1

Beneficiaries’ Feedback on Youth Employment and Social Support Operation Public Workfare (PWF) and Skills for Jobs (S4J) Programs

Iterated Beneficiary Monitoring Series for North East Projects in Nigeria

Abul Azad & Ayodele Fashogbon Nigeria Poverty and Equity Team June 2018

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

2

1 CONTENTS

2 Summary ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3

3 Background ................................................................................................................................................................. 4

4 Presentation of Findings on pwf ............................................................................................................................. 5

4.1 Orientation Training ........................................................................................................................................ 5

4.2 Work Assignment ............................................................................................................................................. 7

4.3 Stipend Payment ............................................................................................................................................... 8

4.4 Savings and Grievance Redress ...................................................................................................................... 9

5 Presentation of findings on S4J ............................................................................................................................... 9

5.1 Orientation training .......................................................................................................................................... 9

5.2 First level trainings ......................................................................................................................................... 10

5.3 Internship ......................................................................................................................................................... 11

5.4 Stipend payment ............................................................................................................................................. 12

5.5 Saving and Investment ................................................................................................................................... 13

5.6 Grievance and Redress .................................................................................................................................. 14

6 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................................ 15

6.1 Structural Issues .............................................................................................................................................. 15

6.2 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................................... 15

7 Acknowledgment ................................................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

8 Annex ......................................................................................................................................................................... 16

3

2 SUMMARY

The spate of terrorist activities in the North east geopolitical zone of Nigeria is a major challenge to project implementation support activities for most World Bank projects across the states in the zone. Apart from strengthening delivery of project to beneficiaries, project implementation support mission provides an opportunity for on-the-spot assessment of structural issues that may exist within a project delivery chain. Because of the security challenges in this part of Nigeria, the Bank mission is banned in states like - Borno and Yobe particularly. In a bid to close this gap in monitoring and supervision of project in difficult project terrain, the iterated beneficiary monitoring (IBM) was introduced to the task teams of projects in North east zones of Nigeria. The IBM identifies structural issues within project delivery chain in hard-to-reach areas.

For YESSO project, the IBM focused on public workfare and skill for job components of the project which have beneficiaries for now and only in Bauchi state in the North east. Using a structured questionnaire and telephone interviews, the IBM took on key issues like- program eligibility criteria, training, job, payment, grievance redress, saving mobilisation and sustainability which form the main chains of program delivery for the two interventions. The interviews were completed for 320 beneficiaries of PWF and 58 beneficiaries of S4J between May and June 2018, and the respondents were randomly selected with about 10% representativeness from the lists of beneficiaries of both interventions. Using simple descriptive analysis, the results were quite revealing.

The major highlights of the findings from the IBM include; –

• ineligible beneficiaries enrolled for skill for job interventions who did not meet minimum requirement of junior secondary school certificate.

• high to low attritions in trainings for reasons that can be improved on. For example, inadequate time for preparation between notice of selection and time for training, timing (Ramadan season), crowded training with minimum coordination.

• exploitation on stipends from PWF beneficiaries, which is very connected to supervision arrangement in the delivery of workfare.

• delay of payment and none payment of stipend were major issues recounted by the beneficiaries.

4

3 BACKGROUND

Youth Employment and Social Support Operation (YESSO)

The YESSO project started in 2013 with the aim of targeting the poor using an innovative approach and provision of jobs, skills and conditional cash transfers to targeted poor households. In a bid to address the big social challenges associated with crisis in North Eastern states of Nigeria and growing numbers of internally displaced persons, the project was restructured with a revised development objective, which is – “increase access of the poor and vulnerable, using improved safety net systems, to youth employment opportunities in all Participating States and to provide Targeted Grant Transfers to the poor, vulnerable and internally displaced people (IDPs) in the NE States”. The project is operational in 12 states including the 6 NE states, and has four components, which are:

Strengthening the Social Safety Net System in Nigeria: Coordination of social safety net at federal and state, and creating a common targeting mechanism to identify poor and vulnerable households and individuals, including IDPs; creating Single Registers in all participating States, using the common targeting mechanism referred to above and Unified Registry of Beneficiaries (URB) in NE States.

