cost effectiveness
Cost-efficiency analysis Conditional Cash for Education and Protection
This case study summarizes an analysis conducted by CARE using the Dioptra tool to generate cost-efficiency estimates for Conditional Cash for Education and Protection in Jordan. The analysis revealed that:
● Conditional Cash for Education and Protection cost $1,474 per child on average, across nine projects within the program portfolio.
● Tweaking the transfer size and frequency can affect cost-efficiency by more than 30 percent. It can free up funds to reach at least 40 percent more children with conditional cash, or allow existing recipient households to benefit from other economic resilience interventions.
● Providing awareness sessions on the importance of education is a small cost component of conditional cash that could be cost-effective.
● Different interventions are required for different groups of children. At minimum, the children receiving conditional cash should be differentiated by age: young (6-11) and old (12-16).
● Providing conditional cash for the full school year of at least 10 months is believed to be more effective and protective for children in need.
● Despite its effectiveness, cash incentives are unlikely to be a sustainable intervention to ensure children’s school attendance. It could benefit from other supporting interventions that address social barriers preventing children from attending school.
● Based on further assessments on different approaches and best practices, the program team intends to test a gradual reduction in transfer amounts for 10 months per year over 3 years, differentiated by age group, including livelihoods support for all recipient households, and referrals to Emergency Cash Assistance for highly vulnerable households.
Cost-efficiency estimates are cited for learning purposes only, and should not be used as the sole basis for future budgeting or benchmarking. All cost-efficiency estimates include Direct Project Costs, Direct Shared Costs, and Indirect Costs. Read More...
● Conditional Cash for Education and Protection cost $1,474 per child on average, across nine projects within the program portfolio.
● Tweaking the transfer size and frequency can affect cost-efficiency by more than 30 percent. It can free up funds to reach at least 40 percent more children with conditional cash, or allow existing recipient households to benefit from other economic resilience interventions.
● Providing awareness sessions on the importance of education is a small cost component of conditional cash that could be cost-effective.
● Different interventions are required for different groups of children. At minimum, the children receiving conditional cash should be differentiated by age: young (6-11) and old (12-16).
● Providing conditional cash for the full school year of at least 10 months is believed to be more effective and protective for children in need.
● Despite its effectiveness, cash incentives are unlikely to be a sustainable intervention to ensure children’s school attendance. It could benefit from other supporting interventions that address social barriers preventing children from attending school.
● Based on further assessments on different approaches and best practices, the program team intends to test a gradual reduction in transfer amounts for 10 months per year over 3 years, differentiated by age group, including livelihoods support for all recipient households, and referrals to Emergency Cash Assistance for highly vulnerable households.
Cost-efficiency estimates are cited for learning purposes only, and should not be used as the sole basis for future budgeting or benchmarking. All cost-efficiency estimates include Direct Project Costs, Direct Shared Costs, and Indirect Costs. Read More...
Socio-Economic and Financial Profitability Analysis of Rice Seed Production by Women Groups “Nawe Nuze” in the framework of “Win Win” Program in Burundi
mplemented in 6 communes of Kirundo and Gitega provinces in Burundi, the 4-year research program tests an innovative approach « gender transformative » for the agriculture sector. The approach begins with the development of critical thinking aiming at defying discriminatory social beliefs and norms, via a reflective model, community dialogue and collective action. CARE is evaluating how this innovative approach could improve gender equity and the way a particular attention on power relations and a wake of conscience could produce durable effects on food security, nutrition and population economic well-being. The ultimate goal of this research is to compare (1) a model of gender transformative (EKATA4 model) for gender equity and (2) a typical gender integration approach in the agriculture model (gender light model (light, normal or usual). [63 pages] Read More...