Concept note for Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund (PPAF)

1. Tanvir Hussain (GM ERD, PPAF)Hassan Akbar (ME ERD, PPAF) Aleena Naseem (ME ERD, PPAF) ImtiazAlvi (World Bank – TTL) NethraPalaniswamy (IFPRI) Concept note for Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund (PPAF)

2. Project description Scale Working in 126(of 130) districts with 84 Partner Organizations 3rd Phase with USD 250 m budget Components • Social Mobilization & Institutional building • Formation of inclusive Community Based Orgs, federation of COs at different levels • Livelihood Enhancement & Protection • Productive asset transfers to Ultra-Poor, Livelihood skills training and Community Livelihood Fund • Micro-credit Access • Micro-credit, enterprise loans, and enterprise training • Basic Services & Infrastructure • Health, Education, Water & other community infrastructure

3. Research questions • Has the project been able to affect household income, consumption and production? • Has the project succeeded in enhancing the following assets of its target beneficiaries: Financial, Physical, Human, Social, Natural • Has the project been able to increase access to basic services and infrastructure? • Has the project been able to improve community level institutions in terms of their social capital, empowerment, and governance? • Has the project been able to reduce vulnerability and improve food security, resilience to external shocks and reintegrate and rehabilitate conflict affected communities?

4. Indicators • Household income, consumption, food consumption and household assets • Agricultural production and non-farm enterprises (gender disaggregated) • Access to drinking water, roads, sanitation, irrigation schemes, and education and health facilities • Linkages and access to other public and private service providers • Participation of poor and women in community institutions • Reconstruction of conflict affected infrastructure and rehabilitation of communities

5. Identification strategy • Basic sampling unit: Settlement • Randomly assigned treatment and control settlements, based on phasing. • Several baseline and impact evaluations staggered over 5 cohorts, same households interviewed at 3 points of time. • Difference-in-difference method for analysis, use of IV for any possible contamination. • Results augmented with monitoring reports and data. • Poverty scorecard to identify the poor and track poverty levels in the assessment areas.

6. Sample • A representativesampletakingcare of geographic spread, partnerdiversity, financialweight of interventions, and multitude of components and interventionswillremain a challenge. • Sampletobestratifiedtoensureadequaterepresentation of eachcateogry. • Sampleisexpectedtoprovidestatisticallyvalidresults at theprojectlevel. • Based on final stratificaton, 95% confidence level, and ±3% error margin, a representative sample of settlements and households to be selected. • Based on the above parameters, an estimated 384 settlements (192 treatment, 192 control) to be covered • And an estimated 4,000 treatment (and 4,000 control) households will be interviewed

7. Timeline • Treatmentand control groupsforeachcohort of baseline, mid-term and end-termsurveys; Use of cohortfixedeffectsmehtodtoaccountforvariabilityovercohorts. • Tosupplementtheevaluation, Case Studiestobeconducted at variouspoints of time, and UserSurveystobeconducted at theend of eachfinancialyear.

8. Impact evaluation team • ERD Unit – PPAF • World Bank PPAF Project Team • DIME Team • Consultants

9. Estimated budget • Estimatedcost: 1 million USD (approximately) • A portion of thefinancingfromprojectfunds • SeekremainingfundsfromDIME, national, regional, and global sources • ExistingMoUwith premier academicinstitutions. • Similar linkagestobeestablishedwithinternationalinstitutionsseekingpartnership

10. Thank you