Public Workfare Program (PWF): This is to support the participating State governments to put in place an effective and efficient mechanism to provide immediate labour-intensive work opportunities for unskilled youth from poor households. Beneficiaries of this program are selected based on the following criteria: uneducated or with educational levels lower than JSS 3, and unemployed youths (male and female) between the ages of 18 and 35/ or 18 – 50 in the NE from the Single Register (SR) with State Operation Coordination Office (SOCU). The beneficiaries are to be paid a Stipend of N7,500/month based on satisfactory work performed for at least 4 hours per day, 20 days per month for a duration of at least 1 year and maximum of 2 years.

Skills for Job (S4J): The component delivers on (a) Trainings - life skills, sector specific skills, and entrepreneurial skills for 3 months; (b) Internship/apprenticeship with private and public-sector agencies for 6-9 months; (c) provision of stipends of N7,500/month based on satisfactory attendance at training and internship, 20 days per month and for a duration of 6 – 9 months. The National Directorate of Employment in partnership with State Governments and the Private Sector has the responsibility of implementing this component. The beneficiaries are selected using the following criteria: unemployed youths (male and female) between the ages of 18 and 35/ or 18 – 50 (for NE) with minimum of 9 years of school (JSS3) in the NE from the SR with SOCU. The focus is on urban areas given the availability of private sector actors. The beneficiaries receive starter-pack at the end of the internship which are to be provided by state governments.

Targeted Grant Transfer (TGT): This component is only for the North-East states and the aim is to provide support for IDPs (individuals and Households) in camps, host communities, resettled communities – to relocate to their parent communities or any other community that is willing to accept them to lead meaningful lives.

Iterative Beneficiary Monitoring (IBM)

Iterative beneficiary monitoring is a small scale high frequency data collection mechanism, developed by the poverty team, that collects data from project beneficiaries to create a beneficiary feedback loop and serve as an alert system. The approach improves project efficiency and increase beneficiary engagement and satisfaction. It also helps examine project activities, identify challenges within the project, inform decision-making process and improve project outcomes based on the feedbacks from beneficiaries.

IBM focus for YESSO

The main focus of this piece of work was on understanding the issues around - trainings, job/internship, stipend payment, sustainability and grievance redress mechanism (GRM) for the two of the three intervention components of the project – PWF and S4J, which had beneficiaries being supported as at the time the IBM

5

was designed and implemented. Likewise, the IBM for YESSO only focused on Bauchi state because it is the only state which has beneficiaries for PWF and S4J of all participating states from NE.

Methodology

The IBM is designed to collect information to help create beneficiary feedback loop that allows for quick identification of structural issues that exist within projects and help track progress and improve project performance through high frequency but smaller data collection efforts. Due to the simple and rapid nature of the IBM, samples collected are usually not representative at state level.

However, given that this round was done for only one state1, there is significant representativeness in the two samples drawn for both PWF and S4J programs. For the public workfare program, a random sample of 320 beneficiaries was selected out of 3,489 beneficiaries with phone numbers of the total beneficiary’s number of 4,171. The sample was stratified based on local government areas and gender and the selection was done proportionate to number of beneficiaries across strata. Likewise, 60 beneficiaries were randomly selected from 201 beneficiaries with phone numbers of the total beneficiaries of 606 for the skill for job program. The sample selection was stratified to LGA and sex and proportional to the sizes of each stratum. For the questionnaire, the questions were structured to bring out gaps and issues that may exist within the delivery of the program. The questions centred on the structured processes within the interventions, the questionnaire was programmed into mobile application using Survey Solution and interviews were done through phone calls.

Given the rapid nature of the IBM study and conflict and fragile characterization of the study areas, interviews were conducted using telephone. In all, 320 (74%) interviews were successful out of a total 431 calls made to PWF beneficiaries, and 58 (90%) interviews were successful from 65 calls made to beneficiaries of S4J program. The data collection was done in three (3) weeks and completed in May 2018.

4 PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS ON PWF

In this section, we present the results and discussion of the analysed data from the interviews we had with the beneficiaries of Public Workfare program. Using tables and charts, the presentation of the results focused on key issues that are operational to the program, which we hope will be useful in improving the performance of the project. Starting with the demographic characteristics2 of the beneficiaries, the findings are presented in subsections and each subsection looks at the sequence of operations in the program. On gender distribution, we interviewed more female (55%) than male (45%) which is a good representation of the beneficiary’s registry of the program (Female - 60% and Male - 40%). The average age of the respondents is 26 years with a minimum age of 18 and maximum age of 45 years, while 28% had no formal education, 32% completed only primary, 10% completed JSS and another 11% completed nonconventional education. In total, about 81% of the beneficiaries are in the required educational qualifications while 19% did not meet the criteria.

