Operational Performance of the Safety Net Transfer Modality Research Initiative

Akhter Ahmed, Esha Sraboni, and Fiona ShabaInternational Food Policy Research Institute

Stakeholder Workshop3 December 2013, Dhaka

Transfer Modality Research Initiative

TMRI with 5 arms: 1. Only cash2. Only food3. Food + cash4. Nutrition behavior change communications (BCC)

+ cash5. Nutrition BCC + food

WFP implements TMRI; IFPRI evaluates it Implemented in 5 upazilas in north-west, 5 upazilas

in south

Transfer amounts

The value of transfer per household is the same for each of the 5 transfer modalities: 1,500 taka ($18.75) per household per month

Cash: transferred to beneficiaries within the first week of every month through mobile phone money transfer service

Food: 30 kg of rice; 2 kg of mosur (lentil) pulse; and 2 kg of micronutrient fortified cooking oil

Food-cash combination: total transfer is a combination of 50% food (15 kg of rice; 1 kg of mosur pulse; and 1 kg of cooking oil) and 50% cash (750 taka)

TMRI Participants and control households

• For the pilot test evaluation, we use 50 clusters (villages) and 10 households per village for each treatment arm and the control. Thus, each treatment and control includes 500 households

• 3 transfer modalities, nutrition BCC + cash, and control in the Northern region: 250 clusters (villages) and 2,500 households

• 3 transfer modalities, nutrition BCC + food, and control in the Southern region: 250 clusters (villages) and 2,500 households (10 households per cluster)

• Total sample size: 500 clusters and 5,000 households

• 4,000 beneficiaries and 1,000 control households

TMRI upazilas in the northwest and the southern regions

IFPRI Process Evaluation of TMRI

In October 2012, IFPRI carried out a quantitative survey household survey of TMRI participants and non-participant control households : randomly selected 1,000 households from the baseline sampleConducted in-depth qualitative interviews with TMRI participants, non-participants, community members and implementing partners (WFP and ESDO)

Page 6

Implementation

Implementation structure To maintain the integrity of the research initiative, it is

essential that beneficiaries receive their due transfers in a timely, error-free manner

The transfers and activities must remain standard across all TMRI participants (beneficiaries), and the influence of external confounding factors must be minimized.

WFP has a strong field presence and a dedicated team for the TMRI to ensure that the activities are carried out to plan and meet the expected standard. A detailed implementation plan ensures timely delivery of the food and cash transfers and nutrition BCC to the participating women, each of whom were issued a participant card and an identification number.

The TMRI activities are undertaken at the field level through the Eco-Social Development Organization (ESDO). WFP also takes measures to sensitize and build the awareness of local government, participants, and other stakeholders about the TMRI in order to ensure smooth implementation.

Implementation structure (2)

WFP is responsible for procuring the appropriate food commodities and ensuring their appropriate packaging, storage, and quality control. Food is packaged individually, and each food entitlement includes a 15 kilogram (kg) bag of rice, 1 kg bags of lentils, and 1 liter bottle of cooking oil. Individual packaging makes for a more streamlined distribution process.

For cash transfers, mobile phone technology has been introduced with the expectation that it would provide a more secure, efficient, and transparent modality to distribute cash entitlements and reduce the opportunity for leakage. WFP introduced this technology via ESDO and an authorized bank, Dutch-Bangla Bank Limited.

To preserve the integrity of the research, all 4,000 participants as well those in the 1,000 control households under the TMRI received a basic mobile handset (Nokia 1280) valued at approximately US$21 and a Banglalink SIM card, even though the mobile is only required for the participants receiving cash.

Since the intervention began in May 2012, participants have received their monthly entitlements (including food, cash, and/or nutrition BCC training sessions) on time, and no incidences of leakage or loss have occurred.

The pilot of mobile phone cash transfers was rolled out beginning in July 2012.

ESDO staffers mentioned that they had noticed a stark difference between participants who received nutrition BCC training and those who did not. One ESDO staffer said the participants in training sessions tended to be less superstitious; “The doors to their brains,” he said, “are open.”

Another success ESDO workers noted was that participants in the BCC training sessions adapted more promptly to mobile phone cash transfers, presumably because this group of participants was more accustomed to training.

Eventually, all TMRI participants adopted the mobile phone cash transfer system quite well. These findings indicate that it is incorrect to assume the very poor women cannot adopt mobile phone technologies.

Successes

The content and delivery of the nutrition BCC training sessions were inadequate in their initial weeks. In June 2012, more community nutrition workers were hired and trained, supervision tools were revised, and refresher courses were mandated for existing community nutrition workers. Subsequently, the nutrition BCC component has continued to show improvements each month.

