ministry of social development sedesol mexico design and evaluation of social programmes gonzalo...
TRANSCRIPT
Ministry of Social DevelopmentSEDESOL
Mexico
Design and Evaluation of Social Programmes
Gonzalo Hernandez, Gustavo Merino, Ana Santiago, Miguel Szekely
PRESENTATION
1. Designing a new programme:
Plataforma de Oportunidades
2. Evaluation of Social Programmes
Evaluation System at SEDESOL
Evaluation of Plataforma de Oportunidades
From Progresa to Oportunidades
Nutrition, Health, Schooling
Increasing the number of beneficiaries: from 2.6 to 4.2 million
Moving to urban areas: Important number of poor families in urban areas
Grants to High School students: Young people leave school after secondary level
Primary, $90 Secondary, $150 High School, $550
More generous grant for girls in Secondary and High School
4 critical issues in the design of OportunidadesOportunidades
1. Demographics
2. Uncertain incentives problem
3. Final-grade repetition incentives
4. Potentially conflicting incentives with other programmes
1. Demographics: What can be accomplished today with the beneficiaries of OportunidadesOportunidades will have an
effect in the next 50 years
Age groups
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
2000
2020
2040
0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 85-89 90-94 95-99 +
Of the current beneficiaries
• 7,773,634 are less than 18 years old
• 2,962,606 are between 12 and 18 years old
2. Uncertain incentives
When Oportunidades extends coverage to urban areas, the level of benefits will remain the same, yet average household income is higher in urban areas.
2533
3027
2200
2300
2400
2500
2600
2700
2800
2900
3000
3100
Rural Urban
Average income of the 30% poorest households (2000)
3. Incentives for repetition of the final-grade of high school
If few or none “exit” options are available, then it may be more convenient for the beneficiary to repeat the last academic year, in order to continue receiving benefits (grants).
4. Potentially conflicting incentives between programs
Microcredit for productive projects can create “employment” opportunities for members of beneficiary households. These other programs can create incentives that compete with the incentive to remain in school.
Non renumerated worker in family business
Non. agrarian worker
Agrarian worker
Other non renumrated worker
Other
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Population 12 to 18 years with occupation
14.9 % enrolled in school
45.9 % enrolled in school
Plataforma de Oportunidades:
Your first patrimony
Proposal
First Step:Widen the “doors” in alignement with Contigo Contigo
strategystrategy
Elementary 1 Jr. High School
2 Jr. High School
3 Jr. High School 1 High School
2 High School
3 High School
OptionsCapabilities Patrimony Protection
Second Step:Create “the platform” of Oportunidadesthe platform” of Oportunidades
Elementary 1 Jr. High School
2 Jr. High School
3 Jr. High School 1 High School
2 High School
3 High School
9-12 years
13-15 years
16-18-20 years
OptionsCapabilities Patrimony Protection
Fund
$ Cash
Deposit inBank Account
Giving Points each year
The first generation has the followingoptions:
ProgramWing
CapatbilitiesHigher
Education
Pronabes (SEP)
PRONABESSEP
ProductiveOptions and
Savings
OptionsCrédito y otros proyectos productivos en
cajas de ahorro
Credit and other productive projects in cajas de
ahorro
Protection MedicalInsurance Seguro para la familia
(IMSS)
Insurance for the familyIMSS
(Popular Insurance)
Patrimony Housing Vivah VIVAH
The value of the fund can be significant, reinforcing positive incentives generated by
Oportunidades…
The monthly family income of Oportunidades beneficiaries is aproximately $1490.
Fund´s ValueRelationship between fund´s value and monthly income
$3,000 2.01
$4,500 3.02
$6,000 4.03
4 critical issues in the design of OportunidadesOportunidades
1. Demographics: Better equiped individuals for crucial demographic boom
2. Uncertain incentives problem: More attractive programme; more schooling
3. Final-grade repetition incentives: Repetition may become less attractive
4. Potentially conflicting incentives with other programmes: Alligning incentives with other programmes
Evaluation
Evaluation System
Evaluation of Plataforma de Oportunidades
The Evaluation Process in SEDESOL
Mexico has a long tradition in social programmes (IMSS, subsidies, Pronasol, Progresa)
Some of them, however, have responded to various political situations
We don´t actually know the real impact of these programmes on the population…
… and we don’t have of course a ranking of these programmes in terms of efficiency
There isn’t yet a generalized evaluation practice.
The Evaluation Process in SEDESOL
Since 2000, SEDESOL must evaluate all social programmes through external institutions.
We invite many institutions and we choose the best project, given the budget constraint for each programme
This year we evaluated 26 programmes designed for various populations and with different objectives:
• Milk, Supply of Basic Goods in Rural Areas, Tortilla, Artcrafts, Temporary Employment, Oportunidades, Micro Credits, Women heads of Household, Indigenous population, etc.
Structural Problems
Only annual evaluations• The total impact of social programmes can’t be measured in the
short term
Limited resources
• Some institutions don’t participate
Since we evaluate each programme, we cannot profit from
economies of scale
Poor beneficiarie’s data base
Not enough human capital in the country
Support from International Agencies
IDB: Support for Oportunidades
IDB: Technical Co-operation. Resources for inviting
international experts. Scientific Committee.
World Bank: Institutional Development Fund.
• Resources to improve evaluation on certain
programmes and increase the Mexican human
capital on social evaluation
Evaluation of Plataforma de Oportunidades
Objective:
Increase High School enrolment
Increase individual’s assets
(Are liquidity constraints important?)
Methodology
Measure differences in outcome between beneficiaries and control groups. Two point in time.
Finding the proper control groups in order to measure the impact of both benefits: school attendance and financial capital accumulation
The effect of the financial bit: Giving randomly the full Fund to Oportunidades-students finishing high school in 2003.
MethodologySchool attendance:
Comparing secondary-high school transitions in randomly selected Plataforma-beneficiaries with Oportunidades-beneficiaries only, or
Comparing outcomes in 2002 (without Plataforma) and 2003 onwards (with Plataforma)
Testing preferences: Giving the whole fund without conditions
All this is subject to budget and political constraints
Methodology
Evaluate carefully the five exit door options in Plataforma:
Why did they choose a particular “exit door”?
Are there local problems with one or several options?
Will there be a difference in individual development in choosing different approaches?