4.1 ORIENTATION TRAINING Within the program delivery, it is articulated in the project manual that orientation training will be provided to all beneficiaries as induction training into the program. The orientation training covers such things as: taking enrolment data, opening of bank accounts, workshop on program process, structure and principles. The orientation workshop was provided for 3 days in Bauchi for two batches.

1 PWF and S4J programs have been selected for IBM and they are active only in one state, Bauchi 2 The demographic table is in annex

6

Participation in Orientation Training:

About 13 percent of the beneficiaries we spoke with did not attend the program orientation (Table 1). The respondents cited various reasons for their absence from the orientation workshop which included – health problems and family challenges, late notice and even some did not receive notice of the workshop.

Table 1: Did you participate in the orientation workshop?

Participation Freq. Percent

Yes 281 87.27

No 41 12.73

Total 322 100

Reported Orientation Days

About 9% of the respondents could not finish all their required documentations and workshop classes within 3 days. The reasons were that the venue was crowded and there was no proper arrangement for activities carried out during the orientation workshop. However, most of the respondents (91%) completed theirs within the official 3 days. This suggests that it is possible to complete the training within 3 days if proper arrangement is put in place.

Assessment of the Orientation Training

We asked the respondents to assess how the orientation was organised and the activities that was carried out. About 5% of the respondents felt the orientation was not well organised while only 2% opined that some of the activities and workshop during the training were not useful (Table 2). Following this, the respondents itemized their challenges during the orientation workshop that include: large crowd with poor coordination, inadequate supervision, late start to activities, poor accommodation, language barriers (as some speak Fulfulde and not Hausa) (Table 3).

Table 2 How well was the Orientation organized?

Was the training content useful

Freq. Percent Freq. Percent

Well organized 267 95.02 Yes 276 98.22

Not well organized

14 4.98 No 5 1.78

281 100.00 281 100

Table 3.

Challenges during Orientation

1 Crowded hall

2 Inadequate supervision

3 Insufficient transport arrangement

4 Late start to training

11%

45%34%

3% 2% 4% 0%

1 2 3 4 5 7 10

Days

Days of Training (n=280)

7

5 Inadequate accommodation

6 No Fulfulde interpretation

7 Congestion and uncoordinated process

8 Inadequate food

9 Poor quality of food

4.2 WORK ASSIGNMENT A major component of the PWF intervention is the mobilization of the beneficiaries to support different micro-projects in their respective local government areas. In Bauchi, more than three-quarter of the beneficiaries were mobilised for waste and environmental management micro-projects like: cleaning of primary health centres, schools, and other community or local government infrastructures. Likewise, some were mobilised to direct labour for various construction projects (see annex).

Period at ‘the Work’

We asked the beneficiaries that “for the last month - April, how many days did you work in your posting?” Only 51% of the respondents did work3 for at least 20 days in the month, while about 46% reported attendance between 10 and 19 days and 3% had less than 10 days. This shows that half of the beneficiaries did not meet the required attendance.

In the same vein, about 15% of the respondents did work less than the required four hours while 15% worked extra hours. This

indicates two categories of people. First, those who worked less than four hours or less than 20 days might have another job - self-employed for example in labour intensive work, and this might reduce their availability for the PWF assignment. Likewise, those who put more than required days and hours might be heavily dependent on the PWF program with no other income-generating livelihood and exit strategy.

Satisfaction with ‘the Work’

We went further to ask the beneficiaries - how satisfied are they and what are their challenges with the work? About 2% expressed dissatisfaction with the PWF work, while most of them indicated that their major challenge with their assignments is inadequate working tools to carry out their work, while few said inadequate personal protective equipment and inadequate supervision of work are major challenges they have.

Table 4 Satisfaction with assignment

Freq. Percent

Yes 315 98.44

No 5 1.56

Total 320 100

3 The full distribution of days of work is at the annex.

3%46% 51%

Less10 Btw10_19 Atleast20

Days

Days at Work in last Month (n=320)

15%

69%

15%

Less_4hrs Just_4hrs Morethan_4hrs

Hours in a day (n=320)

8

4.3 STIPEND PAYMENT About 80% of the respondents never got paid every month for reasons like omission from payroll, delay from the PWF office. Likewise, about 41% of the beneficiaries interviewed reported receiving less than 7,500 Naira in a month for reasons like, unknown deduction from the PWF office, and not meeting required attendance.

