REPORT ON GRADUATION SURVEY OF

PPAF FUNDED LIVELIHOOD ENHANCEMENT

AND PROTECTION PROJECT (LEP) DISTRICT
PISHIN OF BALOCHISTAN

Planning Monitoring
Evaluation and Research
section (PMER)
Balochistan Rural Support
Programme (BRSP) Quetta.
1. EXECTIVE SUMMARY 2

2. RATIONALE AND KEY OBJECTIVES 4

3. KEY PROJECT ACTIVITIES 4

4. TARGET VS ACHIEVEMENT 4

5. PURPOSE OF CONDUCTING GRADUATION SURVEY 5

6. SURVEY METHODOLOGY AND TOOLS 5

a. PSC Ranking: 5

b. Survey Questionnaire: 5

c. Primary Documentation Review: 6

d. Direct Observation: 6

e. Individual Interview tools: 6

7. SAMPLING 7

8. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY 7

9. FINDINGS OF THE STUDY 8

Pre and Post results of PSC 8

RESULTS OF SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE 9

MOST SIGNIFICANT CHANGE (MSC) 30

 1. EXECTIVE SUMMARY

This report discusses the key objectives, methodology and findings of the study organized to gauge the
socio-economic status and impact of interventions carried out by BRSP under the PPAF funded LEP
(Livelihood Enhancement and Protection) Project. The project was implemented in five union councils
(UCs) namely Ajram, Rodh Malazai, Dilsora, Kuth and Mandozai at district Pishin of Balochistan province.
The study also holds the influence of project’s contribution, affiliation, commitment and modernizations
explored to increase the living standard of target communities. The findings of this survey also elaborate
the stance of reduction in poverty by using both individualities, i-e quantitative and qualitative. In
quantitative method the pre and post status of PSC (Poverty Score Card) ranking was reviewed and
analyzed, however for capturing qualitative features a survey questionnaire was developed to conduct
direct interviews with the representatives of community/beneficiaries/Households in the respective
villages. Moreover, the Most Significant Change (MSC) approach was also adopted and the component of
MSC integrated in the survey questionnaire as well. During the period of May 2011 to April 2014, LEP
project accomplished 8750 PSCs, 2814 LIPs, 4155 trainings, 976 beneficiaries provided with wage
compensation and finally 1789 beneficiaries received the assets. Subsequently the total target population
of 1789 was taken for obtaining the survey sample size. Based on the methodology, 95% confidence level
with a confidence error margin of (±5%) status acquired by online scientific calculator, wherein a figure of
316 HH certified as sample size to represent the entire population of 1789 beneficiaries. For making the
selection for beneficiaries’ list asset transfer data sheet was used for statically stratified random sampling.
For the representation of HHs in all five UCs, 23% of beneficiaries responded from Dilsora, 22% from Rodh
Malazai, 21% from Ajram, 17% from Kuth and 17% from Mandozai. Although the gender wise breakup of
beneficiaries includes 71% male and 29% female respondents.
Based on the survey results generally the community expressed satisfaction with the activities conducted
under LEP project, they recognized the project as a hierarchy of improvement for their economic
productivity, opportunities provided by the project strengthened their business operations and now they
are moving towards positive change with better income generation due to the provision of resources.
Equally, if we have a glance of the database analysis results, the subsequent figures describe appearance
of vitalities applied by the project during the specified period. Below is the breakup of PSC analysis:
Based on the PSC pre and post analysis of our sampled 316 beneficiaries, the status shows that 291
beneficiaries who were previously standing in the category of ultra and vulnerable have moved to higher
categories which is (92%) of the sample.
Coming towards the second tool the survey questionnaire analysis, the status shows that 99%
beneficiaries were engaged while the conduction of PSC survey initially. . Status of engagement in
implementation process indicates; 99% engagement in PSC Ranking, 99% involvement in developing the
(LIPS), 100% beneficiaries successfully attended the training on livestock and enterprise, 81% got
membership of CIGs and at the end 100% acknowledged that they received the assets proposed in the
LIPS. 94% of the participants proposed livestock, 06% proposed enterprise wherein 91% of the
beneficiaries received goats and sheep, 05% received general store items and 04% received
poultry items.
In sector wise proposed trainings 99% got the same trainings which they proposed in LIPs and
99% expressed their confidence and satisfaction from the trainings, ultimately in degree of usefulness
43% marked it as a very good training , 46% marked as good, 09% marked it satisfactory while
rest of the 2% guaged it poor and not responded the question. In utilization of aquired skills 84%
are utilizing the acquired skills while 16% are not utilizing. In effectiveness of training in income
generation 25% marked it very effective, 47% marked it effective, and 17% least effective and11%
marked it not effective. As mentioned above out of 81% participants who got the CIG
membership 20% said that the CIGs shared new ideas while 80% denied. Same is the case with
development of linkages, 14% said that CIGs helped in developing linkages while 86% replied with
NO.
In type of asset as proposed, 98% said they received the same assets as they proposed while the
remaining replied with no, said they did not received the same asset. About having the same
assets 90% of the beneficiary answered with positive stance as they are having the same assets
while 10% said they are not having same assets, describing it with many reasons. Furthermore
when they were asked as assets increased or decreased 73% of the total beneficiary answered
with increased in assets, 20% replied that their assets has decreased while the remaining 7% said
they are having the same assets. When asked about did the Programme assets have improved
the wellbeing in life, 79% of the beneficiary said yes it has helped them in the wellbeing of their
family while the remaining 21% said it has not did any such thing in their family life.
When asked about areas of improvement on health status, 61% of beneficiary including female
replied with yes and 39% of the remaining said still they did not have any such improvement in
their life. 45% of male respondent said now they have access to employment while the remaining
55% replied with no. Same 38% 0f female respondent said they have access to employment
directly or indirectly and the remaining 62% female replied with no. On better education of
children 47% male beneficiary answered it positively and 53% said this area has not been
improved yet. Female on the other hand answered positively of 37% and 63% said area of better
education has not improved yet. Respondents on visibility and access to social space, 60% replied
that they have now visibility and access to social space and different markets, while 40% of the
remaining said still yet they did not have any such kind of improvement in their life. When asked
about housing structure has any renovation or construction they did, 38% of male respondent
said they did some renovation or construction during project intervention while the remaining
62% of the respondent said they have not done any such intervention.
The detailed debriefings of the entire process has been exclusively articulated in the report with graphs
and case studies.
 2. RATIONALE AND KEY OBJECTIVES

