More poor households receive increased cash in hand in Ghana
Context
In 2008, the government of Ghana launched the Livelihood Empowerment Against Poverty (LEAP) programme to provide cash transfers to extremely poor households with children orphaned or made vulnerable because of HIV/AIDS, or with elderly or disabled members who are unable to work. The bimonthly cash transfers were conditional on households sending children to school, not allowing child labour, enrolling family members on the National Health Insurance Scheme and registering the births of all children. While LEAP started with alleviating short-term poverty and promoting long-term human development as its goals, there was significant scepticism surrounding the use of the transfers.
In 2010, 3ie supported researchers from University of North Carolina, University of Ghana and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations to study the impact of LEAP on a range of household outcomes. Apart from the consumption and non-consumption expenditure of households and their enrolment in the National Health Insurance Scheme, the researchers were also keen to understand if participation in the programme improved children’s access to school and health.
The research team used a longitudinal propensity score matching design as well as a local economy-wide impact evaluation model. They also used participatory research methods and in-depth case studies to gather perceptions of LEAP’s impact on household decision-making, community dynamics and social networks. A total of 1,398 households formed the study sample, divided equally between treatment and control groups.
Evidence
The study found that the bimonthly scheduled direct cash payments to the participating households were inconsistent and irregular, preventing an increase in consumption or consumption smoothing. Because the cash payments were irregular under the scheme, the participating households often received double and triple payment amounts together. Large parts of these ‘lumpy’ payments were used to pay down loans, a point reiterated in the qualitative interactions.
The study also found that LEAP had positive impacts on children’s schooling. The evaluation showed increased access to schooling at the secondary level among the LEAP households. The children also missed school less, and there were fewer instances of grade repetition in both primary and secondary school.
Evidence impacts
Type of impact: Change policies or programmes
Decision makers use findings from an evaluation or systematic review to adjust their programming to fix targeting, cash transfer amounts, training modules or other factors that inhibit the policy or programme’s ability to achieve its intended impacts.
This is one of 3ie’s seven types of evidence use. Impact types are based on what we find in the monitoring data for an evaluation or review. Due to the nature of evidence-informed decision-making and action, 3ie looks for verifiable contributions that our evidence makes, not attribution.
Read our complete evidence impact typology and verification approach here.
Close windowEvaluation findings that LEAP households received irregular and incomplete payments that prevented increases in consumption highlighted the need to regularise the payments for the LEAP programme to meet its objectives. The government of Ghana took these findings into consideration and increased the cash transfer value to the beneficiary households to improve expenditure on consumption.
‘The report highlighted what was not working. One of [the issues] was the irregularity of transfer, and they pushed this information. From 2014, payments have always been regular. The report was part of this but not the only factor. Buy-in from key people in the Ministry of Finance was vital in bringing about this change and pushing the results of the evaluation.’
Type of impact: Scale-up a programme
When programmes found effective are scaled up.
This is one of 3ie’s seven types of evidence use. Impact types are based on what we find in the monitoring data for an evaluation or review. Due to the nature of evidence-informed decision-making and action, 3ie looks for verifiable contributions that our evidence makes, not attribution.
Read our complete evidence impact typology and verification approach here.
Close windowThe positive findings from the LEAP evaluation prompted the government to expand the programme from 1,645 to 150,000 beneficiaries by the end of December 2015, as highlighted in the 2014 state of nation address by the then president, John Dramani Mahama. In 2014, the World Bank increased its funding support for all safety net programmes in Ghana, including LEAP. The World Bank cited positive evaluation findings as contributing to this decision.
Suggested citation
International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie), 2020. More poor households receive increased cash in hand in Ghana [online summary], Evidence Impact Summaries. New Delhi: 3ie.
Evidence impact summaries aim to demonstrate and encourage the use of evidence to inform programming and policymaking. These reflect the information available to 3ie at the time of posting. Since several factors influence policymaking, the summaries highlight contributions of evidence rather than endorsing a policy or decision or claiming that it can be attributed solely to evidence. If you have any suggestions or updates to improve this summary, please write to influence@3ieimpact.org
Last updated on 13th November 2020