Targeting the Hard-Core Poor: An Impact Assessment

Asia

India

Social Protection

Conditional Cash Transfers (CCT)

Banerjee, Abhijit, Esther Duflo, Raghabendra Chattopadhyay, and Jeremy Shapiro

2011

Banerjee, Abhijit, Esther Duflo, Raghabendra Chattopadhyay, and Jeremy Shapiro. 2011. “Targeting the Hard-Core Poor: An Impact Assessment”. Working paper.
View publication

-

2011

Bandhan’s Targeting the Hard-core Poor

2007-2009

Elevate the poorest of the poor out of extreme poverty

Households are eligible if they are “ultra poor”. To be considered “ultra poor", households must meet three of the following five criteria: the primary source of income is informal labor or begging; land holdings are below 20 decimals (10 katthas, 0.2 acres); the household owns no productive assets other than land; there are no able bodied males in the household; school-aged children work instead of attending school. In addition, households must meet two further requirements. First, the household must have an able-bodied female member, as the program was intended specifically to improve the situation of women. Second, households must not be associated with any microfinance institution (the aim is to target those who lack credit access) or receive sufficient support through a government aid program.

The intervention starts with direct asset transfers (such as livestock, inventory, fodder and sheds) depending on the livelihood option most suitable to the household. Subsequently, Bandhan staff meet beneficiaries on a weekly basis over a period of 18 months to provide information and training related to the household’s enterprise (as well as broader social and health issues). Beneficiary households are required to save Rs. 10 (approximately US$ 0.25) per week at the meetings. At the end of the 18 month period the households are integrated into Bandhan’s microcredit program by means of a mandatory 3 day orientation course.

• Minutes spent studying in the last 24 hours
• Minutes spent on household chores (not further defined) in the last 24 hours
• Minutes spent working (not further defined) in the last 24 hours

Randomized controlled trial

Study design: Bandhan first identified ultra poor households in the poorest hamlets in Murshidabad. A total of 991 of these households was interviewed at baseline (see below) and subsequently 512 of the 991 households were randomly selected to receive an offer to participate in the program. Randomization was done remotely by the research team and selection was stratified by hamlet. A substantial number of selected households did not participate because they were found to be ineligible (12.5%) or they refused the offer to participate in the program (35.6%).
Data: The study relies on data from two survey waves. The baseline survey wave was conducted from February 2007 to March 2008. At follow-up (18 months after the asset transfer) 812 of these households were re-interviewed.
Balance and attrition: The authors argue that the attrition rate does not affect the validity of their results because treatment status does not predict attrition and attritted treatment and control households are similar in terms of observed characteristics. Baseline characteristics of treatment and control households generally are well balanced, suggesting that the experimental design of the study is valid.

Intent-to-treat estimates indicate that the intervention improved indicators of household welfare, such as per capita household consumption, nutritional intake, and perceived health. Children (age range not specified) of potential beneficiaries spent an additional 38 minutes studying in the 24 hours prior to the interview compared to the control group. However, they did not differ from children in the control group in terms of time spent working or in chores.

Child Labour

Households

Local

Children of potential beneficiaries did not differ from children in the control group in terms of time spent working or in chores.

Children of potential beneficiaries spent an additional 38 minutes studying in the 24 hours prior to the interview compared to the control group in India. The asset transfer intervention improved indicators of household welfare, such as per capita household consumption, nutritional intake, and perceived health.

-