1

Document of

The World Bank

RESTRUCTURING PAPER

ON A

PROPOSED PROJECT RESTRUCTURING

OF THE

NATIONAL RURAL LIVELIHOOD PROJECT

P104164

{July5, 2011}

TO THE

REPUBLIC OF INDIA

{May 23, 2013}

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

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

AAP Annual Action Plans

CIS Community Investment Support

GEF Global Environmental Facility

GoI Government of India

IDA International Development Association

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MIS Management Information System

MORD Ministry of Rural Development

NMMU National Mission Management Unit

NRLM National Rural Livelihood Mission

NRLP National Rural Livelihood Project

ORAF Operational Risk Assessment Framework

PDO Project Development Objective

PIP Participatory Identification of Poor

SERP Society for Elimination of Rural Poverty

SHG Self Help Group

SPIP State Perspective and Implementation Plans

SRLM State Rural Livelihood Missions

TA Technical Assistance

Regional Vice President: Isabel Guerrero

Country Director: Onno Ruhl

Sector Manager / Director: Shobha Shetty/John Henry Stein

Task Team Leader

Parmesh Shah

3

INDIA: NATIONAL RURAL LIVELIHOODS PROJECT

CONTENTS

A. SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................................... 4

B. PROJECT STATUS .......................................................................................................................... 5

C. PROPOSED CHANGES .................................................................................................................. 7 D. APRAISAL SUMMARY……………………………………………………………………12

ANNEX 1: COMPARISON OF PRE AND POST RESTRUCTURED PROJECT ...................... 13

ANNEX 2: REVISED RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND MONITORING ................................... .14 ANNEX 3: OPERATIONAL RISK ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK (ORAF)

4

INDIA: NATIONAL RURAL LIVELIHOODS PROJECT

RESTRUCTURING PAPER

A. SUMMARY

The project was envisioned to build on the successful experience of rural livelihoods projects at

the state level (five of which are ongoing), and to roll out the livelihoods approach to 100 of

India's poorest districts. In addition, the original project concept envisioned the creation of a

"center of excellence" at the national level so that Government of India (GoI) could support

states in their efforts to expand access to the benefits of livelihoods programs to the poorest. It

also envisaged a transformation of the Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD), GoI, at the

central level. It was proposed that the GoI will move away from an entitlement based approach

for resource allocation to the participating States to a more performance based approach, through

changes in policies and systems. The MORD would also redefine its role as a TA provider to the

more backward States, rather than just a disburser of finances. The project would support the

broader national level programme, the National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM), in the

poorest states to demonstrate a new approach and also support the delivery mechanism for the

NRLM in these states.

The Government of India (GoI) requested for a restructuring of the National Rural Livelihood

Project (NRLP), Credit Number IDA 49870 (dated July 5, 2011), through a portfolio review

meeting between the DEA, Ministry of Finance, GoI and the World Bank held on January 15,

2013. The original credit proposed and sanctioned by the Board, on July 5, 2011 was of the

amount US$ 1000 million (SDR 635.8 million). The project was declared effective on July 18,

2011. The first twenty two months of implementation have resulted in many significant changes

at program and policy level. All the 13 participating states in the NRLP have established special

purpose vehicles called the State Rural Livelihood Missions (SRLM) that implements the project

from the State to the Block level. The project is currently being implemented in 78 districts and

183 Blocks across thirteen participating States with coverage of 1.1 million participating

households. These households have been capitalized through project funds of US$ 7 million and

commercial bank financing of US$ 30 million. The initial results show that the core design of the

project is still valid. However, establishment of the SRLMs, subsequent staffing and roll out of

the project has taken longer than originally envisaged in the project thus resulting in a lag of

more than a year in the project implementation.

In addition, at the GoI level, several business processes that would have allowed for recruitment

of a full-fledged human resources team and procurement of system for support agencies to

provide technical assistance to the participating states has not been implemented as originally

planned. By March 31, 2013, the expenditure in the project was much below what had been

envisaged (against total allocation of SDR 635.8 million, disbursement as on April 20, 2013

stands at SDR 13.213 million [equivalent of USD 20.374 million] at 2.08% of the original

allocation, as compared to 40% planned disbursements till end of year 2). This delay in project

implementation entails a risk to the achievement of the project development objectives within the

given project time frame of five years. Series of institutional and program assessments were

5

conducted by the Bank team through its field visits, consultation with the participating states, and

implementation support missions, (carried out in October, 2011; April, 2012; August, 2012 and

April, 2013). A special study to recommend changes in business processes has also been

completed. Based on these findings and discussions with Ministry of Rural Development

(MORD), GoI, it is proposed to restructure the project (Level 2).

