Kenya OVC-CT Programme Operational and Impact Evaluation

More documents

Recommendations

Info

suggests HIV/AIDS prevalence is higher than in the rest of the country, and in two additionalgovernment-funded districts (Embu and Busia).The primary objective of this phase of the pilot phase is to evaluate the potential role of cashtransfers as an instrument to retain orphans and vulnerable children within their families andcommunities and in promoting better nutrition and health and school enrolment, attendance andretention. Important improvements in the design of the different processes have been made,including the targeting process and the delivery mechanism. It is expected that the design of theprogramme will be adjusted with the lessons learned from the implementation of Phase 2 and theresults from the Operational and Impact Evaluation. Emphasis is also placed on informing thedesign of a monitoring and evaluation system for use in a scaled-up cash transfer programme. Theoutcomes of this process will inform the National OVC Policy development in regards tocommunity-based safety nets for orphans and vulnerable childrenThe eventual target population of the programme is 100,000 households at a national scale. Withan average of three OVCs per household, the OVC-CT programme would therefore cover around300,000 OVC.1.1.3 Programme objectivesAs stated in the programme’s Operation Manual, the overall objective of the OVC-CT programmeis to provide a social protection system through regular cash transfers to families living with OVCsin order to encourage fostering and retention of OVCs within their families and communities and topromote their human capital development.The specific objectives of the project in terms of household and child welfare are as follows:Education:- Increase school enrolment, attendance and retention for 6 to 17 year old children 2 in basicschool (up to standard 8).Health:- Reduce the rates of mortality and morbidity among 0 to 5 year old children 3 , throughimmunizations, growth control and vitamin A supplements 4 .Food security:- Promote household nutrition and food security by providing regular and predictable incomesupport.Civil registration:- Encourage caregivers to obtain identity cards within the first six months after enrolment- Encourage caregivers to obtain birth certificates and identity cards for children2 Children up to 17 years old could still be enrolled in basic school3 The focus is on immunization, nutrition and children illness.4 In accordance with the official health regulations (Ministry of Health).2
The programme was developed under a framework of child rights and, if there were the resources,might potentially cover all OVCs. However, resources are inevitably limited and the decision wastaken to target the programme at poor OVC households. The programme is not intended primarilyas an anti-poverty programme, however. The selection of districts for the pilot, for example, wasnot based on poverty criteria. Nevertheless there is an interest in how it might contribute to povertyreduction as one part of the wider GOK social protection framework.1.2 The evaluationOxford Policy Management (OPM) has been contracted to undertake an independent evaluation ofthe current pilot phase of the programme. The purpose of the evaluation is to establish theefficacy and efficiency of the OVC cash transfer programme during the second pilot phase(Phase 2). Specifically the evaluation will look at determining the effectiveness of the processesused in the pilot with regard to:• the targeting and eligibility criteria• cash disbursement and accountability mechanisms• the transaction costs associated at each stage of the project• cash transfer utilisation• the effect that the cash transfer has had on children, households and communities• the impact of conditions related to the cash transfer provisionThe evaluation therefore has two core objectives. Firstly, to evaluate the welfare and economicimpacts of the pilot amongst those who benefit from it; and secondly, to evaluate the operationaleffectiveness of the pilot programme, including an evaluation of the extent to which it reachesthose in greatest need (targeting effectiveness) and an assessment of cost.1.2.1 Key evaluation questionsThe evaluation aims to answer the following key questions:• Are cash transfers reaching the most vulnerable children and having a substantial impacton their welfare - both human development for the child and wider social benefit for thehousehold? How much of an impact are cash transfers having?• Does the impact justify the cost of the programme? Would a national programme beaffordable and fiscally sustainable? On that basis, should the programme, or a variant of it,be scaled up to a national level?• If the programme is to be scaled up, which aspects of its operation must be modified orstrengthened for it to operate effectively at a national level? Which aspects of goodpractice should remain the same and be replicated?• What is the impact or incentive effect of imposing conditions on recipients, versus notimposing conditions? What is the cost of doing so, for both households and thegovernment? Does any additional impact warrant the additional cost? If households fail tocomply with conditions, why is this so?In attempting to answer these questions the evaluation will cover a range of cross-cutting issuesand processes, including assessing the effectiveness of some of the key programme operations.3
Page 1 and 2: KENYA OVC-CT PROGRAMME OPERATIONAL
Page 3 and 4: AcknowledgementsThe authors would l
Page 5 and 6: in the evaluation locations and 22%
Page 7 and 8: It seems likely that some form of p
Page 9 and 10: C.4 Comparison with the internation
Page 11 and 12: Table C.4 Real monthly consumption
Page 13: 1 Introduction1.1 The OVC cash tran
Page 17 and 18: The baseline survey will be followe
Page 19 and 20: least until the follow-up survey. A
Page 21 and 22: Control household - a control house
Page 23 and 24: OVC households make up the study po
Page 25 and 26: Treatment locationsControl location
Page 27 and 28: familial relationships are, overall
Page 29 and 30: 3 Targeting effectiveness - are cas
Page 31 and 32: Table 3.1Comparison between study a
Page 33 and 34: not so different; a significant par
Page 35 and 36: Bcov erage = ×100A + BCoverage and
Page 37 and 38: Table 3.3Distribution of poorest OV
Page 39 and 40: The corollary of this is that a sig
Page 41 and 42: 3.5.1 Design issues - if applied co
Page 43 and 44: Table 3.9 Proportion of OVC househo
Page 45 and 46: the programme enrolment process, wh
Page 47 and 48: Table 4.1Health and nutrition indic
Page 49 and 50: As for the child health indicators,
Page 51 and 52: suggest that there are some differe
Page 53 and 54: Table 4.7Supply of education servic
Page 55: In general, the recipient and contr
Page 58 and 59: Kenya OVC-CT Programme Operational
Page 64 and 65:
Kenya OVC-CT Programme Operational
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102:
show all

Kenya OVC-CT Programme Operational and Impact Evaluation

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?