Last Payment (March, 2018)

We asked about receipt of last payment4 and how much they received. 68% of the beneficiaries interviewed had not received stipends for March as at May we had the interviews. Those who had received their stipends got 4,000 and 7,500 Naira, on an average of 7,161 Naira (Table 5).

In concluding this section, we asked them about their challenges with the payment. The respondents main challenges were: irregular payment of stipend, deduction from stipend and payment of unofficial N500 – N1,000 to their focal persons or supervisors.

Table 5 How much did you receive last month?

variable mean sd min max N

Stipend 7161.765 641.6322 4000 7500 102

4 By May, 2018, the program state office informed our team that the beneficiaries have been paid their stipends for March but preparing payment for April.

20%

59%

80%

41%

Paid every month (n=320)

Received less (n=318)

Yes No

"A respondent said they are being coerced to pay 500 naira each at the end of every month.

Failure to do so attracts a decrease in the next month's stipends, because the supervisor

marks them absent for some days even if they came to work. "

Yes, 32%

No, 68%

Receipt of March Payment (n=320)

9

4.4 SAVINGS AND GRIEVANCE REDRESS

The PWF program supports mobilization of saving for investment in beneficiaries’ livelihoods. Of the 320 beneficiaries we spoke with, about 48% did not have savings from their stipends and 68% of the rest that had savings had invested the saving into both farm and nonfarm enterprises. Moreover, about 65% of the beneficiaries started income generating activities after joining the program.

Grievance reports from the beneficiaries is about 9% and most of the issues reported are: absent or lazy co-workers, ill treatment of supervisors, inadequate working tools and delay or deduction from stipends. Most of the issues are reported to either PWF staff, community leaders, LGA CDOs or supervisors. More so, about 66% of the reported cases are never resolved.

5 PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS ON S4J

We present results and discussion on the beneficiaries of Skills for Jobs (S4J) program in this section with the sole aim to explore structural issues within the program that will possibly require interventions from the task team of the project. The issues focused in here included but not limited to orientation in the program, first level of trainings, internship and stipend payment.

On the demographic characteristics5: there is a fair representation of men (53%) and women (47%) in the program with an average age of 25 years and about half of the respondents competed senior secondary school (SSS) as their highest educational qualification. Further, the educational qualification shows that 5% of the beneficiaries completed primary education only, which shows that they are not eligible to be in the program based on eligibility criteria of the program.

5.1 ORIENTATION TRAINING About 14% of the respondents did not attend the orientation training which was done for the beneficiaries for various reasons. Most of it was connected to health and family demands. The orientation program was rated satisfied by most of the beneficiaries with few challenges. The challenges include: poor guidance on opening of bank account, inadequate accommodation and food.

Orientation Freq. Percent

Yes 50 86%

No 8 14%

Total 58 100

5 See the annex for distribution of demographics

52% 68% 65%

48% 32% 35%

Saving Invested IGA

Saving, Investment and IGA (n=320)

Yes No

9%

34%

91%

66%

Reported Grievance (n=320)

Grievance resolved (n=29)

Yes No

10

5.2 FIRST LEVEL TRAININGS

Participation at Trainings

The first level trainings in S4J program contains life-skills, vocational and entrepreneurship, in that order. For our respondents, 10% did not participate in the life skill session, and another 5% did not participate in both vocational and entrepreneurship sessions. For those that did not participate, their reasons were that – they did not get invitation or notice of the training, travelled, or needed to attend to family needs.

Attendance at trainings

Among those that attended trainings, about 13 percent did not complete the life skill and about 27% and 16% did not complete vocational and entrepreneurship trainings respectively. The main reasons why they did not complete the trainings include – inability to get transport fare to the training location, family demand particularly the training was conducted during Ramadan period and health challenges.