It is proposed that the project is now scaled down in size to IDA credit of US$ 500 million and

the project period extended by one year ( to end in December 31,2017 instead of December

31,2016). GoI has agreed to co-finance the investments at the block level based on performance

and progress of the participating states so that geographical and household coverage of the

project will remain unchanged. GoI has indicated its interest in requesting for additional finance

if project performance picks up. There will be no change in the Project Development Objective

(PDO), which is to establish efficient and effective institutional platforms of the rural poor that

enables them to increase household income through sustainable livelihood enhancements and

improved access to financial and selected public services. There is also no change in the

components within the project. While there is no change in the indicators, result values have

changed in the Result Framework due to the proposed scaling down of the project. Results

framework has been revised to incorporate for extension of the project by a year. It is now

proposed to shift the focus of the project implementation to the state level with all project

components and eligible expenditures/investments within them, being available for financing at

the state level. Consequently, the investments at the GoI level are being reduced. The role of the

GoI will therefore be more in the nature of project coordination, limited technical assistance,

disbursement and monitoring. As the total financing is reduced, funds have been reallocated

between the components. More rigorous criteria for fund allocation to the participating States

will be followed and a fully operational SRLM will be a precondition for a participating state to

receive project funds. The disbursement schedule over the balance period of the project has

also been modified. The Financing Agreement of the project will be modified to accommodate

all the above changes and will form the basis for the implementation of the restructured project.

These changes are summarized in Annex 1.

B. PROJECT STATUS

NRLP envisaged three types of impacts. Firstly, it envisaged a transformation of the MORD,

GoI, at the central level. It was proposed that the GoI will move away from an entitlement based

approach for resource allocation to the participating States to a more performance based

approach, through changes in policies and systems. The MORD would also redefine its role as a

Technical Assistance(TA) provider to the more backward States, rather than just a disburser of

finances. Secondly, it required all the participating states to establish an exclusive institutional

structure to deliver the project through the autonomous SRLMs which would be adequately

staffed by relevant professionals. Thirdly, the project proposed investments in social inclusion

and mobilization through promoting good quality institutions of the poor (SHGs and their

federations), financial inclusion through access to savings, credit and other financial services,

economic inclusion through access to economic services, technologies and markets and access to

social protection services and entitlements.

6

The project has been rated as satisfactory in terms of achievement of development objective and

moderately satisfactory in terms of implementation progress in the recently concluded World

Bank implementation support mission. The key areas of progress of the project since it was

declared effective in July 2011 are summarized below:

Policy and Program Reforms: The project has resulted in significant changes in the

implementation and policy framework for NRLM. Firstly, MORD has transitioned from an

entitlement based system of fund allocation to participating states to a performance based system

based on Annual Action Plans (AAP) and Budgets with end year result indicators. The AAPs

allow the participating states to adopt a targeted, phased and geographically intensive approach

towards poverty reduction. This change has ensured that adequate emphasis is given to quality

of program inputs (e.g. Professional human resources) and outputs (e.g. quality of Self Help

Groups {SHG}). Participating states are also in the process of preparation of a longer term State

Perspective and Implementation Plan (SPIP), which lays out the poverty, social inclusion and

financial inclusion diagnostics and implementation strategy for implementing the rural poverty

reduction programs over the entire five year project period. Secondly, a household targeting

methodology based on Participatory Identification of Poor (PIP), which has been tried out in

various World Bank supported programs, has been accepted as a methodology for identifying

poor households for NRLM. Thirdly, capital subsidy to the poor has been replaced by a

community investment fund which can be revolved and enhanced by the community through

fund revolution thus increasing the rate of capitalization of the poor through access to

commercial credit. This has created an enabling environment for satisfactory implementation of

the project in future.

Institutional Reforms: The MORD has established a National Mission Management Unit

(NMMU) at the central level that is staffed by 35 professionals drawn from different fields. The

NMMU team has been providing TA to the participating states in establishing their project

implementation structures and some support in specific programmatic thematic areas. Right to

Information and Grievance Handling Systems has started functioning in the project. In order to

assist several participating states to kick start a quality program at the village level, that can act

as a demonstration for the future scaling up, a Resource Unit has been established in Andhra

Pradesh (which successfully implemented a Bank supported statewide rural livelihood project).

