UGANDA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY - MUKONO

CONCEPT PAPER

ON

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SOCIAL ASSISTANCE GRANT FOR EMPOWERMENT’S TARGETING MECHANISM IN THE SELECTION OF SENIOR CITIZEN GRANT BENEFICIARIES. A CASE FOR COMMUNITY BASED TARGETING IN KOLE DISTRICT.

PRESENTED BY
ANDREW NEWTON OGEI odrew2002@yahoo.com RS15M13/602
MASTERS OF DEVELOPMENT STUDIES

1.0 Introduction
1.1 Background
Social transfers are increasingly seen as a key tool in Eastern and Southern Africa to combat the triple threat of chronic poverty, hunger and HIV/AIDS (Hyper & Veras, 2012).Social transfers have over the years been the main focus for most aid organisation and multilateral agencies in transferring aid and support to developing countries. These social transfers take the form of cash or in-kind transfer. They are also in form of conditional and unconditional social transfers.
According to World Bank, Cash transfers are defined as the provision of assistance in the form of cash to the poor or to those who face a probable risk of falling into poverty in the absence of the transfer.
In Africa, these cash transfer programme are being used as a means to fight and eradicate poverty. These programme target different categories of vulnerable groups such as; elderly persons, children, orphans, women, widows and people with disability. In Africa cash transfer programmes are being implemented in Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique and Zimbabwe to mention but a few. Modest but regular and predictable income transfers helps households to smooth consumption and sustain spending on food, schooling and healthcare in lean periods without the need to sell assets or take on debt (DFID, 2011).
Uganda is implementing a non-conditional cash transfer programme called Senior Citizens Grant in 15 districts (Kiboga, Kaberamaido, Kyenjojo, Katakwi, Apac,Nebbi, Zombo, Moroto, Amudat, Nakapiripit, Napak, Kole, Kyegegwa, Kyankwanzi, Yumbe) and it targets elderly persons 65 years and above and 60 years and above for Karamoja sub region (Expanding Social Protection Programme, 2012). The elderly persons are given a grant of shs. 50,000 bimonthly.
According to the SAGE implementation manual, Senior Citizens Grant beneficiaries are identified and selected to benefit from the programme through the community registration model. The community members at village level play a big role in identifying individual that are eligible and meet the registration criteria.
The targeting mechanism used in the selection of beneficiaries has a big impact on the final beneficiaries. However, this is also based on the targeting design, which mainly deals with who should be reached and why they should receive the intervention (Slater & Farrington, Project Briefing, No. 27, 2009).
1.2 Problem statement
Targeting has been widely researched about and the different mechanisms greatly elaborated. However, not much has been written on community based targeting (Coady, Grosh, & Hoddinott, Targeting of Transfers in Developing Countries: Review of Lesson and Experiences, 2004).
SAGE uses demographic data to help determine the individuals that qualify to benefit from the programme. Data on age, nationality and residence are used to guide the process of registration for Senior Citizen grant beneficiaries (Expanding Social Protection Programme, 2012). However, there is limited data relating to individuals date of birth given that Uganda lacks adequate civil registration data on it citizens. “The need for proof of age complicates categorical targeting to older people. Given the poor registry systems in many developing countries (particularly decades ago), many older people do not possess formal documentation of their age”, (Targeting Cash Transfer Instruments). This can at times lead to some eligible elderly persons being excluded from the programme because they cannot prove their ages and they cannot afford the cost of processing an official document.
This gap in the availability of adequate and accurate information regarding individual’s births, especially elderly persons makes registration complex. Due to the inadequacy of data about individuals or households, targeting becomes complex and in most cases this leads to inclusion and exclusion errors (Farrington, Sharp, & Sjoblom, 2007). This lack of comprehensive data on households normally leads to powerful individuals attempting to influence the process (Bailey & Harvey, 2015). The whole process can be overrun and manipulated by influential politicians, opinion leaders and local elites. Community registration can “…particularly be prone to manipulation and capture by more powerful community members and local elites who may distribute resources in ways that deviate from targeting guidelines”.
Communities are also found of considering everyone as vulnerable in one way or the other and they tend to provide subjective information about themselves. The assumption of community based targeting in that the community is meant to drive the process by giving accurate information to support the targeting process. This is not the case as noted in some studies in that the community members chosen to support the targeting processes tend to fear the repercussion of their action especially when it does not favour a member (Coady, Grosh, & Hoddinott, Targeting of Transfers in Developing Countries: Review of Lesson and Experiences, 2004). This affects the reliability of the process and can lead to discontent and disunity in the community.
The implementation process of the community based targeting method has a big contribution to the outcome of the process. This study therefore seeks to understand the details involved in the process of targeting SAGE Senior Citizens Grant beneficiaries using Community based Registration. The study seeks to understand the levels of inclusion and exclusion errors as a result of implementing community based targeting. It also seeks to discover whether the mechanism used is free from distortions and manipulation from influential community members like; local elites, politicians and opinion leaders. The study would like to explore whether the implementation guidelines on community registration were followed to the latter.