6% 2% 6%

87%

2 7 8 10

Attendance at Life Skill Training (n=52)

9%2% 5% 5% 5%

73%

10 12 16 17 18 20

Attendance at Vocational Training (n=55)

2% 4% 7% 2% 2%

84%

1 2 10 15 18 20

Attendance during Entrepreneurship Training

(n=55)

90%

95%

95%

10%

5%

5%

life-skil (n=58)

Vocational (n=58)

Entrepreneurship (n=58)

Yes No

11

Adequacy of Training

All the beneficiaries we spoke with believed that the entrepreneurship training days was adequate while about 6% were of the opinion that the life skill training days was not adequate and the 2% believed that vocational training days was not adequate either. However, the situation at the training became clearer when asked what their challenges were during the training, and the main issues were around timing -as training took place during Ramadan.

5.3 INTERNSHIP After the first level of training, the beneficiaries of S4J were mobilized for internship training, which is referred to as second level of training by the program. Most of the respondents had their internship in fashion design and tailoring, followed by carpentry, ICT and electrical works. The intern posting was done after interviews with the beneficiaries to match what they wanted and what the interview panel believed they are suited for. Therefore, we asked about how they were selected for the posting and their satisfaction with their posting. Everyone

that believed they got what they wanted for posting and were satisfied. On the contrary, 3% of those that were of the opinion that their postings were chosen for them were not satisfied.

Attendance during Internship

It is required for an intern to have a satisfactory attendance of 20 days a month in this program. Therefore, we asked for the last month under the training, how many days they were present in their posting centres. 4% of the respondents had less than 10 days attendance and about 27% having between 10 and 19 days attendance.

94%

98%

100%

6%

2%

0%

Life skill (n=52)

Vocational (n=55)

Entrepreneurship (n=55)

Adequacy of Training Days

Yes No

100%

97%

0%

3%

I C H O S E I T ( N = 2 4 )

I T W A S A S S I G N E D T O M E ( N = 3 1 )

Sat is fact ion with Internship

Yes No

4%

27%

69%

Less_10 days Btw10_19 days Atleast_20 days

Interns' Attendance in S4J (n=55)

12

The respondents expressed their main challenges during the internship period include – inadequate working tools and materials, high cost of transport to work, and trainers not willing to teach them. They further suggested that regular payment of stipends and provision of tools and materials for the training will go a long way in improving the interns’ experience.

5.4 STIPEND PAYMENT Having completed the program, we asked the respondents if they received their last month payment. About 22% of the respondents did not receive their last payment as at May, 2018 having concluded their intern by February, 2018. For those who received payment, the average stipend was N6,813 with the minimum and maximum receipts being N3,500 and N7,500, usually prorated on beneficiaries’ attendance.

Stipend (Naira) mean sd min Max N

6813.953 1112.822 3500 7500 43

Regularity of Stipends

About 38% of the respondents had received less than the usual N7,500 per month, and most of them did not know why there were deductions from their stipends with exception of few who knew that it was because of not meeting the required attendance. Further, about half of the respondents did not received their stipend every month.

69%

20%

7%

4%

No challenge

Inadequate working tools

High transport cost to work

Trainer not willing to teach

Internship's Challenges (n=55)

47%

62%

53%

38%

Monthly payment (n=55)

Received less (n=55)

Stipend Payment

Yes No

No22%

Yes78%

Received last month (n=55)

13

Challenges with Stipend

About 13% of the respondents, on beneficiary list of S4J, reported to have never received stipend throughout the program, and some 6% are being owed stipend payment between 2 and 3 months. In addition, delay in payment, not getting full payment and absence of bank in their communities were challenges for some respondents.

5.5 SAVING AND INVESTMENT About half of the respondents did not save from the stipends, one-third did not invest from it, and 67% did not start any income generating activities during the process. Also, the respondents reported of saving average of N3,000 per month from their stipend and average of N26,000 during the period of the program.

mean SD min max N

Saving in a month 2,982.76 1,332.846 500 6,000 29

Savings all together 26,534.48 12,283.8 8000 50,000 29

2%

4%

7%

11%

13%

16%

47%

Yet to be paid 2 months

Yet to be paid 3 months

Not getting full payment

Delay in payment

Never been paid stipend

No bank in the community

None

Challenges with Stipend Payment (n=55)

…. My mother was sick and had to travel to take care of her, I was dropped and wasn't

posted for internship...

