TIP 2000-01 Evaluation Programme

An overview of the methodology

Carlos BarahonaStatistical Services CentreUniversity of Reading, UK

Lilongwe 19th September 2001

Modular structureMonitoring TIP distribution

Food Production and Security

A Quantitative Study of Markets and Livelihood Security

A Qualitative Study of Markets and Livelihood Security

Agricultural Communications and the HIV/AIDS leaflets

Consultations with the Poor on Safety Nets

Monitoring TIP distribution

Interviews with key informants at all levels:DA personnel before and after distributionATF, VTF and TIPLU

Monitoring of distribution

174 monitoring days were monitored

Survey work108 villages selected in all 27 districtsIndividual interviews with TIP recipients and non-recipients, VTA members, and distributors

Food Production and Security

A stratified random sample survey of national coverage

– All 27 districts– 108 villages– 3030 households interviewed– Questionnaires in Chichewa and

Tumbuka

A Quantitative Study of Markets and Livelihood

SecurityA stratified random sample survey of national

coverage with a questionnaire based on findings of participatory work

26 districts (Likoma not included)60 villages1789 households interviewedQuestionnaires in Chichewa and Tumbuka

A Qualitative Study of Markets and Livelihood Security

Based on qualitative methods.

Pays more attention to language, based on case studies

Bring out diversity in order to clarify wider phenomena

Work done in 12 sites purposively selected to include a variety of settings throughout the country

108 days of spent living at villages and discussing with villagers

Agricultural Communications and HIV/AIDS messages

A combination of participatory and survey work

29 villages selected using stratified random sampling throughout Malawi

Participatory work based on FG discussions of media, messages, symbols and pictures

Survey of men, women, boys and girls; 848 individual interviews

Consultations with the Poor on Safety Nets

Covers TIP and Direct Welfare Transfers

lessons about what the rural poor think would be fair methods beneficiary SELECTION and fair ways of MANAGING the benefits

23 randomly selected villages –focus group discussionsTools:

social mappingcard games to simulate beneficiary selectionscoring of alternativesseasonal calendarskey informant interviews (village heads)

Net impact of TIP

Looking at the multi-dimensional aspects of the impact of Starter PackTriangulating the estimates of production and months of food produced through

Year to year comparisonsRecipients versus non-recipientsFarmers’ perceptions and experienceIndependent measures of ‘impact’ from each module in the evaluation.

Poverty classification

Based on assets and incomeDoes not attempt to define a poverty lineIntended to allow comparisons of poverty profiles of TIP recipients and non-recipients

Assets dimension

• A weighted index that includes ownership of:

Chicken ,ducks ,guinea fowls, doves, pigs, goats, cattle, radio ownership, bicycle ownership, oxcart ownership

Income dimension

• All crops• Small business • Crafts or artisan

work • Livestock sales • Remittances • Pension

• Ganyu (weeding)• Salary • Sale of fish • Sale of charcoal or

firewood• Rent • Any other income

Includes all income from

 

Assets index

Income index

Less than 2

2 to 30 31 to 70 71 or higher

0 to 100 1 1 2 3

>100 to 300

1 2 3 4

>300 to 800

2 3 4 5

>800 3 4 5 5

The evaluation team