Transcript "Child Support Programme: Pakistan", Francisco V Ayala

CHILD SUPPORT
PROGRAMME
PAKISTAN
Hypothesis

CSP Pilot Hypothesis: linking additional
cash support to the FSP families with
children would force them to invest in
human capital development. By doing this,
PBM can further assist ongoing government
efforts towards achieving universal primary
education.
Rationale



Food Support Programme is Pakistan’s largest cash
transfer program. It reaches some 1.45 million
households. The annual budget is close to US$ 70
million dollars per year
Pakistan Bait-Ul-Mal with technical assistance from
WB and DFID decided to pilot and evaluate the
impact of offering additional cash transfers
conditional on families sending their children to
school.
For the pilot, 5 districts were chosen with about
50,000 FSP families. Out of them, about 27,000
families had children of ages 5 to 12.
Percentage of families with children of
age 5 to 12 enrolled in school by age in
the treatment areas
100,0
90,0
80,0
70,0
60,0
50,0
40,0
30,0
20,0
10,0
0,0
5
6
7
8
Male
9
Female
10
11
12
General Objectives of CSP

Increase the number of children in
primary education towards the
achievement of Universal
Primary Education

Promote the investment in human
capital for poverty reduction.
Specific Objectives of CSP




Increase primary school registration
in the target districts
Reduce dropout rates
Increase attendance levels
Provide additional resources to the
FSP beneficiaries having children of
school going age.
Target Population


Initially the Programme will cover
existing beneficiaries of FSP with at
least one child of primary school going
age
Additional beneficiaries will be added
as long as space becomes available
within the approved budget. New poor
families will be chosen using proxy
means test methodology (second part
of the presentation)
Benefits


Beneficiaries are entitled to receive Rs.
3,000 (US$ 50) a year from the FSP on
quarterly basis
The CSP beneficiary is entitled to receive
additional:
* Rs. 200 (US$ 3.3) per month for one child
* Rs. 350 (US$ 5.8) if they have two or more
children of school going age
Conditionalities

Beneficiaries:
* Children of FSP families between the
age of 5-12 years.

Conditions:
* Be registered in the primary school
* Must attend at least 80% of classes
* Pass the final examination.
Duration and Exit Policy


Households will stay in the Programme as
long as their children meet the
conditionalities.
Benefits are suspended when:
* Children fail to comply with given
conditions
* Children have failed in final exam for
three consecutive times
* Beneficiaries have provided false
information.
Evaluation of the Programme
Treatment group:
Families participating in the Food Support
program that have children in the age group 512 in the treatment districts.

Control Group:
1) Current FSP beneficiaries in the control
districts
2) Non beneficiaries to be selected in the
treatment districts

Data requirements
QUANTITATIVE DATA should be collected three times:
 Baseline data: 2,500 households and 200 schools in the
treatment and control districts before the enrollment of
the beneficiaries in the new program.
 Assessment of 4 months into the program: get ideas of
the impact of the program, the need for improvements in
the design and implementation of the program.
 A second data collection: follow up on the same
households to assess the impact of the program after the
end of the school year and the enrollment in the following
school year.
PROJECT CYCLE
TARGETING
CASE MAGMT
ENROLLMENT
COMPLIANCE
M&E
-program performance
-service provision
PAYMENTS
Implementation








Design document was approved in June 2006
First version of the operational manual in August
2006
Development of the MIS by modules between
September 2006 and April 2007
Enrollment process completed in December 2006
First payment for January 2007
First control of conditions for March 2007
Expansion of the programme to 100,000 households
for August 2007.
World Bank is preparing an investment loan to
support the expansion process.
ANALYSIS OF
TARGETING
MECHANISMS
FOR PAKISTAN
AND CCTs IN
GENERAL
IMPORTANCE OF TARGETING

Maximize :
reduction in poverty
increase in social welfare
Targeting ensures that limited
program resources reach the poorest
households

Targeting allow that the poor
population are not excluded.

TARGETING METHODOLOGIES
Geographic targeting
 Proxy means test
 Community based targeting


Some Programmes are using
combinations of the above
methodologies
WHY COMBINATIONS?
CCTs are expensive
Programmes, and highly
criticized if targeting systems
are not good.
 More and more Programmes
are implementing combined
systems to assure better
targeting.

TARGETING SYSTEMS IN CCTs




Combination of GT and PMT. Examples in
Mexico, Pakistan, Colombia
Combination of GT and CBT. Examples in Kenya
Combination of PMT and CBT. Example in Sri
Lanka
Combination of GT, PMT and CBT. Example to
be implemented in Tanzania.
GT-PMT-CBT




Geographic targeting is applied to
eliminate non-poor areas
Proxy means test is used to identify
individual households within poor areas
Community based targeting is applied to
prioritize list of beneficiaries and/or
verify extreme inclusion errors
Example: Sri Lanka
GT-CBT-PMT




Geographic targeting is used to eliminate
non-poor areas
Community based targeting is applied to
identify initial list of potential beneficiaries
by local committees
Proxy means test to verify inclusion errors
and order the list of potential beneficiaries
to produce a “priority list”
Example: Tanzania?
COMBINED SYSTEMS
ADVANTAGES
 Balanced participation of the Programme
execution unit and community
 Acceptance by all stakeholders
 Lower levels of exclusion and inclusion errors
LIMITATIONS
 They tend to be expensive, specially in the
initial stages
 Difficult to be accepted by stakeholders in the
beginning
 If not well designed, system may end up in
chaos.
Thank you!!!