matthew bird the ultra poor graduation project at fundación capital
Post on 18-Dec-2014
737 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
IDRC/IPC, Brasilia, September 10-11, 2014
Matthew Bird
Unviersidad del Pacífico
The Ultra-Poor Graduation
Project at Fundación Capital:
Toward an Evaluation of a Public
Policy Graduation Model
EVOLUTION OF THE GRADUATION MODEL
ORIGINAL MODEL
(400,000 households)
REPLICATIONS
(RCT)
ADAPTATION
(Public policy)
BRAC AND CGAP/FORD MODEL
FUNDACION CAPITAL PUBLIC POLICY MODEL
DEMAND FOCUS
CASH TRANSFER
ICT
FUNDAK ADAPTATIONS
Demand Focus
Cash Transfer
ICTs
1. DEMAND FOCUS
Belief that it is the participants themselves who best know their
personal abilities, interests, previous experiences and the local context
well enough to determine what economic activity will constitute the
best investment of their time and the project resources.
Life plan
Business profile
Local support committee
• Powerful instrument for empowerment and teaching
IFAD
• Various studies validate the proper use of resources
Blattman et al. (2013) in Uganda; De Mel et al. (2008) in Sri
Lanka; Fafchamps et al. (2011) in Ghana
In-kind transfers do not guarantee proper usage
• More cost-effective for governments
• Financial inclusion
2. CASH TRANSFER
3. INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION
TECHNOLOGIES
Rules of thumb
Colombia LISTA
experience
• Guarantees quality
• Reduces costs
• Closes digital gap
• Creates spillover effects
• Enables participants to
learn at their own pace
GRADUATION PROJECT EVALUATION
Phase 2: Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT)
Phase 1: Concept evaluation, Process evaluation, Results evaluation
• Pre-Post
• Quantitative supported by qualitative Results
• Acceptability, salience, effectiveness
• Qualitative supported by quantitative Concepts
• Implementation of the design
• Qualitative supported by quantitative Processes
CONCEPT EVALUATION: SOME EXAMPLES
Asset-building coach profile
Community versus proxy means test targeting
Business profile format and supporting material
Results: PMT more cost-efficient in Colombian
context to identify the extreme poor
Results: Identification and prioritization of 7 factors
that make a suitable coach
Results: Need to simplify and strengthen visual
codes because of functional anafalbetism
Testing Two Targeting Methods: Proxy means vs. Participatory Wealth Ranking
Item(Costfortargeting250programparticipants) Costo
Tallerdecapacitacióndelosgestores(incl.viajeyhonorariosdeltalleristaymateriales) USD700
Organizaciónde15talleresmapasparlantes(convocatoria,salones,materiales,yrefrigerios) USD4.500
Honorariosde5gestoresdurante2meses(incl.tiempodeformación,convocatoria,talleresyreporte) USD10.000
TOTAL USD15.200
0
.02
.04
.06
0 20 40 60 80Puntaje Sisbén
Unidos/Sisbén Mapas parlantes
0
.01
.02
.03
.04
.05
0 20 40 60 80Puntaje Sisbén
Physical Assets
Human Assets
Access Social
Assets
Financial Assets
LIVELIHOOD RESILIENCE INDEX
Weighting
determined in
Phase 1
Appropriate
variables
determined in
Phase 1
INDICATORS
PRODUCTIVE ASSETS
• Participants’ ave age o thly i o e is at least USD 45
• Participants have at least 1 profitable
productive activity
• Participants have invested in their
productive activity from their own income in
order to strengthen it
• Participants have at least 1 physical asset
more than what they had in the baseline
• If consumption has increased by 10%
• If the frequency of households reporting
having lacked money to buy food in the last 3
months has decreased by 10%
FOOD SECURITY
• Participants’ savi gs ala es have i eased by 30%
• The p opo tio of pa ti ipa ts’ savi gs i banks or savings groups has increased by 30%
• During the project duration participants have
saved at least once a month
• Participants are 15% more likely to use their
savings to cover their non-regular expenses
instead of using moneylenders or selling
assets
FINANCIAL ASSETS
HUMAN & SOCIAL ASSETS
• The decision-making index for women
participants has increased by at least 5%
• The optimism index among participants has
increased by at least 9%
• The social capital index among participants
has increased by at least 5%
Welfare: Percpetion
Sitio Nuevo San Luis Total
Base Media Base Media Base Media
P37_¿Cómo es el nivel
de vida de su hogar en
comparación con meses
anteriores?
Mejor 35,5% 88,6% 29,7% 67,4% 31,0% 77,5%
Peor 14,1% 0,2% 23,6% 1,9% 18,1% 1,1%
Similar 50,5% 11,2% 46,7% 30,6% 50,9% 21,4%
¿Faltó dinero en el hogar para
comprar alimentos?
Sitio Nuevo San Luis Total
Base Media Base Media Base Media
No 28,6% 70,3% 35,8% 60,3% 42,3% 65,0%
Si, Algunas veces 42,9% 13,2% 41,5% 32,1% 38,5% 23,1%
Sí: Rara vez 14,3% 15,8% 5,7% 3,2% 4,6% 9,2%
Sí: Siempre 14,3% 0,5% 17,0% 3,4% 14,6% 2,0%
Si; No contestaron 0,2% - 1,1% - 0,7%
Financial Accounting / Planning
Sitio Nuevo San Luis Total Base Media Base Media Base Media
P17.1_Metas en el corto plazo No 88,4% 80,7% 74,7% 78,7% 78,8% 79,6%
Si 11,6% 19,3% 25,3% 21,3% 21,2% 20,4%
P17.2_Metas en el mediano plazo No 71,0% 69,0% 65,5% 92,4% 66,9% 81,3%
Si 29,0% 31,0% 34,5% 7,6% 33,1% 18,7%
P17.3_Metas en el largo plazo No 45,7% 50,1% 58,8% 33,3% 56,5% 41,3%
Si 54,3% 49,9% 41,2% 66,7% 43,5% 58,7%
Sitio Nuevo San Luis Total
Base Media Base Media Base Media
P31_¿Sabe ud qué es un
presupuesto?