BRSP implemented Livelihood Enhancement & Protection (LEP) project with the help of PPAF
(Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund) in two districts Pishin and Kharan of Balochistan Province. LEP
project seeks to improve the economic productivity of the poor and underprivileged groups exist
in the society. The proposed ideology of (LEP) Livelihood Enhancement and Protection project
basically allies for building the capacity, provision of opportunities, assets allocation, enhancing
the productivity level of community members/ beneficiaries to reduce their vulnerability to
shocks, improve their livelihoods initiatives and strengthen their business operations. By
enhancing skills of these community members/ beneficiaries for greater income generation is a
unique idea of the project which provides customized solutions to help them to come out of the
poverty trap.

3. KEY PROJECT ACTIVITIES

PSC (Poverty Score Card) Ranking

Development of LIP (livelihood Investment Plan)
Livestock, Enterprise, Agriculture and CIGs formation and development skills trainings
Wage Compensation to Ultra Poor
Formation and development CIGs (Common Interest Groups)
Assets transfer to Ultra/Vulnerable poor

4. TARGET Vs ACHIEVEMENT
Deliverables Targets Achievements %age
PSC completed 10,461 8,750 84%
LIP Completed 2,586 2,814 109%
Training provided to person 3,898 4,155 107%
Person provided with wage compensation 1,255 976 77.8%
Amount provided as wage compensation (Rs) 4,016,800 1,633,950 41%
Assets distributed to persons 1,789 1,789 100%
Disbursement (Rs) 44,725,000 44,680,300 99.9%
CIG formed 93 105 113%
Linkages developed 62 05 03%
 5. PURPOSE OF CONDUCTING GRADUATION SURVEY

Planning Monitoring Evaluation and Research (PMER) department in collaboration with

Livelihood Section, LSOs (Local Support Organizations) and CRPs (Community Resource Persons)
mutually conducted a graduation survey; aimed to assess the status of execution of overall
project objectives, specifically to gauge the influence of project activities and their effects over
the lives of community members/ beneficiaries suffering with deprivation; at this phase it was an
appropriate time to measure the status of reduction in vulnerability among the beneficiaries who
have been assisted under the LEP project. At this span of time, it was necessary to know that how
the project moderately changed the living status of community/beneficiaries after delivering or
allocating the services. Is there any change occurred among their lives? And if the change
occurred, what the current living status of the HHs indicate? Whether the HHs are now continuing
with an improved/sustained socio-economic structure or not. Like wisely, it was a great
opportunity for BRSP’s PMER section to track the story of change or to learn from the gained
experiences throughout this period. The findings and acknowledgment of this graduation survey
would be a vital source to support BRSP for the improvement and transformation in upcoming
similar nature of projects in future.

