Fiscal year 2010/11 - Poverty Alleviation Fund, Nepal

Child Underweight Effects
7. For child malnutrition, measured in terms of underweight, the impacts
of PAF are as not strong as they are for other outcome indicators.
Nevertheless, incidence of underweight among children under 5 years of
age is estimated to decrease by 5 to 10 per centage points. The results
are however not statistically significant and also do not hold across
different matching techniques and across multiple treatment groups. We
take this as a sign of overall trend in the right direction and could see
significant effects in the next couple of years.
Other Effects
8. There are, as yet, no significant PAF impact evident on indicators
associated with community/social capital (trust, respect, relationships
between different ethnic groups, community disputes, etc.), although
the overall trend for both groups is positive. Similarly, while there is
no significant impact of PAF program on the use of health services/
facilities, the effects are qualitatively positive on the use of agricultural
centers, community forest services, and farmers’ groups.
Targeting
9. The targeting results are consistent with PAF’s objective of targeting the
poorest households and support monitoring data results as well. Of the
many categories that PAF uses to classify the disadvantaged, one is the
level of food sufficiency. The other is whether the household is from Dalit
or Janajati caste/ethnicity category. For example, the probability of being
selected as PAF money recipient goes up by 25 per centage points if you
are from a Dalit/Janajati household. Similarly, one per cent decrease in
per capita consumption at the baseline is associated with 15 per centage
points increase in the probability of being selected for PAF.
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
Reduction in Food insufficency
6.8
60.4
Control
Treatment
17.2
3 months or Less 6 months or Less
10. The impact results are also consistent with PAF’s targeting the
poorest households. Among other categories that PAF uses to classify
the poor, one is the level of food sufficiency. Households are separated
into four different groups under this category: hardcore poor (those with
less than 3 months of food security either via own production or other
-9.1
dependable sources of income), medium poor (those with 3 to 6 months
of food security), poor (those with 6 to 11 months of food security), and
non-poor (those with 12 or more months of food security). The results
show that the per centage of households with food insufficiency of 3
months or less dropped from 13.8% in 2007 to about 5.5% in 2010, a
reduction of more than 60%, for the PAF beneficiary households (defined
as those engaged in PAF supported income generating activities). The
reduction was only about 6.8% for non-beneficiaries. Similarly, the
per centage of households with food insufficiency of 6 months or less
decreased from 40% in 2007 to about 33% in 2010, a reduction of about
17.5%, for PAF beneficiary households. There was no reduction for nonbeneficiaries
during this period and in fact, there was an increase in food
insufficiency of these households by about 9%.
Access and Use of Services
11. With the second phase of PAF II still ongoing, the number of poor
households with access to improved infrastructure facilities has reached
more than 49,000. The impact evaluation results show that the school
enrollment rate for children from households engaged in PAF supported
income generating activities increased by more than 7 per centage
points. The enrollment rate was even higher for children from Dalit or
Janajati households. While there was no obvious difference between the
PAF beneficiaries and the non-beneficiaries in the use of health services/
facilities, the beneficiary households were found to be making more
use of agricultural centers, community forest services, and farmers’
groups. The increased use of such services supports the monitoring
data findings that PAF beneficiaries are investing in agriculture-related
opportunities and reaching out to service providers to improve and
develop these investments.
Conclusions
12. The evaluation results indicate that there is a positive and significant
impact on household level welfare due to the PAF program relative to
any other poverty reducing efforts that may be on-going at the same
time. The results further indicate that the program is an effective tool for
targeting the population considered most vulnerable in terms of caste
and ethnicity as well as most food insecure. There are many process
related questions that this impact evaluation does not yet answer. For
example, a review of the monitoring data suggests that women groups
are far more diversified in livelihood activities that mixed groups. Impacts
on women only groups would need to be analyzed further as should the
previously related positive indication of nutritional impact on children
under 5 years of age.
13. The household-level panel data provide an opportunity for further
analysis over time which may help us understand changes in poverty
dynamics and for further counterfactual analysis of the outcomes
reported in this paper. As such, a continuation of the survey methodology
and of the impact evaluation analysis would be an important tool for
policy makers and for the implementation of the poverty alleviation fund
at the national level.
(Ref. Impact Evaluation of the Nepal Poverty Alleviation Fund, WB/TU)
ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT (2010/2011) 69