the  Nodal Officer:‐      Is the progress of the Scheme regularly discussed and  Yes / No monitored  in  various  periodical  Meetings  of  Banks?  (SLBC / DCC / BLBC) 

107   

31 

32 

33 

   

 

If yes, at what level? 

(i) State Level (SLBC)  (ii) District Level (DCC/DLRC)  (iii) Block level (BLBC)  Is  the  financing  Branch  submitting  the  required  half‐ Yes / No yearly  Report  to  SFAC  on  the  progress  in  If  yes,  obtain  a  copy  of  the  last  report  so  implementation?  submitted.        Is  the  unit,  in  the  opinion  of  the  Bank,  working  along  Yes / No the projected lines?  If  no,  what  are  the  specific  areas  of  underperformance, the reasons therefor and the  suggestions  A. Underperforming Areas   (i)   (ii)  (ii)  B. Reasons  (i)  (ii)  (iii)  C. Suggestions  (i)  (ii)  (iii)  Has  the  branch/bank  financed  any  Producer Group in  Yes/No the past?  If  yes,  the  details  such  as  financial  details,  terms  of  financing/securities,  performance  of  the  group,  etc.  may be obtained  If  no,  reasons  for  the  same  and  whether  the  bank  needs any assistance/risk guarantee from SFAC?   

      (Signature of the Promoter interviewed)  Name & Designation:      Contact Phone Numbers:      

 

   

 

   

Date:  Place:      Name & Designation of the SFAC Coordinator:   Contact Numbers: Mobile No.   

108   

 

 

   

(Signature of the Interviewer)  Name & Designation:  Contact Phone Numbers: 

“QUESTIONNAIRE‐C”   Annexure IV  (FOR THE FARMERS)  Date of Visit:  Sr  No  1  2  3  4  5  6  7 

Name of the Farmers  Interviewed  (S/Shri)                             

Name of the  Village 

Distance from  the Project Site  (Kms) 

Total Land Owned  (Acres) 

 

Crops grown for  supply to the  Project   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

Sr  No  1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

Queries 

Details 

How are the farmers actually linked to the unit? (Tick the  (i) Supply raw materials to the unit directly appropriate)  (ii)  Supply  raw  materials  to  the  unit  through  an agent or middlemen or Farmers Group  How did the farmers come to know of the requirement of  (i) Through Govt. Extension Agency  the unit and their ability to meet it?  (ii) The promoters approached them directly  (iii) Some middlemen arranged for all  (iv) Bank  (v) others (specify)    If the farmers supply the raw materials to the unit directly  Yes / No under a formal contract, do they also have a copy of the  associated agreement?  Have  they  read  and  understood  various  aspects  of  the  Yes / No agreement like period of validity, price guarantee, if any,  credit period, transportation, etc.?  Who pays for the transportation of the produce from the  Farmers / Unit farm to the unit – farmers themselves or the unit?      What is the provision in the written agreement, if any, for  (i) Cost borne by the unit  such transportation of the produce from the farms to the  (ii) Cost borne by the farmers  project site?  (iii) Sharing between the two    How  are  the  raw  materials  supplied  to  the  unit?  Please  (i)  Raw form without any primary processing 

109   

tick the correct choice.  

8 

If  raw  materials  are  procured  directly  from  the  farmers  under a formal contract, what are the key features of the  backward linkages? 

9 

Has the setting up of the unit provided an assured market  to the concerned farmers for their produce? 

10 

Did  the  setting  up  of  the  unit  directly  resulted  in  the  introduction  of  some  new  crop  (crop  diversification)  in  the covered villages? 

11 

Were  the  farmers  inducted  into  a  new  type  of  crop  for  supply to the unit  

12 

Does  the  crop  have  other  avenues  of  sale  besides  the  unit. 