6. SURVEY METHODOLOGY AND TOOLS

While conducting this study, both (Quantitative and Qualitative) approaches riveted and the
description of adopted tools and techniques are as under:

a. PSC Ranking:
(Quantitative Technique)

Assessing the poverty status of the beneficiaries/HHs PSC (Poverty Score card) ranking used as
an integral part of methodology, since at the beginning of the project PSC exercise was conducted
to gauge the poverty level of the target communities. Initially PSC survey done in 8750 HHs and
for conducting graduation survey, the post data was collected as per the sample size and analyzed
via in-house MIS. So 316 beneficiaries /HH were selected for post PSC ranking and the post PSC
data integrated in the MIS for comparison and further analysis.

b. Survey Questionnaire:
(Qualitative Technique)
To see the qualitative change in the lives of beneficiary HH, survey questionnaire was designed
to gauge the significant change occurred after the project interventions. The questionnaire
comprising of factors related to the HH social status, their knowledge about PPAF and BRSP, their
involvement and level of satisfaction about PSC ranking, LIPs, trainings, assets, quality and
effectiveness of their proposed sector, status of assets and their utility. More importantly the
areas of improvement contributing to enhance their wellbeing were emphasized in the study. As
per the methodology by aiming the outlook of most significant change, some innovative studies
have also been documented during the survey.

c. Primary Documentation Review:

In primary documentation review, The PMER section assessed the sum of 125 LIPs (25 LIPs of
each Union council) to acquire an idea about the initial livelihood status, their critical
requirements and what the beneficiaries proposed for the betterment and enhancement of their
livelihood. Furthermore, initially collected data of PSC was also reviewed.

d. Direct Observation:
During the study, the team while interviewing them about the existing situation of the HHs
/beneficiaries also observed and noted about their wellbeing status by visiting their business
housing structure.

e. Individual Interview tools:

(PSC Ranking form and Survey Questionnaire)

The information acquired by the enumerators was based on two vital sources i.e. PPAF endorsed
PSC ranking form and a survey questionnaire developed by PMER section. These tools navigated
the study towards quick and effective results for the survey.
 7. SAMPLING

Sample size calculation1

Sampling is one of the most important Total targeted population 1789
factor to ensure legal representation of Confidence level 95%
population for an adequate execution of Confidence Interval 5
Sample size 316
appropriate information and results.
Confidence Interval (50%) 5
This information enables BRSP and PPAF
Bifurcation (target per UC) 63.2
to get a clear snapshot of development
achievement, learning and future
planning of such development projects.

Planning Monitoring Evaluation and Research (PMER) unit adopted a well-known technique of
simple random sampling that is relatively least biased and widely used in such studies or
assessments. In addition, this random sampling provides an appropriate mechanism that could
be applied to identify the overall findings of the study.
PMER section calculated sample size which ensures 95 percent confidence level with the error
margin of 5 percent plus or minus, it was expected that some respondents /beneficiaries may
reject or might not be present during the time of survey. Since the total beneficiaries are 1789
including men and women, therefore the numerally calculated sample size was 316 representing
100 percent Households (316 = 100% HHs). The sample size is almost at the 50 percent
confidence interval; thus, collecting information from the sampled population represents on the
entire population. Keeping in view of the scenario, it was presumed to be an effective way of
study as per the standards.

8. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

Survey findings are based on perceptions of the community members. Physical verifications
including verification of receipts to verify increase income, cross verification with records in
health, education and other relevant departments, detailed assessment of the businesses etc.,
were not part of this study.
 9. FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

Pre and Post results of PSC

The below graph shows pre and post results of PSC containing groups. Initially the ranking of
beneficiaries of ultra-poor and vulnerable poor was 50% of each group, but after the post survey
results, there is a massive change of growth observed, as 32% of the vulnerable poor have been
graduated to non-poor, 29% of ultra-poor also graduated to non-poor. 12% of the vulnerable-
poor have been graduated to transitory-poor, 12% of ultra-poor have been graduated to
vulnerable, and 8% of ultra-poor have been graduated to transitory-poor, while 5% and 2% of
respondents has remained vulnerable to vulnerable and ultra to ultra.

Poverty Ranking - Pre and Post (in %)

PSC Ranking Chart
Non Poor
Ultra - Poor 0 -11
61.3
Vulnerable - Poor 12 -18
Transitory Poor 19.8
Transitory - Poor 19 -23
50.3 Vulnerable Poor 15.4
Non - Poor 24 -100
49.7 Ultra Poor 3.5

60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0

Post Pre

Ratio of poverty ranking after intervention

4%

15% Ultra Poor

Vulnerable Poor

61% 20% Transitory Poor

Non Poor
 Ratio of change in groups
5%
V to N
8%
U to N
2%
32% V to T
12%
U to V
12% U to T
29% U to U
Vto V

Results of Survey Questionnaire

UC wise breakup of beneficiaries.