1.3 Objectives 1. To establish the level of inclusion and exclusion error as a result of implementing community registration 2. To establish the extent of acceptability of the targeting mechanism among beneficiaries and opinion leaders 3. To establish whether implementation guidelines where followed during registration
1.4 Justification
Although many studies have been conducted on targeting mechanisms and their effectiveness, no literature exists on community based registration in Uganda. This study will therefore add knowledge onto the existing studies on community registration with reference to cash transfer programmes targeting elder persons. This study will also highlight on any weaknesses that are within the targeting mechanism – Community based registration. It will also detail the experiences and lessons in the implementation of community registration and this will inform the policy makers on how best to implement community based targeting to effectively reach vulnerable groups.
2.0 Literature Review
This chapter reviews literature from various authors on targeting mechanisms. It also reviews some of the existing forms of targeting with particular interest on community based targeting also known as community registration.
Targeting for cash transfer programmes refers to the process of identifying those households or individuals that are suitable to benefit from an intervention. (Slater & Farrington, Project Briefing, No. 27, 2009) Asserts that, targeting design is concerned with who, in principle, is to be reached and why, and includes approaches that rely on poverty assessment and social categorisation. While targeting implementation is about how the recipients of an intervention are going to be identifies. The combination of the two is what brings out a good targeting mechanism.
There are various forms of targeting that are applied in the selection of who is to benefit from cash transfer programme. The common methods are, means-testing, self targeting, community based selection and proxy means testing. These methods are used in different situation based on the beneficiaries to be reached, the overall objective of a project/programme and the implementation design to be used. Other issues of cost effectiveness and political acceptability of approach/ mechanism are also taken into consideration (Slater & Farrington, Project Briefing, No. 27, 2009)
Community based targeting has its foundation in the discipline of Community-based development (CBD). It is a design of social programming which promotes local shareholder engagement by including community members in decision-making processes. One aspect of CBD is community-based targeting (CBT), whereby community members determine program eligibility by identifying poor households that would qualify for program assistance (Handa, Huang, & Hyper, 2010).
Community based-targeting uses a group of community members or a community leader to decide who in the community should benefit (Farrington, Sharp, & Sjoblom, 2007). In the case of the SAGE SCG, ad hoc committees of moral upright elderly persons are formed for the purpose of reviewing the eligibility of applicants. These committees support the role of the Parish Chiefs who are normally the administrators at village meetings (Expanding Social Protection Programme, 2012). However, not much is known on whether these local government officers follow the implementation guidelines in the process of presiding over community registration.
(Handa, Huang, & Hyper, 2010) Identify inequality, spatial density, and geographic setting of the community as factors that can affect community based targeting while identifying beneficiaries. They refer to these factors in the context of programmes that target poor households. The other issue discussed is elite capture and political influence. A similar argument is also advanced by (Bailey & Harvey, 2015) when they write that the absence of household data can lead to influential individuals attempting to influence the process of community registration.
Community based targeting has not been used widely around the world but has commonly been applied in the developing countries. In places where it has been used, evidence has shown that it suffers from errors and few national programme have applied it (Kidd, Calder, & Wylde, 2009).
In a study about beneficiary and community perception, (Bukuluki & Watson, 2012) state that, beneficiaries perceived the targeting process to be fair, with no significant differences in beneficiary experiences of targeting or enrolment based on the different methods used (automated registration in Kaberamaido and community registration in Nebbi). The beneficiaries might have a positive perception about the targeting but their understanding on the process and their role in the final outcome is very important for acceptability.
Some studies have suggested that community member’s dissent from taking decisions that were prejudicial to community member’s eligibility. This is mainly due to the urge to maintain the social fabric and relations in community above the cash transfer programmes. This makes identification of the true individuals that qualify to benefit from difficult.