13 

If  answer  to  item  12  above  is  No,  did  the  farmer  have  any  feeling  of  insecurity/ risk  in   taking  up new  type  of  crop?  If  answer  to  above  is  Yes  what  are  the  factors  that  helped him overcome the feeling of insecurity.  If the unit did not result in crop diversification, how were  Narration: the  concerned  farmers  marketing  their  products  before    the unit came up?          If there is a formal backward linkage with the farmers, is  Please specify: the Company providing any type of extension service like  credit, information, seeds, fertilizers, technical know‐how,  insecticides, etc.?     

14  12 

13 

110   

by the farmers at the village level   (ii)  After  some  primary  processing  by  the  farmers themselves at the villages  (iii)  After  some  primary  processing  at  the  village levels by some third party  (iv)  After  some  primary  processing  by  the  Company at the villages  1. 2.  3.  4.  5.  Yes / No   If  yes,  please  narrate.  If  no,  please  indicate  the reasons:          Yes / No If yes, please indicate the new crop/s & area      Crop                         New Area (Acres)          Yes/ No   If yes, what is the type of crop introduced?      Yes/ No     Yes/ No

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

What  approximate  %  of  the  total  marketable  surplus  of     %   the farmers is procured by the unit?      If  it  is  less  than  75%,  where  are  the  farmers  selling  the  (i) Local APMC/Society:  balance produce?  (ii) Directly to Other Processors  (iii) Directly to traders/agents  (iv) Other (pl specify)      Has the marketing tie‐up with the unit encouraged more  Yes / No farmers in the area to approach the same or other units in    the area for similar arrangement?  If yes, details.          Does  the  unit  provide  any  kind  of  training  or  skill  Yes / No upgradation inputs to the farmers?    If yes, specify.          If  yes,  has  such  a  training  /  skill  upgradation  helped  the  Yes / No farmers  in  increasing  productivity  /  producing  better    quality  /  adopt  better  and  more  environment‐friendly  If yes, please specify the benefits.  methods of production?              Has the setting up of the unit resulted in higher incomes  Yes / No to the farmers for their produce?    If yes, the details please  Narration:      

   (Signature of the Farmer interviewed)       Name & Village:           Contact Phone Numbers:    

     

                     (Signature of the Interviewer)              Name & Designation:              Contact Phone Numbers: 

Date: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Name & Designation of the SFAC Coordinator:   Contact Numbers: Mobile No. 

 

 

111   

Place: 

ANNEXURE‐IV Zone wise, State wise, year wise distribution of Sanctioned Projects under VCAS Zone West Zone

South Zone

North Zone

North East

Central Zone Eastern Zone

States Maharashtra Gujarat Goa Karnataka Tamil Nadu Kerela Andhra Pradesh Himachal Pradesh Rajasthan Uttar Pradesh J&K Uttrakhand Haryana Punjab Assam Manipur Nagaland Arunachal Pradesh Meghalaya Mizoram Madhya Pradesh Chhattisgarh West Bengal Orissa Bihar Total

2007-08 20 7 0 11 9 0 3

2008-09 16 1 0 9 4 11 3

2009-10 18 8 0 17 8 5 1

2010-11 30 3 0 12 13 7 4

2011-12 29 2 1 7 9 1 4

1 0 2 3 0 1 1 0 3 2

6 0 1 4 0 1 1 0 0 0

4 1 0 3 6 1 0 4 0 0

6 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1

7 8 28 3 5 7 1 3 0 0

24 9 32 14 12 11 4 7 4 3

1 2 0

1 0 0

0 0 0

1 0 0

0 0 1

3 2 1

1 0 1 0 0 68

0 0 0 0 0 58

1 0 0 0 0 77

1 0 0 1 0 85

1 1 2 0 1 121

4 1 3 1 1 409

   

 

112   

Total 113 21 1 56 43 24 15

ANNEXURE‐V Sanctioned Unit under VCAS by Activity Activity

No. of Projects 67

Sweet/ Baby Corn

2

Cold Storage

66

Pepper (1) Tea (1)

2

Mango

35

Horticulture Crops

2

Cashew Nut

35

Lavender Oil

2

Grape Export/Cold Storage

21

Ginger

1

Coconut (20) Coconut shell charcoal (1)

21

Vermi Compost

1

Poly House (Floriculture)

20

1

Onion & Garlic Dhy.