The need/demand for such TA is very high and expands as the state implementation structures

develop and expand. Recruitment of TA providers in various areas through NMMU has been

cumbersome and delayed due to the current business process at the MORD level. However, the

recent Cabinet Committee of GoI decision to establish an autonomous Society (which will house

the NMMU) is expected to bring additional improvements in the area. It is agreed to expand the

partnership framework of the project and decentralize it to participating states so that they can

have more choice and seek TA in an efficient manner.

All the 13 participating States in the NRLP have established SRLMs to implement the project

from the state to the block level. Each of these SRLMs has a Governing Body and decision

making committee called the Executive Committee and has appointed CEOs. Human Resource

strategy for the project visualized recruitment, training and placement of about 10,000 rural

livelihood professionals across the 13 participating States over the project period. As this is a

large effort requiring professionalization of the service delivery architecture within the State

7

Governments, it has taken longer than expected. As of April30, 2013, 2340 professionals have

been recruited and placed (31% of approved positions). As human resources are the key input for

delivering of the project, lag in recruitment has been the major reason for delay in implementing

the project as per plan. This has also had a cascading effect in terms of opening and equipping

offices at the lower levels of districts and blocks and eventually village level implementation.

Subsequent investments are also being stepped up in systems development including financial,

MIS, Monitoring&Evaluation and project management at the State level.

Program Progress:

NRLP has been rolled out across 78 districts and 183 blocks in the thirteen participating states.

The program has initiated mobilization of 1.1 million households into 100,000 Self Help Groups.

Of these, 27500 SHGs have been capitalized to the extent of US$ 7 million through Community

Investment Fund. 18600 of the SHGs have leveraged credit from commercial banks to the tune

of US$ 30 million. Skill development trainings facilitated by the SRLMs has resulted in

placement of 25000 youth from the participating poor households. State Level missions have

started developing partnerships with quality academic institutions, civil society organizations and

social entrepreneurs. A new partnership framework to be implemented by the project by June 30,

2013 will enable SRLMs to develop a good technical support system for project implementation.

C. PROPOSED CHANGES

Project’s Development Objectives

The PDO will remain the same and is as follows:

To establish efficient and effective institutional platforms of the rural poor that enables them to

increase household income through sustainable livelihood enhancements and improved access to

financial and selected public services.

Results/Indicators

As the core design of the project has not changed, indicators will remain the same. However

Results Framework has been modified to reflect the progress made in first two years and

extension of the project to Year 6. Revised Results Framework is presented in Annex 2.

Components

The components, their objective and overall features will remain the same. The major change is

that all components and eligible expenditures within them will be available to the participating

States as part of their AAPs. As the total amount of financing has been reduced from US$ 1

billion to US$ 500 million, financial allocation for the different components has been changed as

shown in section on Project Financing below. More elaborate guidelines on eligible activities

under each component have been developed and the key changes are summarized below:

8

Component 1: Institutional and Human Capacity Development: No change is envisaged in

the investments to be financed by this component. Greater support to the SRLMs for

development of partnerships with well-established training, academic and research institutions in

the field of rural livelihoods will be given.

Component 2: State Livelihood Support: All the thirteen participating states will continue to

be supported to establish fully staffed State Rural Livelihood Missions at the state and district

levels. However, the investments to be made within this component for Institution Building and

Capacity Building and Community Investment Support will be made only when a specific state

establishes a fully staffed SRLM. The subcomponent of Special Programs will also support

expansion of existing models of livelihood promotion promoted by other agencies in specific

participating states through partnerships, based on a protocol developed for this purpose.

Component 3: Innovation and Partnership Support: The component will continue to invest

in all the proposed activities but will be scaled down in size due to a lack of capacity in States

and Centre.

Component 4: Project Implementation Support: There will be no change in this component

and the activities it supports both at the state and central level. The overall allocation under this

component will be substantially reduced.

Safeguards

No change related to safeguard policies applicable to the project is required

Institutional arrangements

The NRLM Empowered Committee (NRLM-EC) would continue to review and approve the

respective SPIPs and AAPs for release of funds. The Joint Secretary, NRLM, MoRD, as Mission

Director, assisted by two Chief Operating Officers, will head the main implementing entity, the

NMMU, comprising a multi-disciplinary team of professionals.

