Impact of Rural Livelihoods Programs: Evidence from Projects

1. Impact of Rural Livelihoods Programs: Evidence from Projects PRADAN’s Initiatives

2. Coverage • About PRADAN • Results of the latest Impact evaluation • Learning from the evaluation

3. PRADAN • Founded in 1983 as a Charitable Society • Inspired by the belief that: • Individuals with knowledge resources and empathy must engage with the disadvantaged communities for poverty to decline faster

4. Beliefs & Strategies of PRADAN • Core Beliefs • Poor have capability to help themselves and others move out of deprivation • Collectives provide strength to deal with inequities caused structurally and incidentally • Removing poverty is a transformative process • Strategies • Induct Educated & Empathetic Youth • Organize women in Self-Help groups • Create/Enhance Livelihood Opportunities: • Build People’s Capabilities: • Mobilize Mainstream Resources

5. Changes envisioned • Women collectives have an articulated, collective vision • They work to ensure food security and adequate income • They participate in governance and community fora • They ensure access to basic services, rights and entitlements for all • They motivate other women to collectivise • Collectives and individuals speak up and take action against caste, class, gender based violations

6. Outreach - 2012-13 • Households : 271,921 • Revenue villages : 5,159 • Districts : 41 • States : 7 • 18,736 SHGs of 2.52 lakh women • Nearly one third participating in gramsabha • Water supply and sanitation and literacy covers around 15% • 1,50,000 Households participating in livelihoods interventions

7. Water Harvesting structures in Dhamtari Water Harvesting structures in Dumka

8. Mustard field, Dholpur Wheat field, Dholpur First weeding, Lohardaga Combined Nursery, Lohardaga

9. Small Holder Broiler Farming Model Cooperative (300-400 producers) Central accounts, input supply, marketing Family Level Income Rs.75-100/day for 200 days p.a. Rs.15,000-20,000 p.a. Wholesalers Supervisors (20-30 producers) Inputs distbn, production support Retail outlets Producer Collective Turnover : 4-5 crore Producer Margin : 45-50 Lakh Small Producers (400-700 birds)

10. Impact Assessment Study of PRADAN’s Interventions at the Grassroots Research team: Srijit Mishra, NirmalSengupta

11. Objectives of the study • To explore the impact of PRADAN’s activities on individuals and communities • To identify areas for further study • To create an in-house capability for future evaluation work.

12. SHGs and Other Organizations • 60% new livelihoods activities • Enhanced access to market, knowledge & skills • Better financial services • Position of women improved in society • Conflict resolution done in group • Generated assets for group • Improved linkage with outside world • 80% can manage on their own

13. Villages • 25% no school, 30% no anganwadi, • 58%+ no electricity, all weather road, health center or higher level school • 67% increased income, food security and cropping intensity • 60% number and quality of service increased (some attribute to their own agency role) • Availability of water, forest resources and fodder is decreasing (global factor) • Participation in local body meetings did not increase • Access to services did not increase much (no response is high – village level response)

14. Individual Perception • 70-80% poor better off, 50% increased income, • 60% productive occupation (through PRADAN) • 40%+ continue to remain food insecure (migration has reduced, but continues to be a matter of concern) • 40%+ improvements in health in recent years • 90%+ regularly save, 67% have saved 5-10K rupees • 30% knowing someone who contested • 40% improvement in social position • General awareness (pulse polio, age at marriage, MGNREGS … need to be imporved) • 50% members role in family improved

15. External Schedule • PRADANites reach out to remote areas, motivate people and guide in connecting technology to community • Unleash leadership and entrepreneurial abilities amongst the poorest people. • Motivate people to become social workers. • Several of its works have been adopted by governments and development agencies for local, national, and international level development.

16. Some Critical Questions • PRADAN professionals are hard pressed for time – personal and family commitments could suffer. • Their emphasis on interventions that are beyond SHG formations could be improved. • Their sectoral interventions are commendable, but there is scope for learning from other best practices when it comes to integrating across sectors for a holistic approach. • Their focus on livelihood is narrow and misses out on important contributing aspects like health and education among others.

17. PRADAN’s learning related to M&E • There are no baselines to compare • Absence of comprehensive MEL framework – the questions/dimensions either arbitrary or chosen by academician • Existing monitoring system not targeted to track individual level changes

18. Evaluation questions Learning Monitoring questions Theory of Change, Strategy MEL Framework Baseline questions

19. Indicators

20. Indicators

21. Tools

22. Where we are now • Conducting baseline in new teams based on MEL framework • Piloting mobile based monitoring tools for tracking • Livelihood activities • Group Processes in SHGs • Women’s Participation in Local Governance • Women’s access to public services and entitlements • Working with experts to develop tools for understanding • Changes in sense of agency of women • Changes in the local economy • Changes in the local natural resource base

23. Thank you