14

Patchouli (Medicinal Plant) Vanilla curing

Mushroom

14

Lemon Grass

1

Raisin

10

1

Pickles/Sauces/Jam

9

Tissue Culture Laboratory Anti Cancer drug

Gherkin

9

Banana Ripening

1

Herbal Extracts

9

Cardamom

1

Winery

7

Chicory

1

Misc. Spices

7

Nutmeg/pepper oil

1

Fisheries

7

Tapioca Roots

7

Peas

6

Guar Gum

6

Potato Chips

4

Pineapple

3

Bamboo

3

Pomegranate

3

Honey

3

Aloe Vera

2

Walnut

2

Misc. Fruits & Veg.

Total Total No of units= 490

390

113   

Activity

No. of Projects

1

1

19

ANNEXURE‐VI Proceeding of State Level Consultation held at Bhopal and Bhubaneswar State Level Consultation on Venture Capital Assistance Scheme for Agri-Business Development, held at Hotel Jahanuma Palace, Bhopal, on 27 February, 2012 Brief Note on the Proceedings A State level workshop as above was organized by Nabcons on behalf of SFAC as a part of the ongoing evaluation of the VCA scheme being implemented by SFAC during the XI Plan. The primary objective of the meet was to obtain views and feedback on the scheme from various stakeholders like banks, govt. officials and promoter organizations. The actual programme schedule and list of the participants as well as the background note circulated to ht eparticipants are attached. Besides the list, representatives from the Nabcons, New Delhi, Nabcons HO and the NABARD RO were present to participants and facilitate the event. A report on the meet is as under. 1. The meet was started with the welcome remarks by Shri Munish, GM, Nabcons, HO who briefly described the programme objective after which each participants introduced him self. 2. Shri Mukesh Singhai, GM, NABARD, Bhopal addressed the participants on the importance of credit in investments and capital formation in agriculture in general and in promotion of agroprocessing in particular and touched upon low off take of credit in the State of Madhya Pradesh. 3. Shri D. Sharma, AGM, Central Bank of India (SLBC convenor Bank) dwelt on the lopsided and low growth of credit and lack of focus on agribusiness in the State. He cited the case of a farmer who took up aonla cultivation in a big way, but was in distress because there is no avenue to sell the produce. He emphasized that such pockets of cultivation / plantations may be identified by SFAC and given special attention to promote processing units in their vicinity. 4. Thereafter Shri T.K. Hazarika, DGM, Nabcons made a PowerPoint presentation on the VCA scheme and provided necessary clarification to the participants. This was followed by presentation on the terms and reference of the evaluation study being undertaken by Nabcons and the issues that required to be given special attention and recommendation / suggestions by the participants. 5. The above sessions generated tremendous response and spontaneously one after the other the participants stared toughing the issues at random. With a best utilize the time and give opportunity to all in a focused way, the participants were divided into three groups to specially focus on the allotted aspects. After one hour of discussions the groups came forward with their various suggestions which are summarized item-wise as under. a. VCA terms and conditions i. ii. iii.

SFAC should first appraise the proposal and issue sanction for VCA or LOI so that the entrepreneur can then approach the bank. 5% of the VCA amount be allowed to be retained by the entrepreneur at the repayment stage for prompt repayments of loan. Cost of DPR preparation by CAs may also be reimbursed to the entrepreneur.