The mobile phone networks used for some of the TMRI cash transfers were not always accessible during distribution times, so beneficiaries had to wait to receive their entitlement.

Initially, ESDO field staffers encountered certain problems related to the experimental nature of the TMRI. Unlike other safety net programs, union council chairmen and upazila administration were not involved in the selection process at all. This led to some backlash from people who were not selected, wanting to know why they could not receive the much-needed assistance provided by the TMRI despite being as poor as those who were chosen to participate.

Challenges

Distribution Process

Most beneficiaries were happy with the location of the distribution center: those receiving food were slightly less satisfied

Cash Only Food Only Food+Cash BCC+Cash BCC+Food0

20

40

60

80

100 96

87

80

91

97

91 93

84

North South

Per

cent

age

of p

arti

cipa

nts

• Transport costs are more for participants in the South

• Transport costs are more for those receiving food

• However, it is evident that transport costs are not too high to discourage participants from coming to collect transfer

Transport costs to and from distribution center

Cash O

nly

Food Only

Food+Cash

BCC+Cash

BCC+Food

All Tre

atmen

t0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

6

14 14

7

10

13

20

15

31

20

North South

Cos

t (ta

ka)

Transport time to and from distribution center is roughly the same for participants in the North and South:just around an hour

Cash Only Food Only Food+Cash BCC+Cash BCC+Food All Treatment0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

0.9 0.9 0.9

1.1

0.9

1.1

1.2

1.1

1.2

1.1

North South

Ave

rage

com

mut

ing

tim

e (h

ours

)

The average waiting time at the distribution center is around half an hour

Cash Only Food Only Food+Cash BCC+Cash BCC+Food All Treatment0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0.65

0.45

0.68

0.6 0.590.54

0.64

0.550.52

0.56

North South

Ave

rage

wai

ting

tim

e (h

ours

)

Cash transfer through mobile phones

Cash Only Food+Cash BCC+Cash All0

20

40

60

80

100

32 33

18

28

68 67

82

72

The majority of participants in the North prefer mobile phones as the

medium of cash transfer

Hand-to-hand Mobile phone

Per

cent

age

of p

arti

cipa

nts

Faced difficulties No difficulties0

20

40

60

80

100

2

98

Most of the participants did not face any technical difficulties with

mobile cash transfer

Per

cent

age

of p

arti

cipa

nts

rece

ivin

g m

obil

e ca

sh tr

ansf

ers

in th

e no

rth

BCC Training

BCC training

North South0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

89

70

More participants in the north regularly at-tended the training

sessions

% o

f part

icip

ants

North South0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

56

92

Community nutrition workers in the south are more likely to pay home

visits if beneficiaries miss training sessions

% o

f part

icip

ants

Number of participants usually present in one session

Page 20

North South All1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

9.09.4 9.2

Num

ber

of p

arti

cipa

nts

Who is present in the training sessions for influential community members?

Page 21

Use of Transfer

Percentage of participants who consumed all of the rice in transfer

Page 23

Food Only Food+Cash BCC+Food All0

20

40

60

80

100

120

94

1009798 97 97 97

North South

Per

cent

age

of fo

od r

ecip

ient

par

tici

pant

s

Percentage of participants who consumed all of the pulses in transfer

Page 24

Food Only Food+Cash BCC+Food All0

20

40

60

80

100

120

84

938988

9691 92

North South

Per

cent

age

of fo

od r

ecip

ient

par

tici

pant

s

Percentage of participants who consumed all of the cooking oil in transfer

Page 25

Food Only Food+Cash BCC+Food All0

20

40

60

80

100

120

85

9691

98 98 99 98

North South

Per

cent

age

of fo

od r

ecip

ient

par

tici

pant

s

Preference for transfers and other aspects

Most participants expressed a preference for the transfer type they were receiving

Cash Only Food Only Food+Cash BCC+Cash0

20

40

60

80

100

120

99

35

12

92

0

43

2 31

22

86

5

North

Cash Food Food+Cash

Per

cent

age

of p

arti

cipa

nts

Cash Only Food Only Food+Cash BCC+Food0

20

40

60

80

100

120

97

1721

8

1

71

4

90

2

11

75

2

South

Cash Food Food+Cash

Per

cent

age

of p

arti

cipa

nts

Participants reporting a reduction in private transfers owing to TMRI participation

Cash Only Food Only Food+Cash BCC+Cash BCC+Food All Treatment0

25

50

75

100

10

46

97

22

1416 16 17

North South

Per

cent

age

of p

arti

cipa

nts

Percentage of participants who feel resentment from those in the community not receiving a transfer

Page 29

North South0

20

40

60

4744

Per

cent

age

of p

artic

ipan

ts