Based on the target (316 beneficiaries) the below graph indicates the union council wise breakup
of the respondents, whereas 23% of beneficiaries responded from Dilsora, 22% from Rodh
Malazai, 21% from Ajram, 17% from Kuth and 17% from Mandozai.

% wise beneficiaries breakup in five targeted UCs

Ajram
Rodmalazai 21% Ajram
22% Dilsora
Kuth
Mandozai
17% Dilsora Mandozai
23%
Rodmalazai
Kuth
17%
 UC wise beneficiries breakup
71 69
66
55 55

Ajram Dilsora Kuth Mandozai Rodmalazai

Gender wise breakup of beneficiaries.

In addition to union council wise breakup, here is the division of gender indicating 71% male and
29% female respondents which means out of 316 beneficiaries 224 were male and 92 were
female respondents.
% of Gender wise breakup of surveyed
beneficiaries

Female
29% Male

Male Female
71%

Beneficiaries Knowledge/ information about PPAF & BRSP.

The participants were asked about the knowledge /information about PPAF and BRSP. Relatively
59% of the beneficiaries responded that they are aware of PPAF while 41% of the respondents
were not aware of PPAF as majority of them are illiterate and they simply recognize it as an NGO
or a Government entity.
But moderately 93 % of the beneficiaries fully recognized BRSP as a leading organization because
BRSP remained involved in the implementation of series of projects in the same geographical
area with interventions such as PMSIL, social mobilization, reproductive health, WATSAN,
community physical infrastructure and emergency relief projects from the last seven years
approximately.
 Beneficiaries Knowledge/
information about PPAF & BRSP

300
200 294
185 22
100 131
0
YES NO YES NO
About PPAF About BRSP

% wise knowledge regarding BRSP among beneficiraies

7%
About BRSP YES
About BRSP NO

93%

Status of Intervention.
Respondents were asked about their level of engagement in entire process of project
implementation

Beneficiaries engaged in project implementation

313 3 313 3 315 1 257 59 315 1

Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No

PSC Servey LIPs development Enterprise and livestock CIGs development Assets recived
skills trainning

Based on the responses, 99% beneficiaries were engaged in PSC Ranking and similarly 99% of the
beneficiaries were fully involved in developing the LIPS (livelihood Investment Plans)
 PSC ranking done or not? Development of LIPs
1%
1%

LIPs
development
PSC Survey Yes Yes

99% PSC Survey No LIPs

development
99%
No

Appropriately 100% of the respondents confirmed that they had successfully attended the
training on livestock and enterprise. Whereas 81% of the beneficiaries attained the membership
of Common Interest groups (CIGs) but 19% of CIGs are not practical.

CIGs Development
Trainings
100% of 19%
CIGs
0% development Yes
Enterprise and
livestock skills
training Yes 81%
CIGs
Enterprise and development No
100%
livestock skills
training No

beneficiaries received the assets which they proposed in livelihood Investment plans

Asset recieved

Assets recived Yes

0%
Assets recived No

100%
Proposed sector for the improvement of livelihood

It was asked from the respondents to specify the sector they proposed for the improvement of
their livelihood, 94% of the participants proposed livestock, 06% proposed enterprise, however
the intention towards agriculture sector was weak because it is a very vast and an expensive area
and exceed the limitation of the project modalities. On the other hand, there is huge problem of
water and electricity exists in the entire area so the activities related to agriculture might not be
feasible for the poor communities.

Proposed sectors in LIPs

295

20 1

LIVESTOCK ENTERPRISE AGRICULTURE

Type of assists proposed in LIP

The participants were asked about the types of asset they proposed in the LIPS, consequently
91% of the beneficiaries received goats and sheep, 05% received general store items and 04%
received poultry items. However, rest of the sectors were not preferred by the beneficiaries.

Type of assists proposed in LIP

4% 5%
0%
0% Goats/Sheep
Poultry
General Store Items
0%
Embroidery Items

91% Minyari Store Items

Spray motor
Sector wise proposed training

The participants were asked about the training they had proposed in LIP, therefore assertively
99% of the respondents declared that they got the appropriate training session relevant to their
proposed sectors, particularly on livestock and enterprise.

Did you get the required training related to your

proposed sector?

0%
1%
yes no

99%

Level of satisfaction regarding trainings

In association with the proposed trainings attained by the beneficiaries, the level of satisfaction was also
inquired from the participants and as a result, 99% of the respondents conveyed their confidence and
satisfaction from the trainings organized by the project.