b. Review of cap on TFO

114   

The cap on TFO may be suitably lowered from the present Rs. 50 lakh (Rs. 25 lakh for NER etc) depending upon the position in the state, region and the category of entrepreneurs etc. to between Rs. 10 and Rs. 25 lakhs. c. Guarantee cover SFAC may provide or link the units with some sort of credit guarantee on the lines of CGFTMSE to the extent of Rs. 100 lakh in respect of Commercial Banks and Rs. 50 lakhs for RRBs. d. Promotion of new units i. Most of the bankers expressed lack of any prior knowledge about the VCA scheme in the absence of any publicity / awareness for the scheme. Some were not even aware of that State SFAC was in existence. The scheme requires publicity through newspapers, radio and TV channels. ii. Sensitization meetings on the scheme may b organized for the banks and help of local NGOs / agencies may be taken to create necessary awareness / provide guidance about the scheme among / to the farmers. iii. Some sort of interest subsidy may be considered for new units. iv. The progress may be reviewed at the DLCC and the BLBC level meetings. v. Success stories be developed and the farmers be given exposure on the agro-processing activities. e. VCA vis a vis schemes of NHB etc There was no specific suggestion on this. f.

Extending the scheme to RRB etc. The VCA scheme may be extended to RRBs, Pvt. Commercial Banks and Cooperative Banks beginning with the RRBs. NBFCs were not favoured because their orientation being mostly urban. 6. After discussion on the suggestions made by the groups, the NABARD RO made a brief presentation on the credit scenario on in the State in the agriculture sector and horticulture in particular, underlining the low off take vis a vis the national level to draw attention to need for steps to improve the situation. Thereafter Shri T. K. Hazarika summed up the proceedings and thanked all those who had contributed to success of the meet.

*****

115   

List of Participants S.No.

Name

Designation

Department / Organization

1.

R. P. Singh,

Manager

Dena banks, R.O. Bhopal

2.

D. K. Taneja

Chairman

Madhya Bharat Gramin Bank, SAGAR

3.

K. Mohan Rao

Chairman

Vidisha Bhopal RRB

4.

Birendra Kumar

Chairman

Jhabua Dhar KGB

5.

R. R. Rahi

Program Officer

N.C.T. Chhidwara, MP

6.

Pramel Gupta

Resource Manager - North

VRUTTI

7.

Amuja Kumar

Agri Business Marketing Officer

Canara Bank

8.

Sanjay Kumar

Senior Manager

Canara Bank

9.

Shailendra Kumar Tiwari

Manager (Agri)

Corporation Bank

10.

Anand Kumar Bhaskar

Assistant Manager

Indian Overseas Bank

11.

Narendra Kumar Khare

Lead District Manager

Bank of India

12.

Lalit L Samtari

LDM, Indore

Bank of India

13.

Sushil Mishra

Manager (Agri)

IDBI Bank

14.

Mohammed Fareed Uddin

Manager *Agri)

IDBI Bank.

15.

J. P Gupta

Assistant Manager

Sharda Gramin Bank, SATNA

16.

Sourabh Vyas

Programme Officer

Gramin Vikas Trust, Jhabua

18.

V. S. Breli

Chief Manager

Syndicate Bank, RO Bhopal

19.

Subodh Kumar Beohar

Manager

Agri Dept. SBI, LHO Bhopal

20.

A. S. Khan

Chief Technical Officer

SBI, LHO

21.

Saurabh Jhavar

Head Finance

Jain Mittal & Associates

22.

C. M. Sharma

Coordinator

Manthan Gramin Evam Samaj Seva Samiti, Bhopal

23.

J. S. Singh

State Coordinator

Mahatma Gandhi Pratishthan

24.

Dr. Anand Singh

Executive Officer

MP State Livestock Corporation

25.

R. P. Singh Dhillan

Chief Manager

Punjab & Sind Bank Z.O.

26.

Ajeya Prasad

Manager

Punjab & Sind Bank Z.O.

17.

116   

27.

Rakesh Mehra

Manager

MP State Agro and Dev. Corp. Pvt. Ltd., SFAC – BPL

28.

Vajubhai G. Dodio

Director

Samarpan Rural Development Foundation

29.

S. P. Dixit

Director

SRDF

30.

Laxman Muketi

Proprietor

G.D. Spiece & Veg. Seeds.

31.

S. C. Acharya

Director

Varul Consultant Pvt. Ltd.

32.

C. A. Pawan Kumar Jain

Parnter

Pawan Kumar Jain & AHO.

33.