3.0 Methodology
3.1 Introduction
This is an exploratory study since no much evidence exists on the subject of community based targeting. The research will use mixed methods approach to collect and analyse the data. The research will utilise a cross sectional research design and the main source of data will be quantitative and complimented by qualitative data which will help explain the quantitative data.
3.2 Study Population
The study population will be elderly persons from 65 years and above who are benefiting from the SAGE Senior Citizen Grant in Kole District.
3.3 Sample Frame
The sample frame will be a list of all beneficiaries receiving the Senior Citizen grants in Kole District. The list will be extracted from the SAGE MIS database and it has names of elderly persons identified by a unique serial number.
3.4 Sampling
The study will use stratified sampling method to draw the sample. The data will be stratified according to the existing administrative units of Sub County. There will be six strata representing the six sub counties.
Purposive sampling will used for the Community Development Officers, Parish Chiefs and LCIII Chairpersons.
3.5 Sample size
The sample size will be determined using the sample size formula by Yamane (1967)

Where n= is sample size, N=is the population and (e)2= is the margin of error or precision level
N= 9,500 (Active beneficiaries in the SAGE MIS database as of October 2015)
Precision = _+ 0.07
Sample size = 200

3.5.1 Stratified random sampling
The sample will be stratified into six stratum and proportionate stratified random sampling used to determine the sub sample size from each stratum.
The formula below will be used to determine the sample size in each stratum;
S=n/N where, s= is strata, n=is the sample size, and N= is the population Sub Counties (Strata) | Popln. | n/N | Stata Size | Alito | 3,000 | 0.02 | 63 | Aboke | 2,500 | 0.02 | 53 | Akalo | 1,200 | 0.02 | 25 | Ayer | 1,500 | 0.02 | 32 | Ayer Town Council | 300 | 0.02 | 6 | Bala | 1,000 | 0.02 | 21 | | N=9,500 | | n= 200 |

3.6 Data collection Process
The study will use quantitative and qualitative data collection methods.
3.6.1 Quantitative data collection
Structured interview questionnaire - for the SCG beneficiaries
3.6.2 Qualitative data collection
Key informant interviews – for the CDOs and LCIII Chairperson
Focus group discussions – for the Parish chiefs
3.7 Data analysis
The study will use statistical analysis programs like SPSS for the quantitative data. The data will be entered into SPSS, coded, cleaned and analysed. Content analysis will be used for qualitative data. Recorded data will be transcribed, entered into MS word, themes developed and coded and major themes analysed.
Bibliography

1. Bailey, S., & Harvey, P. (2015). State of Evidence on Humanitarian Cash Transfers - Background Note for the High Level Panel on Humanitarian Cash Transfers. Overseas Development Institute. 2. Bukuluki, P., & Watson, C. (2012). Transforming Cash Transfers: Beneficiary and community perspectives on the Senior Citizen Grant (SCG) in Uganda. 4 & 6. 3. Coady, D., Grosh, M., & Hoddinott, J. (2004). Targeting of Transfers in Developing Countries: Review of Lesson and Experiences. 59. 4. Coady, D., Grosh, M., & Hoddinott, J. (2004). Targeting of Transfers in Developing Countries: Review of Lesson and Experiences. Washington DC: The World Bank. 5. DFID. (2011). Cash Transfers Literature Review. Retrieved from http://r4d.dfid.gov.uk/PDF/Articles/cash-transfers-literature-review.pdf 6. Expanding Social Protection Programme. (2012). SAGE Implementation Manual. 7. Farrington, J., Sharp, K., & Sjoblom, D. (2007). Targeting Approaches to Cash Transfers: Comparisons across Cambodia, India and Ethiopia. 8. Handa, S., Huang, C., & Hyper, N. (2010). Targeting effectiveness of Social Cash Transfer Programs in Three Africa Countries. . 9. Hyper, N., & Veras, F. (2012). Does Community-Based Targeting Really Work in Cash Transfer Programmes in Africa? International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth , 1. 10. Kidd, S., Calder, R., & Wylde, E. (2009). Assessing Targeting Options for Napels Social Grants: What does the Evidence Tell us? 11. Programme, U. N. (2006). Social protection. Poverty In Focus . 12. Slater, R., & Farrington, J. (2009, November). Cash Transfers: Targeting. 13. Slater, R., & Farrington, J. (2009). Cash Transfers: Targeting. Overseas Development Institute. 14. Targeting Cash Transfer Instruments. (n.d.). Retrieved November 2015, from http://epri.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/EPRI_Chapter8_4.pdf) 15. Targeting of Transfers in Developing Countries: Review of Lessons and Experiences. (n.d.). 60.