…. I travelled for a month to write exams after the entrepreneurial training and was dropped

out of the program…

...I did not receive stipends throughout the program…

….I was only paid stipend once throughout the program…

53%

66%

33%

47%

34%

67%

Saving (n=55)

Investment (n=29)

IGA (n=55)

Yes No

14

5.6 GRIEVANCE AND REDRESS Deduction of stipend, delay of payment, and non-payment of stipends are the major cases of grievance reported by beneficiaries to NDE. None of the beneficiaries who reported to have made official complaints got solutions. In all, 15% of the respondents claimed to have reported grievance cases.

Certification Test

About one-third of the respondents did not take part in the organized certification test for various reasons. The reasons are much linked to health challenges and family demands. This is a big attrition value given the huge amount of money paid by the project for all the project beneficiaries to take this test conducted by NABTEB.

Use of Trainings

While asking respondents to assess themselves about their competence level based on training and skills acquired, 5% of the respondents reported ‘not competent’ and only 18% was average while 76% reported very competent in handling jobs using their acquired skills.

Working with Skills

Having finished their internship supported by the S4J program, we asked during the interview if respondents have started doing jobs using their skills. About two out of five respondents have not begun to work using their acquired training. These could be either they are not competent or they

Yes, 71%

No, 29%

Certification Test

Very competent, 76%

Average, 18%

Not compete

nt, 5%

Conpetence Level

6%

26%

30%

43%

I work with other graduates

I work with my trainer

I work on my own

I have not started

Working with Skills (n=54)

Yes15%

No85%

Grievance Reported (n=55)

15

don’t have equipment or tools necessary to take on a job. In contrast, a good number of the respondents have started working using their trainings either on their own (30%), working with their trainers (26%) or with fellow graduates from the program (6%).

6 CONCLUSION

6.1 STRUCTURAL ISSUES Key structural issues emerge from this research and very relevant among them include:

Public Workfare

1. The orientation training was characterized with many challenges: likes - there was a short notice to orientation, high rate of absence and the orientation venue was crowded and with inadequate coordination, language barrier (Fulfulde).

2. There was low or average attendance at workfare postings. 3. Stipends were not paid regularly and consistent with attendance. 4. Supervisors exploit and seek rent with the beneficiaries. The supervisors were not being paid or

incentive within the program and therefore levied each beneficiary between N500 to N1,000 per month.

5. High rate of unresolved grievances: Most of the reported cases have not been resolved.

S4J program:

1. The timing of the first level training was a challenge: the training occurred during Ramadan fasting period and that placed family demands on many beneficiaries and led to high attritions during the trainings.

2. Inadequate training materials and incentives for trainers 3. Delay in payment, payment cut and non-payment 4. Low saving, investment and establishment of income generating activities 5. Low attendance for skill certification test

6.2 CONCLUSION The YESSO interventions provide substantial opportunities and social supports to lift its target beneficiaries from poverty and establish sustainable livelihoods through both public work fare and skill for job programs. However, the programs are not insulated from delivery challenges but close monitoring could help abate. This IBM has shown that critical to the success of YESSO PWF and S4J are issues of delay, cut and non-payment of beneficiaries’ stipends, low saving and attritions at training.

16

7 ANNEX I

Demography: PWF Beneficiaries

Gender Freq. Percent

Female 177 55%

Male 322 45%

Total 322 100%

Educational Qualification Freq. Percent Cum.

No formal 89 27.64 27.64

Primary completed 103 31.99 59.63

JSS completed 33 10.25 69.88

SSS completed 59 18.32 88.2

Post-Secondary (A-level, OND, NCE, D 2 0.62 88.82

Tertiary (HND, Bachelor, Masters) 1 0.31 89.13

Others (Qur’anic, adult edu etc.) 35 10.87 100

Total 322 100

Age mean SD min max N

26.35404 5.474278 18 45 322

Demography of S4J Beneficiaries

Gender Freq. Percent

Female 27 46.55

Male 31 53.45

Total 58 100

Educational qualification Freq Percent

Primary completed 5 8.62%

JSS completed 13 22.41%

SSS completed 31 53.45%

Post-Secondary 9 15.52%

Total 58 100.00

Age Mean SD Min Max n

25.2069 4.506364 18 37 58

PWF beneficiaries Micro-project distribution in the sample.

Micro-project assignment Freq. Percent

Environment and Waste Management 293 91.6%

17

Direct labor in construction sites 21 6.6%

Traffic Cadet 1 0.3%

Child minder 2 0.6%

Local security 3 0.9%

Total 320 100%