A Cabinet Committee of GoI decision to make the NMMU function under an autonomous body

of a registered Society has been taken, which when implemented will help the NMMU to invest

in the activities required to strengthen its role as a TA provider to states and to establish stronger

M&E systems. The main focus of the NMMU is to provide technical assistance to the

participating states in their implementation of the NRLM and to ensure understanding and

compliance with NRLM guidelines. The functioning of the NMMU will be strengthened through

hiring of additional work space, improved business processes, just in time technical assistance to

the participating states through closer to the ground deployment of consultants, and recruitment

of good quality professionals for Financial Inclusion, Financial Management and Procurement

Management. For strengthening of the Financial Management and Management Information

Systems procurement of high quality technical service providers will be made.

The establishment of SRLMs will be speeded up through completion of all recruitment, which

will be a precondition for participating States to receive investments for Institution Building and

Capacity Building and Community Investment Support.

9

The partnership base of the project will be further expanded to include institutions with a proven

record of performance in training courses in rural development, civil society organizations

having a track record in mobilizing communities and implementing rural livelihood projects in

different states, and specialized agencies having sectoral experience in rural livelihoods such as

in agriculture, animal husbandry, handicrafts, etc. A partnership framework and a protocol on the

project-to-project and community-to-community partnership and learning exchange initiative

will be developed and operationalized by the NRLP.

Project Financing

Project Costs: Summary table indicating the changes in the Project costs across components is

presented below:

Revised Costs by Project Components

Components/Activities Current (US$ million) Proposed (US$ million)

IDA GOI Total IDA GOI Total

A. Institutional and Human Capacity

Building –

A.1 Technical Assistance 46.50 46.50 22.57 0.58 23.15

A.2 Human Resource Development 13.80 13.80 7.41 2.30 9.72

Subtotal 60.30 0.00 60.30 29.98 2.88 32.87

B. State Livelihoods Support –

B.1 State Rural Livelihoods Missions

(SRLM) 193.50 193.50 70.45 23.48 93.93

B.2 Institution Building and Capacity

Building 179.30 179.30 150.54 50.19 200.72

B.3 Community Investment Support 326.30 59.70 386.00 135.00 45.00 180.00

B.4 Special Programs 98.00 108.80 206.80 45.83 15.28 61.11

Subtotal 797.10 168.50 965.60 401.81 133.94 535.76

C. Innovations and Partnership Support

–

C.1 Innovation Forums and Action Pilots 11.60 11.60 5.00 1.66 6.66

C.2 Social Entrepreneurship Development 10.50 10.50 0.97 0.33 1.30

C.3 Public Private Community

Partnerships 23.40 23.40 0.97 0.33 1.30

Subtotal 45.50 0.00 45.50 6.94 2.32 9.26

D. Project Implementation Support –

D.1 National Mission Management Unit

(NMMU) 21.10 21.10 19.39 19.39

D.2 Monitoring and Evaluation 23.20 23.20 8.13 2.00 10.13

10

D.3 Electronic National Rural Livelihoods

Management System (e-NRLMS) 28.30 28.30 24.35 4.15 28.50

D.4 Governance and Accountability

Framework 7.20 7.20 1.80 3.00 4.80

D.5 Knowledge Management and

Communication 17.30 17.30 7.59 1.70 9.29

Subtotal 97.10 0.00 97.10 61.26 10.85 72.11

TOTAL 1000.00 168.50 1168.50 500.00 150.00 650.00

Financing Plan

The financial arrangements remain the same and the same funds flow pattern will be followed,

which is all expenditure at the National level will be 100% reimbursed and for expenditures at

the State level it will be 75% reimbursed from IDA credit and the remaining 25% will be State

share as co-financing towards project expenditures. The States will now be able access project

funds under all the components of the project.

Disbursement arrangements

No change in the disbursement arrangements will be made. Revised disbursement plan is as

follows: Year I II III IV V VI

Cumulative Disbursement (US$ million) 5 30 80 180 350 500

Reallocations of proceeds

Two types of changes are proposed for reallocation. Since now all components and financing are

available to participating states, two categories of expenditure, one for Centre and other for

States are proposed. Secondly as IDA proceeds have been reduced from US$ 1 billion to US$

500 million, allocation has been revised. Percent of Financing for each category has remained

the same. Proceeds will be reallocated as follows as per the new project financing plan:

Category of Expenditure

Amount of Financing

Allocated (expressed in

SDR)

Percentage of

Expenditures to

be Financed

[inclusive of

taxes etc.]

