Bonn, 17 April Fabio Veras Soares (IPC)

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Bonn, 17 April Fabio Veras Soares (IPC)"

Dana Walker
6 years ago
Views:

multi-purpose survey and an impact assessment of a social

1 The Social Welfare Fund and the Yemen National Social Protection Monitoring Survey: the challenges of combining a multi-purpose survey and an impact assessment of a social protection programme Bonn, 17 April 2015 Fabio Veras Soares (IPC)

2 National Social Protection Monitoring Survey in Yemen IPC Research Team: Fábio Veras Soares - Diana Oya Sawyer Carolyn Heinrich Laetícia Rodrigues de Souza - Rovane Battaglin Schwengber Dimitri Silva - Clarissa Guimarães Rodrigues Cristiano Ferraz - Marcel Vieira Bernardo Lanza - Pui Shen Yoong Úrsula Mello - Matheus Lobo Alves Ferreira Interaction Team: Khalid Yasin Dubai - Abdulateef Al-Shaibani Mukhtar Saeed - Abdulbaset Al-Qubaty Tareq Al-Madhaji UNICEF-Yemen: Buthaina Al-Iryani Ali Alqubati 1

3 NSPMS Technical Committee Technical Committee (NSPMS Reports Reviews) Dr. Mohammed Al-Hawri Deputy Minister of Economic Studies & Forecasting, Ministry of Planning & International Cooperation- Committee Chairman Dr. Fadl Al-Shoeibi Dr. Tareq AL-Kebsi Dr. Abduljabbar Al-Ghaithi Mr. Abdurrahman Al-Samawi Dr. Mohammed Al-Wesabi Dr. Mohammed Al-Mansoob Dr.. Abdulkarim Alsayaghi Dr. Abdul Wadood Al-Zubairi Mr. Abdulmajeed Al-Batuly Technical Committee (NSPMS Field Work) Ms. Amina Al-Ghurbani Ms. Tahani Al-Afifi Mr. Qais Ali Mr. Ahmed Al-Barakani Mr. Tareq Yeslam Deputy Minister of Planning and statistics, Ministry of Finance Deputy Chairman Assistant for Economic Statistics, Central Statistics Organisation Director General of Information and Research, Ministry of Public Health Director General of Statistics, Ministry of Education Director General of Planning & Statistics, Ministry of Social Affairs & Labor Professor of Applied Statistics, Sana a University Professor of Statistics, Sana a University Ministry of Planning & International Cooperation Social Policy Consultant, UNICEF Yemen Director General for Sampling, Central Statistics Organisation Director of Statistical and Administrative Frames, Central Statistics Organisation Director of Policies, Social Welfare Fund Monitoring & Evaluation Unit, Social Fund for Development Monitoring & Evaluation Unit, Social Fund for Development 2

4 Objectives To establish a social protection and living conditions monitoring system that will updated data on how poor and vulnerable populations are coping with the crisis in Yemen multiple purpose household survey To provide evidence on the impact of the Social Welfare Fund (SWF) government cash transfer programme process and impact evaluation survey How to combine a multiple purpose longitudinal study with an impact evaluation? 3

5 Sampling and the SWF Not possible to use administrative information given the timeline for the sampling SWF priority was not the impact evaluation Non-experimental methodology (PSM) had to be used. Screening of EA would inform SWF status Original idea: use registered but not yet receiving SWF as a comparison group. Survey went to the field in the same month in payment of new beneficiaries took place. 4

6 Social Protection: The Social Welfare Fund Objective : provide financial help for certain social and economic groups that are less likely to be economically active in the present and in the future (MOSAL, 2008). Eligibility: From social categories : disabled: fully and permanently; partially and permanently; fully or partially temporarily (common condition: unable to work either permanently or temporarily due to the disability); orphans (under 18 years old whose parents are either dead or disappeared, also for those between 18 and 25 if they are enrolled in college or technical education); and elderly people (above 55 for women and 60 for men); and From the economic categories: women without a breadwinner in the household (single, widowed or divorced women (not remarried) whose breadwinner is absent for any reason and does not support them. They need to be above 18, unless they are widowed or divorced with at least one child; and unemployed: man who does not have a public or private job and/or whose income/earnings are below the level of the SWF cash assistance. The potential beneficiaries must be between 18 and 60 years old. 5

7 Social Protection: The Social Welfare Fund Comprehensive Social Survey 2008 collected information on a set of indicators for both beneficiaries and potential beneficiaries of SWF This data was meant to inform the targeting of SWF through a proxy means test methodology (PMT) New beneficiaries were selected by this process, but only started being paid in the first half of The payment was then suspended and resumed in October Compromising the comparison group. Old SWF beneficiaries who were classified as non-poor were not graduated from the programme 6

8 Methodology: Sampling Design The NSPMS sample is selected following a stratified two-phase sampling design. Phase 1: EAs are the primary sampling units Stratified at governorate level (30 EA per governorate) Cluster sampling with unequal selection probabilities - proportional to district poverty level estimates. Once EA were selected, all households in the EA were listed for the Phase 2 of the sampling and information on SWF status was collected. Phase 2: 12 households are randomly selected within each pre-defined strata Strata: SWF beneficiary (5), registered and not receiving (5), and non-beneficiary and non-registered for SWF (2). 7

9 NSPMS: The increase of SWF coverage Round Households Individuals Oct-Dec 2012 (round 1) Jan-Mar 2013 (round 2) Apr-Jun 2013 (round 3) July-Sep 2013 (round 4)

10 Why administrative information was necessary? The information provided by survey interviewees on key features of the programme implementation (e.g. when started receiving benefit) had very poor recall) around 50% non-response. Even in the screening process this response was poor. Merging the survey data with administrative information was the solution found to identify the different types of beneficiaries: older and newer beneficiaries as well as to identify non-beneficiaries so that a proper assessment could be made based on treated and comparison groups. The merge between the household survey and the administrative information allowed the reconstruction of the treated and comparison groups. The treated group was further disaggregated into older beneficiaries and newer beneficiaries 9

11 SWF administrative information and NSPMS SWF Categories # beneficiaries (Pop) % # NSPMS (sample) % Social Perm. F. Disabled Perm. P. Disabled Temporarily Disabled Orphans Elderly Economic 38, , , , , , Total Women Without Breadwinner 353, Unemployed men 415, ,507, ,

12 NSPMS: SWF payments (YER) in Oct-Dec/2012 (round 1) and Jul-Sep/2013 (round 4) 50 Jul-Sep/2013 (round 4) Oct-Dec/2012 (round 1) 40 Percent Source: NSPMS how much did this household receive from the swf in the last payment? 11

13 Conclusions The combine of a multipurpose survey with an impact evaluation survey can work even in challenging environment lack of administrative information and poor response on beneficiary status during the screening. Administrative information may be very important to support the impact evaluation analysis year of registration, pay dates, amount paid. The sequential release of results were important to win the support the programme administrator. Results: request to use the data to calculate the quotas for the expansion of the SWF using wealth index in the absence of more recent surveys. 15

14 THANK YOU

Challenges in Social Inclusion in Serbia

Challenges in Social Inclusion in Serbia Mrs Ljiljana Lucic, Deputy Minister, Ministry of Labor and Social Policy, Government of Serbia Athens, June 2007 Social inclusion is......a process which ensures