K. K. Tiwari

Advisor

L T Group

34.

Pramaya Bahl

Programme Manager

Gramin Vikas Trust

35.

Yogesh Dwivedi

Theme Manager

ASA Bhopal

36.

Rabindra Nath

Integrator

PRADAN

117   

Groups-wise Issues discussed and Recommendations A. Group-I Terms of Reference/Issues posed before the Group 1) Revising / Refining VCA terms and conditions 2) Review of CAP on TFO 3) Whether SFAC should guarantee for groups that cannot offer collateral. Recommendations: a. SFAC should first appraise the proposal and issue sanction for VCA or LOI so that the entrepreneur can then approach the bank. b. 5% of the VCA amount to be retained by agripreneurs as incentive for prompt repayment. c. Expenses incurred by the agripreneurs for preparation of DPR through CAs may be reimbursed. d. Cap on TFO may be reduced to Rs. 10 lakh for individuals and Rs. 25 lakh for others. e. SFAC may consider issue of guarantee for term loans on the lines of CGTMSE. f. Progress of SFAC Scheme may be reviewed at District level by DCC. g. Selection of entrepreneurs may be from production clusters. h. SFAC may consider setting up of a task force on the lines of KVIC and PMEGP for location, appraisal and forwarding of proposals. i. Marketing support from SFAC and related marketing agencies / departments will in still confidence in the agripreneurs. B. Group-II Terms of Reference/Issues posed before the Group 1) Promotion of farmers’ groups / enterprise. 2) SFAC presence. 3) VCA scheme vis-à-vis subsidy scheme of NHB / MoFPI, etc. Recommendations: a. SFAC to stand as guarantor for first generation agripreneurs / FPOs. b. More sensitization programmes required for banks and other stakeholders. c. SFAC may interact with NGOs involved in agriculture and other areas in respect of implementation of its scheme. d. VCA should be sanctioned prior to sanction of term loan. C. Group-III Terms of Reference/Issues posed before the Group 1) Steps to promote the scheme. 2) Explaining the scheme to RRBs / Coop. Banks / Pvt. Banks / NBFCs. Recommendations: a. The scheme requires publicity through newspapers, radio and TV channels. b. Involvement of NGOs for creating awareness about the scheme. c. Interest subsidy to a limited extends to be considered for select units. d. Success stories to be developed and farmers to be given exposure on agro-processing activities. *****