Current Revised Current Revised

1 Goods, works, non-

consulting services,

consultants’ services,

operating costs under Parts

A, B1, B4, C and D of the

Project

Goods, works, non-

consulting services,

consultants’ services,

operating costs under

Parts A, B1, B4, C and D

of the Project

314,300,000 3,566,966 100%

11

2 Goods, non-consulting

services, consultants’

services, operating costs

and Investment Support

under Part B2 and B3 of the

Project

Goods, non-consulting

services, consultants’

services, operating costs

and Investment Support

under Part B2 and B3 of

the Project

321,500,000 3,297,403 75%

3 Goods, works, non-

consulting services,

consultants' services,

operating costs incurred

at Central level

32,634,173 100%

4 Goods, works, non-

consulting services,

consultants' services,

operating costs incurred

at State level

294,501,458 75%

Sub total 635,800,000 334,000,000

Cancellation as of

May 22, 2013

301,800,000

TOTAL AMOUNT 635,800,000 635,800,000

Cancellations

Out of the total IDA proceeds of $1000 million in the original project, $ 500 million has been

proposed for cancellation in the restructured project.

Financial management

The financial management arrangements as were envisaged at appraisal remain valid and no

changes are envisaged at restructuring. State level assessments of financial management

readiness have been undertaken jointly by the Bank and MORD teams and action plans drawn.

Financial rules and procedures including delegation of financial powers etc. have been

documented and are at various stages of implementation. While these documents lay the essential

foundations for establishment of sound financial management systems, much of these have yet to

become fully functional. This is partly on account of the delays in the establishment of District

and Block level implementing Units (as integral part of the SRLMs) in the participating states

and recruitment of accounting staff therein. As of date, there are no overdue IUFRs or audit

reports for the project.

Procurement

No change is envisaged in the procurement arrangements. With a substantial increase in roles

and investments going to participating states, bulk of the procurement functions will be now

carried out at the state level and hence supervision of state mission procurement will be

undertaken jointly by the Bank and NMMU.

12

Closing date

It is proposed to extend the closing date by one year from December 31, 2016 to December, 31

2017 to account for the lag in implementation of the project to ensure that PDO can be achieved.

Others

As a significant amount of work done on rural livelihoods at the household and community level

relates to natural resource management and sectors like agriculture, livestock, small ruminants

and non-timber forest produce in forest areas, there is a significant impact of climate variations

on the livelihoods and income. Many of the geographies where the poor live are in drought

prone and flood prone areas. World Bank is in the process of preparing a GEF grant proposal on

climate adaptation and livelihoods. This will be proposed to GEF Board in due course and will

blend with the project financing at the household level.

D. APPRAISAL SUMMARY

Risk

The risk of NMMU not performing its full role in technical assistance, monitoring and

management role as envisaged could still hamper project implementation. This risk has been

mitigated to some extent due to the Cabinet decision at GoI level for formation of an autonomous

Society. However, a fully operational Society with efficient business process and flexible

implementation architecture would take some more time and thus next year disbursements are

calibrated accordingly. Significant delegation of expenditure and implementation to participating

states will also mitigate this risk significantly.

The key strategic change in the restructured project is the shifting of majority of the project

funding from the Centre to the States and opening up the project for program partnership at the

State level with agencies having a track record in rural livelihood projects becoming

implementing partners. It is expected that this action with just in time technical assistance would

unlock the business process bottlenecks and bring about increase in overall efficiency in project

implementation.

The second risk envisaged in shifting to participating states is that some of these participating

states may move faster and some may not due to differing capacity. This may become a higher

order risk in future. To mitigate the same, participating states have been advised to complete

project readiness and achieve initial performance criteria in terms of staffing and equipment by

October 31, 2013. Participating states that are not able to achieve the performance criteria will be

entitled for only first order funding for professionalization support. Second order program

support for intensive investment will focus on participating states that have demonstrated

accomplishment of performance criteria. It has been agreed that slow moving participating states

will be subsequently financed from the NRLM funds through the MORD’s own planned budget

allocations.

