Social Fund for Development

Transcription

1 Social Fund for Development Yemen Labor Intensive Works Program Targeting Khalid Moheyddeen & Abduljalil Al-Sahmere Arusha, June

2 Contents Introduction About Yemen About Social Fund for Development (SFD) Labor Intensive Works (LIW) Program At a Glance Objectives of Rural Version of the Program Features of The Program Design Types of interventions Targeting Targeting Policy Tr Targeting Mechanism hnim Targeting Evaluation Study Targeting Challenges Pilot Targeting Methods 2

3 About Yemen Introduction Yemen population is 23 million 3.5% population growth per annum Widely dispersed population (130, rural settlements and 3,642 urban). 40% of rural and 20% of urban population below poverty line, GDP (PPP) is $1,209 per capita Food insecure nation with 32% of the population considered undernourished.

4 About Social Fund for Development Introduction Social Fund for Development established in 1997 with the objective to improve the range of services and economic opportunities available to the poorest segments of population through carrying out of Community Development, Small and Micro Enterprises Development,capacity building, and Labor- Intensive Works (LIW) Program 4

5 Labor Intensive Works Program At a Glance Introduction Version Implementa tion Year/s Goals Funding and source Range of intervention Method of Implementation Targeted beneficiaries Urban and semi- urban Reduce - unemployment - Contribute to the implementation of infrastructure projects $ m Government Poor quarters in urban and semi urban areas Through Contractors Unskilled labor from labor market (unconditional) Rural Phase I [ ] Phase II [ ] - Reduce the vulnerability of the poorest families due to food crisis - Create some useful community assets $10m WB $23.4m EC, DFID Poor rural areas Direct implementation by benefiting families Labors of poor households * This presentation will focus on the Rural Version of the program 5

6 Objective of the LIW Rural Version Introduction The Labor Intensive Works Program (LIW) of SFD aims at providing a cash-for for-work safety net to target households to bridge their consumption gap during shocks and stagnation of agricultural seasons, while increasing the productive assets of communities and households. 6

7 Features of The Program Design Introduction Geographical targeting mechanism to select benefiting communities Choosing the appropriate intervention that includes intensive labor Low wage rates [ % below market wage of each region] A work quota for each H.H. proportional to its consumption gap. Appropriate timing of the program Gender sensitivity Building capacity of unskilled labors 7

8 Introduction Types of Interventions Terraces rehabilitation and conservation Protection and reclamation of agricultural lands Protection of Irrigation Canals Improving Rural Roads Paving Rural Markets Rainwater Harvesting Protect Drinking Water Sources (surface wells and springs) Digging shallow wells 8

9 Targeting Policy Targeting LIW uses geographical targeting of poor communities using poverty indicators derived from the census and household budget survey. This type of targeting is enhanced by field investigation to ensure its reliability. Selecting benefiting households within communities using income resources and expenditures analysis supported by self-targeting 9

10 Targeting Mechanism of Phases I Targeting Selection of Communities -Official poverty indicators -Emergency cases that affect sources of income -SFD branch office experience about poor communities Field investigation by project team - Insure that communities are eligible to the program -Insure that detailed criteria is met by the selected communities -Final selection of communities Office Targeting Field Screening 10

11 Targeting Mechanism of Phases I Targeting Selection of Households -Insuring that community is affected by a crisis -Collecting detailed information i about affected households and their ability/desire to participate -Self-selection by reducing wages rate [by 10-20%] 11

12 Evaluation of Targeting Mechanism of Phase I Targeting Qualitative study was made by LIW team using (Observations, Focus Group Discussion) Sample of 32 projects was selected randomly. 10 Households were selected dr randomly per each hpr project Key studied issues: Validity of the program Targeting Beneficiary Satisfaction 12

13 Phase I: Targeting Evaluation Results Targeting %100 %90 %80 %70 %60 %50 %40 %30 %20 %10 %0 Areas are applicable for the program Positive impact on beneficiaries Eligible HH are benefited Beneficiaries satisfaction Women participation in projects Yes No 13

14 Challenges Targeting Community Targeting Poverty indicators used in geographical targeting are not applicable in few areas [about 15%] Targeting within communities (Identifying benefiting HH) Required more time [about 17 days of field work] Need enormous efforts and extended staff Higher Cost (about 4-5% %oftheoverallbudgetofthe overall projects) 14

15 Pilot Targeting Alternatives Targeting Targeting benefiting communities : Continue using Geographical, and field investigation mechanism to target benefiting communities. Through Local Authorities of the targeted district Selecting households i) by communities, ii) by communities leaders, iii) self-targeting method through reducing wages highly (up to 50%), and iv) Mixed: by community and Lowering Wages Objectives of piloting : Facilitate the targeting process Ease expanding and scaling up the program Improve and accelerate response to crisis Decreasing targeting cost. 15

16 Pilot Targeting Methods Targeting Identification of the targeted communities Office Targeting Official Poverty Indicators Selection according to poverty indicators and Emergency Situations Field verification visits by Program staff at SFD branches Local Councils Nomination of poorest communities Verification according to a predefined list of area characteristics 16

17 Pilot Targeting Methods Targeting Targeting g Households Community Leaders Nomination of families by community leaders according to specified criteria community Employ community participation tools (increse with wealth) Wage lowering Announce specified lower wages according to activity nature Community+ low wages Poor vs rich family screening+ announcing wage lowering Verification 17

18 Assessment of Pilot Targeting Methods Targeting No Targeting Method Pilot size (communities) Selection of Communities 8 i) Trough local councils 8 70% Sl Selection tinof fhouseholds i) by communities, 8 Degree of success 85% ii) by communities leaders, and iii) self-targeting method only through reducing wages highly y( (up to 50%). iv) Mixed: by community and Lowering Wages % To be defined during implementation of activities 18

19 19

20 20

21 21

22 22

23 23

24 24

25 Thank you 25