No 58,9% 24,6% 87,2% 59,1% 72,9% 42,7%
Si 41,1% 75,4% 12,8% 40,9% 27,1% 57,3%
Sitio Nuevo San Luis Total
Base Media Base Media Base Media
P33_¿Elabora usted su
presupuesto? No 59,1% 26,4% 94,9% 54,9% 77,7% 40,6%
Si 40,9% 73,6% 5,1% 45,1% 22,3% 59,4%
Savings
Sitio Nuevo San Luis Total
Base Media Base Media Base Media
P19_¿le queda dinero
para ahorrar? No 59,1% 16,3% 90,5% 21,9% 75,1% 19,2%
Si 40,9% 83,7% 9,5% 78,1% 24,9% 80,8%
Sitio Nuevo San Luis Total
Base Media Base Media Base Media
FORMA DE
AHORRO
MAS
SEGURA
Dinero en el banco 23,9% 45,2% 11,0% 11,6% 17,8% 27,7%
Dinero en la casa 20,2% 33,4% 6,9% 28,5% 13,5% 30,9%
En animales 44,6% 26,2% 79,5% 61,3% 62,1% 44,6%
En cadenas ,2% ,5% 1,5% 1,5% ,8% 1,0%
Otra, ¿Cuál? 11,0% 1,2% 1,0% ,2% 6,0% ,7%
Use of Funds/Resources (Hypothetical 1)
Sitio Nuevo San Luis Total
Base Media Base Media Base Media
Si hoy usted
recibiera
$100.000
adicionales,
¿en qué se
gastaría la
plata?
En bienes o gastos para el
negocio 24,4% 26,0% 11,0% 18,2% 17,2% 21,9%
En compra de alimentos 37,8% 23,2% 61,0% 29,5% 49,6% 26,5% En mejoramiento de
vivienda 7,8% 13,1% 3,1% 10,5% 6,0% 11,7%
En bienes u otros gastos
para el hogar 7,1% 10,5% 0,5% 6,2% 3,9% 8,3%
Pagar deudas 3,7% 1,2% 8,7% 11,8% 6,1% 6,7% Gastaría una parte y la otra
la guardaría 16,8% 25,8% 14,9% 16,2% 15,9% 20,8%
Otro 2,3% ,2% ,8% 7,7% 1,4% 4,1%
Source of Funds/Resources (Hypothetical 2)
Sitio Nuevo San Luis Total
Base Media Base Media Base Media
Como
obtener
50.000
emergencia
De un familiar, amigo o
vecino 64,1% 36,1% 72,6% 69,0% 68,2% 53,3%
De un prestamista o
cadenas 24,4% 7,7% 1,3% ,4% 12,9% 3,9%
De un banco 0,0% 0,0% ,3% 0,0% ,1% 0,0%
De una casa de empeño 3,2% ,2% ,3% ,2% 1,8% ,2%
De la venta de animales
o bienes 1,1% 1,6% 15,4% 10,6% 8,0% 6,3%
Del dinero que tiene
guardado 2,3% 47,8% 1,8% 14,9% 2,1% 30,5%
De su cuenta de ahorros 5,2% 2,8% 3,9%
No tendría a quien
pedirle 4,4% 1,2% 8,2% 1,9% 6,5% 1,6%
Otro 0,5% ,2% ,3% ,2% ,3% ,2%
Last emergency where got resources/money
3.45%
8.74%
6.67%
4.37%
33.33%
0.23%
18.85%
0.69%
11.72%
11.95%
0.69%
19.21%
3.01%
6.94%
20.37%
0.93%
8.10%
0.46%
37.50%
2.78%
00% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Algún miembro del hogar
ue o t a aja a o…
Con los ingresos normales
Nunca ha tenido una
emergencia económica
Otro
Pidiendo prestado a
amigos o familiares
Pidiendo prestado a un
banco
Pidiendo prestado a un
prestamista
Pidiendo prestado a una
e tidad fi a ie a ot a…
Utilizando dinero ahorrado
Vendiendo o empeñando
animales o bienes
Sitio Nuevo Media
Sitio Nuevo Base
23.59%
14.10%
3.59%
0.77%
32.82%
1.03%
0.26%
0.51%
3.08%
20.26%
3.38%
9.92%
9.07%
3.80%
42.62%
1.27%
0.42%
0.84%
11.60%
16.46%
00% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Algún miembro del hogar
ue o t a aja a o…
Con los ingresos normales
Nunca ha tenido una
emergencia económica
Otro
Pidiendo prestado a amigos
o familiares
Pidiendo prestado a un
banco
Pidiendo prestado a un
prestamista
Pidiendo prestado a una
e tidad fi a ie a ot a…
Utilizando dinero ahorrado
Vendiendo o empeñando
animales o bienes
San Luis Media
San Luis Base
Attitudes / Mentalities
Working RCT Design
3 Research Questions
(1) Does the Graduation package set the extreme poor on a path out of extreme
poverty as measured by a suite of indicators?
(2) Is it more effective to provide cash or asset transfers to the extreme poor as
measured by a suite of indicators?
(3) Is it more effective to provide training via a tablet or in-person model?
Thank you
top related