13

The third risk the task team foresees is the general elections scheduled in 2014 and the possible

disruption to the project implementation and disbursement. This will be mitigated by better

planning and disbursement to community organizations.

Based on the above assessment and the past experiences, the risk is rated as high during

implementation. Specific areas of risk in the project have been identified at this stage and

mitigation measures outlined for implementation of the project. ORAF is attached as Annex 3.

14

Annex 1: Comparison of pre and post restructured project

Description

Pre- Restructuring Post -Restructuring

Amount of IDA Financing $1000 million $500 million

Closing date 31 December 2016 31 December 2017

Components and the allocation Four Components Four Components with reduced

allocation due to reduction in financing

Results Framework In place Revised due to extension of closing

date and slow progress in first two

years

Legal Covenants Revised legal and financial agreements

Disbursement schedule Revised

Reallocation of proceeds In place Revised categories and amounts with

increased proportion to States

Partnership framework In place To be significantly expanded and

delegated to the State level

15

Annex 2: Revised Results Framework and Monitoring

INDIA: National Rural Livelihoods Project

Revised Results Framework

Project Development Objective (PDO): to establish efficient and effective institutional platforms of the rural poor that enables them to increase household income

through livelihood enhancements1 and improved access to financial and selected public services.

PDO Level Results

Indicators*

Co

re

Unit of

Measure

Base-

line2

Cumulative Target Values**

Frequency

Data

Source/

Methodolog

y

Respons

ibility

for Data

Collecti

on

Description (indicator

definition etc.)

YR 1 YR 2 YR3 YR

4 YR5 YR6

Indicator One:

Thirteen State Rural

Livelihood Missions formed

and providing good quality

technical assistance to

institutions of the rural poor

Percent-

age 4 6 11 13 13

13

13

Yearly MIS and

evaluations

NMMU

&

SMMU

M&E

Unit

Based on AP, TN, Orissa and

Bihar experiences

Indicator Two:

At least 70% of the excluded

SC, ST and Minorities

households directly access

Community Investment

Support or formal financial

institutions through

SHGs/Federations.

Percent-

age 0% 0% 5 % 20% 40% 60% 70% Yearly

MIS and

evaluations

NMMU

&

SMMU

M&E

Unit

Based on AP, TN and Bihar

experiences

Indicator Three:

At least 45% increase in the

Percent-

age 9%3 0% 14% 24% 35% 45% 45% Yearly

MIS and

evaluations,

NMMU

& - as above

1 Sustainable livelihood enhancements include investments in agriculture, livestock and non-farm sector through assets, productivity, technology and access to markets. 2 While the Bank has ongoing livelihood projects in several states, their baseline numbers can only be approximated/scaled up for NRLP which will reach 12 states. Further, the context in states with existing livelihood projects such as Andhra Pradesh or Tamil Nadu is entirely different from that of newer states under the Project like Uttar Pradesh. Hence proxy baseline values have been indicated

using best possible secondary data. 3 Only around 9 percent of marginal farmer households (landholding <1 ha, a proxy for poverty) access credit from formal financial institutions (Report of the Committee on Financial inclusion using NSS 2003 data).

16

number of identified poor

households who have

accessed services from

formal financial institutions

NABARD SMMU

M&E

Unit

Indicator Four:

Identified poor households

have saved cumulatively

US$100 million through thrift

and financial inclusion

USD

million 5 5 8 20 40 60 100 Yearly

MIS and

FMS

NMMU

&

SMMU

M&E

Unit

- as above

Indicator Five:

Average income for

identified poor households in

project villages has increased

by 40%

Percent-

age

0 0% 20% 40%

Baseline,

mid-term

and end of

project

Evaluations

External

evaluatio

n

Based on AP, Sri Lanka

livelihoods Projects ICRs

INTERMEDIATE RESULTS

Intermediate Result (Component 1): Delivery of good quality TA to the States for implementation of NRLM.

Intermediate Result indicator

One:

70 Percentage of SRLMs

have received timely and

quality TA as per agreed

service standards, on a

regular basis.

Percent-

age for

Service

Standard

(no.)

0% 15%

(5) 25%

40%

(12)

70%

(21)

70%

(21)

70%

(21) Yearly

Service

standard

assessment

Joint

NMMU

and

SMMU

Service Standard will be

mutually agreed

Intermediate Result indicator

Two:

Thirteen participating

SRLMs have prepared State

Perspective Plan and

accessed dedicated resources

as per agreed service

standards.

