Af Afgh ghanis anistan tan Rur ural al Enterpris prise e - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Ev Evaluating aluating Im Impact: act: Tu Turning ning Promises

• mises in

into to Ev Evid idence ence

Shafiullah Rasikh, Qazi Azmat Isa, Ghizaal Haress, Naila Ahmed, Wali Ibrahimi (Moderator Abdu) Kathmandu, Nepal February 2010

Af Afgh ghanis anistan tan Rur ural al Enterpris prise e Developmen lopment t Prog rogram ram (A (ARE REDP) P)

2

KEY ISSUES:

75% of population live in rural areas where

agriculture is the primary activity;

High unemployment rates and unskilled

labor force;

Shortage of business planning,

management, and marketing know-how; and access to formal credit

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PDO: To improve employment opportunities and income

• f rural men and women; and sustainability of

targeted local enterprises Program Components:

 (a) Community-led Enterprise Development;  (b) Small and Medium Enterprise Development;

3

4 Initiate savings groups and monitor internal lending Initiate enterprise groups and develop enterprise plans Identify SMEs and Initiate financial literacy with SMEs Identify Partial Guarantee Administrator Situation analysis and value chain assessment Inventory and contract of BDS providers Discussion with banks to identify support need Form and register Village Savings and Loan Associations BDS delivery and VSLA lending to enterprise groups Commercial bank lending and BDS delivery to SMEs Innovation awards Seed grant to mature VSLAs

Human Resources;  Financial Resources

• Livelihood

grants to the comm unities

• Partial

Guarantee Funds for SMEs Community mobilization 30% of CDCs in a province organized into groups (35 % female) Well-governed community groups;  Unemployment decreased  Net revenues increased for SMEs Incomes increased for the households Women Empowered Increased private sector investment;  Improved productivity and economic stability; Delivery of technical support and facilitation 70% of groups federate to VSLAs,  80% of VSLAs receive grants and linked to MFIs; Improved savings & inter-loaning and access to formal credit by community groups Business Development Services to SMEs 750 SMEs supported by the project;  Employment increased through SMEs  SMEs accessing more financial resources  High net revenues to SMEs

5

• 2. Results Chain

Inputs Activities Outputs Outcomes Long-term Outcomes

6

• 3. Primary Research Questions

 Q1: Did AREDP have an impact on increasing incomes of

participating households?

 Q2: Did AREDP increase women participation in enterprise

activities?

 Q3: Did the Business Development Services under AREDP

have an impact on increasing net revenues of local enterprises?

7

• 4. Outcome Indicators

 Number of Well-governed community groups  Percentage of groups demonstrating improved

savings & access to formal credit;

 At least 30% increase in employment through

SMEs

 SMEs accessing loans from financial institutions

and have at least 50% higher net revenues

• 5. Identification Strategy/Method

 Selection of Communities:

 STAGE 1: NSP covers 75% of Afghanistan with est. 22,000 CDCs;  STAGE 2: Roll-out: YR1 7 Provinces; YR2  Contingent on funding and

performance to roll-out to all 34 Provinces;

 Selection criteria: security, better entrepreneurial opportunities;

 STAGE 3: Districts and villages will be selected.

 Selection criteria: accessibility, better performing CDCs, and demand

for project;

 STAGE 4: Households self select into Program:

 Selection criteria: Interest to participate, ability to save.

 STAGE 5: AREDP community groups form as savings or enterprise groups.

 Selection of SME’s:

 Baseline survey of 1708 SMEs in 33 Provinces (2008);

8

Identification Strategy/Method

9 7 selected provinces 27 remaining provinces

Potential counterfactual: At each stage, there are potential members of communities who would have been benefited from the Program but have been left

• ut due to

several reasons.

Selected Districts Remainin g Districts Selected Villages Remaining Villages

FUNDING

Treatment Potential Control Groups

e.g. Accessibility e.g. CDC performance

Criteria

• 5. Identification Strategy/Method

 Random Sample of non-participants will be drawn

from potential control groups;

 Impact Evaluation Method

 With respect to the Community groups: Q1 and Q2:

Matching

 With respect to the SMEs: Q3: Difference in difference

10

11

• 6. Sample and data

 Sample selection and Size

 Universe: Avg. 1000 CDCs per Province under NSP; 7000

CDCs are our universe  from which AREDP will select 30% (2000 CDCs);

 Size: Consultation with the Central Statistics Office to

determine a nationally representative sample size;

 Data Collection Method

 Quantitative methods: Design questionnaires to capture

Household, Community and SME data;

 Qualitative methods: To capture process related information:

stakeholders include elected reps. Focus group discussions,

12

• 7. Time Frame/Work Plan

 Timeframe:

 Baseline: 2010  Mid-term review: 2012  Final survey: 2015  Process monitoring (throughout)

 Work plan (e.g. activity: survey implementation and data analysis)

 Consultative process to include variety of stakeholders;  Design of survey instruments  Pre-testing survey instruments  Contracting of survey firm  Survey equipment, tools  Full survey implementation  Post survey (data cleaning, verification)  Analysis to answer Q1, Q2 and Q3  Report writing  Dissemination

13

• 8. Sources of Financing

 Approx. 2% of project cost which is in the project budget.

• Approx. $1.5 million

 Other possible funding.