118   

State Level Consultation on Venture Capital Assistance Scheme for Agri-Business Development, held at Hotel Suryansh, Bhubaneswar on 14 March 2012 Brief Note on the Proceedings 1. The captioned State Level Consultation on Venture Capital Assistance Scheme for Agri-Business Development was organized by NABARD Consultancy Services (NABCONS) on behalf of the Small Farmers’ Agri-business Consortium (SFAC), New Delhi as apart of the ongoing Evaluation Study of the VCA Scheme. The participants included S/Shri R. L. Jamuda, Principal Secretary, Deptt. of Agriculture, Govt. of Odisha; G.R.Chintala, Chief General Manager & Principal Consultant NABARD/ NABCONS, New Delhi, B. M. Patnaik, GM NABARD, Odisha RO; T.K.Hazarika, DGM, NABCONS, Zonal Office, New Delhi; Shri D. Bhuyan, Program Coordinator, SFAC, New Delhi; Senior officials from Banks / major State Govt. Line Deptts., representatives from NGOs & Farmers’ Clubs and representatives from agripreneurs of the state. A list of participants is enclosed. 2. The programme was formally inaugurated by lighting the ceremonial lamp by Shri R.L.Jamuda, Principal Secretary, Deptt. of Agriculture, Govt. of Odisha. Earlier, presenting the welcome address, Shri B.M. Patnaik, GM NABARD/ NABCONS, Odisha RO briefly touched upon the program objective, which he said was primarily to provide a forum to the stake holders of the scheme to share their thoughts and experiences and to find out reasons for low off take of the VCAS in the state. He also explained how the consultation could provide useful inputs to the study and could thereby contribute significantly to the refinement of the scheme during 12th plan and enable to make the same more effective. Shri G.R.Chintala, CGM NABARD and Principal Consultant NABCONS, New Delhi while presenting his key note address dwelt on the role of agri-business in adding prosperity to the rural economy and importance of the VCAS in promoting agribusiness in the country. He expressed disappointment to the fact that the states in the eastern region like Odisha, in spite of having tremendous potential for agribusiness development, have failed to make best use of the schemes available for the purpose. 3. Delivering his inaugural address, Shri R. L. Jamuda outlined the priorities of the state govt. and said that a lot needed to be done to improve the condition of farmers. He expressed disappointment that while two-third of the population was dependent on agriculture, the contribution of agriculture to the state domestic product was hardly 18%. The enhancement of productivity of the sector was thus a major challenge. Commenting on the various measures initiated by the govt., he informed that the year 2012 was being declared as the year of horticulture and for the first time the allotted budget under National Horticultural Mission (NHM) was utilized fully during the current year. He further informed that the Agriculture Deptt. had been giving major thrust on farm mechanization and creation of post-harvest infrastructure including cold chain to reduce crop losses and with a view to ensuring better price to farmers. He further informed that the state had enormous potential for development of agri-business but blamed the gap in communication between farmers and entrepreneurs on the one side and the institutions supporting agri-business on the other, as the main factor responsible for the sector not getting the required push. He expected the hope that the deliberations of the consultation would be useful to identify reasons for slow progress of the Venture Capital Assistance Scheme and will be able to come out with suitable recommendations which, he said, would help the Govt. to refine the policies suitably. 4. After the inaugural address, Shri D. Bhuyan, Program Coordinator, SFAC, New Delhi spoke briefly on the background and the salient features of the VCA Scheme. Shri Bhuyan’s address was supplemented by a power point presentation on the VCA Scheme by Shri T. K. Hazarika, 119   

DGM, NABCONS, which covered the status of implementation of VCAS during XI plan, the scheme’s geographical coverage as also its activity-wise and agency-wise spread. He also elaborated briefly on the terms of reference of the Evaluation Study of the VCAS and invited the the participants to offer their view points and suggestions. 5. The interactions that followed immediately thereafter were moderated by Shri B.M. Patnaik, GM, NABARD. Those who spoke included S/Shri K.C.Goyal, DGM, SBI; Om Kar, Managing Director, APICOL (State Nodal Agency for VCAS), Aurobindo Bhowmik, Chairman, Boitamari Gramin Bank; Laxman Kr. Palatasingh, Faculty Member, IMAGE, Bhubaneswar, Dr. B.P. Mishra, I/C Agro Enterprise Cell, Directorate of Agriculture and Food Production, Govt. of Odisha; K. Behera, Former Director of Hort., Govt. of Odisha & Secy., LALL, Jagatsinghpur district and others. 6. Shri K.C. Goyal, DGM, SBI in his remarks indicated that SBI would be most willing to participate in the scheme. He however, suggested that for better results SFAC should have an office in Bhubaneswar, so that there was proper coordination and decision making was prompt. He further opined that whenever a case was rejected the Bank Branch as well as the entrepreneur should be informed by SFAC about the reasons for the same. His two other suggestions were regarding simplification of the procedure and possible loan tie-up. 7. Shri Om Kar, Managing Director, APICOL, Bhubaneswar, the State Nodal Agency for VCAS presented a brief account of the efforts made by the agency to popularize the VCA scheme in the state. He informed that lack of adequate awareness at bank as well as entrepreneur’s level was a major reason for low off take of the scheme in Odisha. He further observed that Bank branches also lack specific guidelines from their controlling offices, which at times come on the way of sanctioning of a scheme and results in delay. Shri Kar was further of the view that Central SFAC may tone up their communication channel with the state agency and the reasons for rejection of a proposal may be made known to the state agency. He further informed that 9 proposals since forwarded to SFAC, New Delhi were awaiting sanction. 8. Shri Aurobindo Bhowmik, Chairman, Boitamari Gramin Bank speaking on behalf of the RRBs said that the RRBs have since changed. The amalgamated RRBs are now equally strong as a commercial bank and in view of their grass root presence, are in a better position to cater to the new generation entrepreneurs. He strongly advocated inclusion of RRBs in the list of eligible institutions for channelizing VCA. He further suggested that SFAC may make some annual allocation of targets state wise and there may be a system of periodic review and follow-up. 9. After the general discussion and interactions, three separate panels were constituted from among the participants. Each panel or group was given a few specified issues covering the ToR of the VCA Study. Following deliberations among the members in the group, each group/panel came out with specific recommendations on the ToRs referred to them, which were then presented before the House for final acceptance. The panel/group wise details of issues given, composition of group/panel and their recommendations are given overleaf :