Number of

States 1 2 13 13 13 13 13

Half-

yearly

MIS and

FMS, and

Service

Standard

Assessment

NMMU

and

SMMU

Does not include NCR. Some

States may not do intense

blocks.

Intermediate Result indicator

Three:

80 Percent of NRLM staff are

accredited professionals

Percent-

age 0% 25% 40% 60% 80% 80% 80% Yearly HR Data

NMMU

and

SMMU

HR

Units

6000 core staff positions

Intermediate Result (Component 2): Establishment of institutional platforms of the poor for improved access to financial, livelihood and public services for participating

households.

Intermediate Result indicator

One:

All Project SLRMs delivering

Number of

States 0 2 4 8 13 13 13 Yearly

Service

Standard

Assessment,

SMMUs

and

NMMU

Service Standard will be

agreed with NRLM and

partners

17

implementation to service

standards and user

satisfaction

Satisfaction

survey

Intermediate Result indicator

Two:

At least 70 percent of the

identified poor mobilized into

Self Help Groups (SHGs)

Percent-

age of poor

house-

holds

8%4 10% 15% 40% 55% 70% 70% Yearly MIS, NSS,

NABARD

SMMU

M&E

units

Based on mobilization among

BPL, Tendulkar. Baseline

and targets do not include

AP, TN, Mah. and Karn.

Intermediate Result indicator

Three:

At least 70 percent of SHGs

have achieved quality and

sustainable parameters as per

agreed standards/rating

systems.

Percent of

SHGs 0% 10% 30% 40% 60% 70% 70% Yearly MIS

SMMU

M&E

units

Applies to new SHGs under

project

Intermediate Result indicator

Four:

30% of SHG members using

financial services report

higher level of satisfaction as

a result of new service

delivery mechanism.

Percent of

members 0% 5% 10% 25% 30% 30% 30% Yearly

Financial

services

satisfaction

survey

SMMU

and

NMMU

Microfin

ance

Units

Applies to new SHGs under

project

Intermediate Result indicator

Five:

At least 50% of poor

households have made

productive investments

through SHGs

Percent of

Project

village

poor HH

0% 0% 5% 10% 20% 35% 50% Yearly MIS SMMU Investments in agric., livest.

and NFRE

Intermediate Result indicator

Six:

500,000 new jobs for the

poor are created

Number of

jobs 000 0 25 50 150 250 500 Yearly MIS SMMU

Under youth employment

linkage

Intermediate Result (Component 3): Establishment of a platform for PPP and innovations for rural livelihoods and integration into NRLM

Intermediate Result One:

5 pilot innovation replicated,

adopted

Number of

pilots

scaled up

0 0 0 1 2 3 5

Annual

Progress

Report

NMMU Innovation

and Partner Unit

Adoption at

State level at

significant

scale

Intermediate Result two:

At least 20 PPP financed and

Number of

PPPs 0 0 0 5 10 15 20 Yearly

Annual

Progress

NMMU Innovation

and Partner Unit

PPP for

viability gap

4 Using NSS poverty estimates for 2004-05 and SHG membership data from NABARD for 10 states, only 22.3 percent of rural poor were mobilized into groups in these states. The states included

Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Chattisgarh, Jharkhand, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh. Since mobilization will not be carried out as intensively in Andhra Pradesh, and Tamil Nadu and Kerala are not among the 12 Project states, the average mobilization among the remaining states is about 8 percent.

18

launched Report funding

Intermediate Result (Component 4): Establishment of effective project management unit at the national level and establishment of key systems for coordination and management

Intermediate Result One:

NMMU receives satisfactory

management scorecard from

at least 70% of participating

NRLM States on a regular

basis (covers procurement,

decision making, FM, M&E /

ICT support, grievance

handling, etc, but not TA –

which is component 2

indicator)

Percentage of

participating

States.

n/a 0% 25$ 50% 60% 70% 70% Yearly Satisfaction Survey

based on scorecard

SMMUs and

SRLMs

Participating

States:

NRLP States

and States

implementin

g NRLM

with NMMU

support

Intermediate Result Two:

Policies and procedures

developed from NRLP

experiences implemented in

ten other NRLM States

Number of non-

NRLP States 0 1 2 3 6 10 10 Yearly

Annual Progress

Report NMMU

Minimum set

of policies

and

procedures

will be

defined