Skip to content
← Back to SearchPDF(7679 KB)

Rwanda's improved services for vulnerable populations project : initial data collection report for an impact evaluation

2020EnglishExpress202006 | Evaluated task order title: Improved services for vulnerable populations (ISVP) | Project title: MEASURE evaluation phase IV Child survivalCODE: 696; Rwanda Africa South Of Sahara East

Metadata

Authors
Fehringer, Jessica | Parker, Lisa | Angeles, Gustavo | Benson, Aimee | Agala, Chris B. | Musange, Sabine | Ndagijimana, Albert | Ndahindwa, Vedaste | Caridad Varela, Veronica
Contract/Code
AID-OAA-L-14-00004 | GHA-A-00-08-00003-00
Institution
891 - University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 10929 USAID. Bur. for Global Health. Ofc. HIV/AIDS
Keywords
HIV/AIDS | Age | Caregivers | Child malnutrition | Dance | Data collection | Disease prevention and control | Households KD91 Public health care (260.0) | Finance (88.0) | Population surveys (62.25)
ID
PA00WMBM
File size
7679 KB
Source
Open PDF

Abstract

MEASURE Evaluation, in collaboration with local partners, is conducting an impact evaluation of the USAID-funded Improved Services for Vulnerable Populations (ISVP) project in Rwanda. This evaluation is a prospective, cluster randomized, controlled trial design, using a difference-in-differences (DID) estimation strategy with fixed-effects modeling to evaluate the impact of ISVP on economic, health, and education outcomes. Administrative sectors were randomly assigned to study groups receiving different intervention packages: (1) a household economic strengthening (HES-only) group, which provides a core platform of financial interventions; (2) a full ISVP group, which supplements the core platform of HES interventions with health, education, and skill-building services; and (3) a control group, receiving no ISVP interventions. An initial round of data collection was conducted July?September 2017, and it employed four quantitative surveys (Household, Caregiver, Youth, and ISLG questionnaires). The final household sample sizes were 1,428 for full ISVP, 1,309 for HES-only, and 1,216 for control. Balance tests across primary and secondary outcomes of interest suggested that the program and control groups are different from each other in some systematic ways. Potential for contamination in the study areas was also identified. Implications for end line data collection and analysis in late 2018 are discussed.