120   

Groups-wise Issues discussed and Recommendations D. Group-I Terms of Reference/Issues posed before the Group 1) Scope/usefulness of extending the VCA Scheme to FIs other that PSU Banks 2) Need for specific incentives to Banks for ensuring their better participation in implementation of the scheme 3) What should be the cap under the VCAS? Whether the present cap on investment for various categories of investors/regions is adequate? 4) What should be done for timely grounding of a project under VCAS and to cut down delays in implementation? 5) Any other suggestions for increasing the effectiveness of the VCAS? Recommendations: a. The assistance under the VCAS may be channelized through RRBs, Co-op Banks and other Pvt. Banks besides the PSU Banks. b. The Banks should have a say in identification of the beneficiary under the scheme. No other incentive is required. c. The cap on investment may be reduced to Rs. 25 lakhs. Odisha may be treated at per with the ER states in the matter of eligibility of units being assisted under the scheme d. A committee of select Bankers, LDM, DDM, NABARD, select Line Deptts. including Distt. Level Officer of Directorate of Horticulture, Distt. Administration and Representative of SFAC may be formed at district level for identification of agripreneur, scrutiny and selection of proposals. The DCC may regularly review the progress of the scheme at periodic intervals. E. Group-II Terms of Reference/Issues posed before the Group 1) Adequacy of incentives / interventions required for making the scheme more attractive. 2) Reasons for slow off take of VCAS in the State. 3) Role of State SFAC and other related institutions. Recommendations: a. Need to creating more awareness on information / incentives of the scheme among primary producers / agripreneurs. b. Online information must be made more simpler to enable the rural people to make more use of it. c. The quantum of VCA may be increased to 25% of the total project cost. d. Transportation subsidy / vehicle incentive need to be considered for long distance producers. e. Capital investment subsidy approach to be adopted by SFAC. f. Simplification of procedure of documents at Bank / SFAC level. g. Rate of interest for agri-business projects must be less than 10%. h. The eligible institutions under the scheme may include private sector commercial banks, cooperative banks and regional rural banks. i. Training and capacity building support to the officials of line departments, progressive farmers. j. Creating a cadre are group of master trainers at District / State level by SFAC / other institutions. k. Proper linkage of SFAC with Zonal Technology Management and Business Planning and Development Unit (BDP), ATMA at District level. F. Group-III Terms of Reference/Issues posed before the Group 121   

1) 2) 3) 4)

Adequacy of incentives / interventions required for making the scheme more attractive. Reasons leading to low off take of the scheme in Odisha and other Eastern States. Additional activities need to be covered. Role & Steps needed to be taken by State SFAC.

Recommendations: a. Focused attention to be given for Odisha as there as no improvement during the last 5 years by setting up of Regional office of SFAC in Odisha, include activities such as Sericulture, Dairy and Poultry. b. Inclusion of private sector banks, regional rural banks as eligible institutions. c. Adopt the format of project, appraisal and disbursement as in the case of NHP. d. NABCONS as coordinator for product development facility. e. Popularize the schemes of SFAC through NABARD DDM at District level. f. Placement of advertisements, banners etc. at banks branches. g. Review of SFAC schemes by the District Consultative Committee. h. Publication of Checklists for various schemes. i. Cluster approach to be followed for establishing agri-business units. j. Coordination with other agencies. The program ended with a vote of thanks offered by Shri S. K. Nanda, Associate Consultant and Nodal Officer, NABCONS, Bhubaneswar.

