Impact Assessment of the District Poverty Initiative Project Rajasthan

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 1.1: Sample Household Number and Village BLS 2007 NBLS 2007 Total District Village APL BPL Total Village APL BPL Total Village APL BPL Total Baran 11 161 273 434 9 135 225 360 20 296 498 794 Churu 10 149 249 398 10 150 250 400 20 299 499 798 Dausa 12 180 300 480 8 120 200 320 20 300 500 800 Dholpur 13 193 324 517 7 105 175 280 20 298 499 797 Jhalawar 9 132 210 342 11 165 275 440 20 297 485 782 Rajsamand 11 165 275 440 9 135 225 360 20 300 500 800 Tonk 8 120 199 319 12 180 300 480 20 300 499 799 Total 74 1100 1830 2930 66 990 1650 2640 140 2090 3480 5570 Note: BLS- base Line survey and NBLS- non-baseline survey. 140 quantitative survey villages. Table 1.2: Households that could not be surveyed District APL BPL Total Baran 4 2 6 Churu 1 1 2 Dausa 0 0 0 Dholpur 2 1 3 Jhalawar 3 15 18 Rajsamand 0 0 0 Tonk 0 1 1 Total 10 20 30 Note: Households (30) were replaced as the baseline households were not available for survey due to migration, death etc. Qualitative evaluation: The sampling framework is as follows. For each district, we have stratified the sample by type of SPAs, exposure to the program and NGOs performance. The sample size is as depicted in table 1.3. (list was provided by DPIP-SPMU). The method used mainly focuses on groups (at CIG level) and interviews (at individual and village level). Of the 98 villages, 54 villages were also covered in baseline 2001 survey. The other 44 villages are part of phases II, III and IV of DPIP (also see table 1.4 for FGDs). Table 1.3: Qualitative Survey Village District BLS NBLS Total Baran 9 4 13 Churu 9 4 13 Dausa 7 6 13 Dholpur 7 9 16 Jhalawar 10 10 20 Rajsamand 2 5 7 Tonk 10 6 16 Total 54 44 98 Note: BLS- base Line survey and NBLS- non-baseline survey. Table 1.4: District-wise FGDs and Interview for Survey District No. of FGDs Baran 22 Jhalawar 34 Churu 24 Rajsamand 21 Dausa 26 Tonk 33 Dholpur 32 Total 192 14
Survey Instruments The survey has adopted a mix of qualitative and quantitative research tools. Quantitative data including household and village questionnaires were used to assess socioeconomic impacts are measured at the household level (which includes specific measures coming from individual members of the household). Generally, this survey is applied to the head of the house, and also to some specific members in some designs (for instance, to household members who belong to project CIG groups). The village survey presents local village context. The household questionnaires also include a short SPA module (categorized by the four major types of sub-project activities) that has been collected from those households that have participated in the project. Qualitative data including key informant interviews and focus group discussions were used to understand in greater detail the main issues in program implementation. The key informant interviews have been used to elicit information from qualified individuals on some attributes of the intervention (the facility, or the service) or about features of the village and its members. This include sarpanch, community accountant, bank manager, cluster president, representatives from selected NGOs, key service providers (e.g. RCDF), those responsible for the maintenance of a facility, representatives of NGOs, etc. Some aspects covered in the FGDs are strengths and sustainability of CIGs, satisfaction levels with the project, level of convergence with other program, and so on to better understand the reasons for the results observed in the quantitative impact evaluation. All the instruments were preceded by a pilot survey to test and subsequently revised in light of the findings of the pilot test, with the proviso that certain key outcome indicators remain consistent with those in the baseline survey. Selection and Training of Field Staff Selection of the staff was done as per the norms of the Institute. The training of the staff was organized in the Institute and resource persons from DPIP- SPMU and the Institute was used. They were explained what DPIP is initially and then each question of the various questionnaires was discussed and explained. A pilot schedule was filed by all investigators to ascertain the understanding of the questions. From the selected 15
Page 1 and 2: Impact Assessment of the District P
Page 3 and 4: limited too. Panchayati Raj Institu
Page 5 and 6: Chapter 1 Introduction This study i
Page 7 and 8: for skill up-gradation in the Non-f