122   

State Level Consultation on Venture Capital Assistance Scheme for Agribusiness Development held at  Bhubaneswar ,Odisha on 14 March 2012  List of Participants   S.No.

Name

Designation

Department / Organization

1.

  M.P Mishra

Chief manager (Rural)

Zonal Office, State Bank of India

2.

  B.C Dash

Manager

SLBC

3.

  Rajbir Singh

Deputy General Manager

RO, Oriental Bank of Commerce

4.

  R.N Senapaty

Senior Manager

Zonal Office, Andhra Bank

5.

  J.B.Dey

Chief Manager

Regional Office, Union Bank

6.

  Kissrod Kumar

Officer

IDBI Bank

7.

  Amit Mohanty

Officer

IDBI Bank

8.

  Dr. B.P Mishra

9.

  Dr.B.Dash

Director

AH & VS

10.   Dr. S.C Pannas

Officer

NHB

11.   Laxman Kumar Patal Singh

Faculty Member

IMAGE, BBSR

12.   Dr. P K Banga

Director

BBSR

13.   C K Pal

Consultant

Shreyanmas Progressive Consultancy Pvt Ltd

14.   Subhnansa Udgata

CEO

Shreyanmas Progressive Consultancy Pvt Ltd

15.   Biswa Ranjan Nayaak

District Secretary

Odisha Krushak Mandal

DAFP

16.   Kalicharan Marondi

Dulal

17.   Sandeep Kumar 18.   Santhosh KU Barva

Utkal Krushak Club

19.   Kshetramohan Prehena

Secretary

LALL

20.   Santosh Kumar Dash

President

Jaganaath Framers Club

21.   Arun Kumar Khdanju

Facilitator

Suraksha

22.   Subhash Kumar Pradhan

Representative

Jaimatadi Farmers Producers Company

23.   Purna Ch Majni

Agri Fish Business

24.   D. P Povdhy

Senior Consultant

25.   S.N Biswal

Consultant

Agragamee

26.   Pridarshy Sadngi

Consultant

PSD Consultancy Pvt Ltd

123   

27.   Aswin KU Pati

Blarwone Janakalyan Krishak

28.   Dr. P C Mohanty

Manager

Bank of India

29.   D C Mihapatna

Manager

Bank of India

30.   Auribindo Bowmich

Chairman

Baitarani Gramya Bank

31.   S M Mishra

Assistant General Manager

RBI

32.   Sinalisa Sahoo

Manager

Punjab National Bank

33.   M P Pande

Senior Manager

Canara Bank

34.   U K Roy

Officer

Kalinga Gramya Bank

35.   A C Kunda

Manager

Allahabad Bank

36.   Om Kar

Managing Director

APICOR

37.   Mahesh Mahapati

Representativ e

NGO – Adhar Jagat Sikshan

38.   Maydesh Sidhi

Representative

NGO - Narasahi

39.   Dilip Kumar

Representative

NGO

40.   Biranchi Narayan

Representative

NGO

41.   Siri Arun Kushuahoo

Representative

NGO, Chakdolla

42.   Pramod das

OPDSC

43.   G K Sarvegar

Officer

UCO Bank

44.   Saurav

Representative

NGO

45.   Debnanada Bhauja

Dy. Director

Directorate of Fisheries

46.   Dr. G K Tripaty

Lecturer

Animal Husbandry & Vet. Sciences

124   

NABARD Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd. Corporate Office 3rd Floor, C C-Wing, Wing, NABARD HO Building Plot No. C-24, G-Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East) Mumbai – 400051 Website: www.nabcons.com Email: [email protected]

Zonal Office 1st Floor, NABARD Tower 24 Rajendra Place New Delhi – 110125 email: [email protected]