Page 9 and 10: MART - Hat ( Development ): MART Ne
Page 11 and 12: * Ensure transparency, widespread i
Page 13: The quantitative evaluation seeks t
Page 17 and 18: Chapter 2 CIG and Non-CIG Household
Page 19 and 20: NON-CIG Member Households Nuclear 8
Page 21 and 22: Table 2.7: Main Occupation of the H
Page 23 and 24: -----------------------------------
Page 25 and 26: 40 3 7 10 50 2 6 8 60 5 3 2 1 1 12
Page 27 and 28: -----------------------------------
Page 29 and 30: Table 2.16: Source of Irrigation --
Page 31 and 32: Yes 56.76 100 63.94 47.78 67.88 69.
Page 33 and 34: Months Baran Churu Dausa Dholpur Jh
Page 35 and 36: Percent 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
Page 37 and 38: CIG member Households Yes 59.62 60.
Page 39 and 40: Table 2.30: Whether Animals are cov
Page 41 and 42: milk and the average annual income
Page 43 and 44: Across districts, the percentage of
Page 45 and 46: For any crisis, financial assistanc
Page 47 and 48: N 59 66 68 53 Total Mean 4010 4007
Page 49 and 50: N 3 5 1 2 Churu Mean 3045 20501 741
Page 51 and 52: was no such household in Baran, Dau
Page 53 and 54: Baran Mean 4398 4451 5935 35 N 9 2
Page 55 and 56: Per capita income from famine works
Page 57 and 58: Dholpur Mean 1 1 2 1 45 -6 N 74 107
Page 59 and 60: Appendix 2.1: Per Capita Agricultur
Page 61 and 62: Appendix 2.9: Per Capita Land Lease
Page 63 and 64: Appendix 2.16: Bajra Production in
Page 65 and 66:
Chapter 3 Household Level Changes:
Page 67 and 68:
Dausa 95.6 4.4 85.7 13.0 1.3 Dholpu
Page 69 and 70:
Households and DPIP Sub-projects It
Page 71 and 72:
Table 3.13: Relation with SPAs Meet
Page 73 and 74:
Income Access Social sabha Income A
Page 75 and 76:
Agriculture Income The average inco
Page 77 and 78:
Some households also still engage t
Page 79 and 80:
though this is more so in drought p
Page 81 and 82:
Rs.3768 for APL household. For non-
Page 83 and 84:
APL BPL APL BPL APL BPL Baran 15 68
Page 85 and 86:
BLS 2001 BLS 2007 NBLS 2007 APL BPL
Page 87 and 88:
Traditional Yackak Income Rs. Rs. 1
Page 89 and 90:
Other Incomes Rs. Rs. 50000 45000 4
Page 91 and 92:
Expenditure of Footwear Rs. Rs. 160
Page 93 and 94:
Expenditure on Social Obligations R
Page 95 and 96:
Expenditure on Electricty Rs. 2500
Page 97 and 98:
Table 3.42: Average Household size
Page 99 and 100:
Area Cultivable Bighas 35 30 25 20
Page 101 and 102:
Appendices Appendix Table 3.1: Deci
Page 103 and 104:
Appendix Table 3.5: Decision on Par
Page 105 and 106:
Appendix Table 3.8: Decision on Usi
Page 107 and 108:
Appendix Table 3.12: Decision on Me
Page 109 and 110:
Appendix Table 3.16: Who Does the C
Page 111 and 112:
BPL Baran 51.28 10.26 15.02 1.83 Ch
Page 113 and 114:
Male Female Boy Girl APL Baran 41.6
Page 115 and 116:
Appendix Table 3.33: Who in the Vil
Page 117 and 118:
Chapter 4 Sub- Project Activities:
Page 119 and 120:
Type of SPA In Baran district, 65.5
Page 121 and 122:
Were the villagers informed about t
Page 123 and 124:
is reported in 10.34 percent groups
Page 125 and 126:
Is there any conversation between t
Page 127 and 128:
It may also be pointed out the sele
Page 129 and 130:
Village Nayagaon, located 25 kms fr
Page 131 and 132:
• It was also felt that verificat
Page 133 and 134:
• Every three months there should
Page 135 and 136:
• Group formation should be done
Page 137 and 138:
The main source of income besides,
Page 139 and 140:
Subsidy should be reduced and shoul
Page 141 and 142:
Type of Household Man Women Differe
Page 143 and 144:
Who Takes the Decisions on Sending
Page 145 and 146:
Who Takes the Decisions on Particip
Page 147 and 148:
Who Takes the Decisions on Having A
Page 149 and 150:
APL Baran 100.0 1 100.0 1 100.0 1 D
Page 151 and 152:
Dausa 19.2 15.0 34.2 12.5 5.8 0.0 1
Page 153 and 154:
Dausa 30.8 15.0 24.2 11.7 3.3 0.0 1
Page 155 and 156:
If your Children are not enrolled i
Page 157 and 158:
Compared to 5 years ago has the hou
Page 159 and 160:
Compared to 5 years ago has the hou
Page 161 and 162:
Has the paternal worked on your fie
Page 163 and 164:
Tonk 22.2 77.8 180 17.6 82.4 990 BP
Page 165 and 166:
Tonk 41.7 58.3 300 63.2 36.8 1650 D
Page 167 and 168:
Does the CIG members borrow from yo
Page 169 and 170:
Do Participate in Caste Panchayat M
Page 171 and 172:
Roles and Responsibilities in the H
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Tables on Asset Position of CIG and
Page 179 and 180:
Tonk N 6 4 10 8 Total N 23 41 57 94
show all

Impact Assessment of the District Poverty Initiative Project Rajasthan

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?