Level of satisfaction from the training

0%
1%

Yes
no

99%
Degree of usefulness of the training

To guage the degree of usefulness of the training, the participants/benificiaries were asked about
their feedback on the training they attended initially, based on their experiences multiple
responces scored.

The indications of their feedback demonstrates that 43% of the participants valued it as a very
good training, 46% said that it was good training , 09% marked it satisfactory, 1% of the
participants declared it poor and rest of the 1% not responded the question.

Degree of usefulness
1% 1%
9% Very Good

Good
43%
46% Satisfactory

Poor

No Response

Utilization of acquired training skills after its completion

The participants were asked about the utilization of their acquired skills after the attainment of
training on livestock and enterprise, although 84% of the respondents agreed that they are
utilizing the acquired skills in their relevant sectors like livestock management, value addition,
marketing, saving etc. while 16% of the respondents are not applying their earned skills.

Utilization the acquired training skills

16%

yes

84% no
Along with the utilization, it was also nessesary to assess the efficiency of the trainings whether
the utilization of the training in terms of income generation is viable and effective to enhance or
sustain their lives? based on their experiences multiple responces scored. The indications of their
feedback demonstrates that 47% of the participants valued it as an effective training, 25% said
that it was very effective training , 17% marked it least effective training, while 11% of the
participants decleared it not effective training.

Degree of effectiveness of training

Not Effective
11% Very Effective Very Effective
25%
Effective
Least
Effective Least Effective
17% Effective Not Effective
47%

Sharing of new ideas of production by CIGs (Common Interest Groups)

For the sake of economic interest like livestock and enterprise/small business, 20% beneficiaries
agreed that CIGs assisted them to enhance and sustain their livelihood status, and the CIGs raised
the level of awareness regarding economic empowerment, here a huge proportion comprised of
80% of the beneficiaries are still omitted because majority of the HHs do not need to sale out
their products in the market especially from livestock and they are utilizing the products for their
own household requirements.

Did the CIGs shared new ideas of production?

20%

yes
80% No
Linkage development by CIGs and beneficiaries’ possession
14 % of the beneficiaries agreed that CIGs supported them in developing the linkages with the
market, while rest of 86 % HHs expressed that they are not able to sale out their products in the
market due the low production especially in livestock sector and hardly fulfill their household
requirements.

CIGs support regarding linkaged development

14%

Replied with yes

86% Replied with No

Type of asset received as proposed

98% of the beneficiaries agreed that they have received the same asset which they have
proposed initially at the time of developing the LIPs, a minute group which is 2% of the
respondents were expecting something which was out of the approach or budget like they were
demanding for cows, tractors, heavy machinery etc.

Assets recieved as proposeed

2%

yes
no
98%
Level of satisfaction about the quality of the asset

To assess the level of satisfaction about the quality of asset received by the beneficiaries’
choices were given to scale their level of satisfaction, 42% of the beneficiaries expressed their
complete satisfaction regarding the quality of the assets whereas 40% marked an average
satisfaction and rest of the 18% were having some apprehensions and they were not satisfied
with the quality of the asset /animals, as per their perception the assets particularly in livestock
provided to them were physically weak with sickening condition as they had brought from
warm geographical areas such as Sindh, Jaffarabad and Sibi. So they could not survive in cold
areas where the temperature decreased up to -10 degree Celsius in winter. Accordingly, to cop
up the cause, the procurement committee replaced the livestock with the local (Shinwarri)
breed.

Level of satisfaction on assets

Completely satisfied

18%
42%
to some extent

40%

Not satisfied

Current status of the asset

Based on the results 90% of the beneficiaries are having the same assets which they received by
the project while 10 % were not holding the asset due to certain reasons like lost/died, sold due
to an urgency or domestic need etc.

Having same assets or not?

10%

yes

90% no
Ratio of increase and decrease in assets

The ratio of production increase in asset is 73% due to the appropriate livestock and enterprise
management skills. Percentage of asset decreased in asset is 20% which has already been
explained that unluckily the asset lost/stolen, died or sold due to an urgency or for domestic need
etc. Moreover 07% of the beneficiaries are stagnant by having the same number of assets
regardless of any increase or decrease.

Ratio in increase or decrease in asset

7%

20%
Asset Increased

73% Asset Decreased

having same assets

Have you made any changes/replacement in the asset during this period?

Larger part of the beneficiaries which is 97% have not changed or replaced their assets during
this period while only 03% of them have made replacements.

Changes/replacement in the asset

3%

Yes No
97%

Here is the breakup of above 03 percent of beneficiaries who changed/replaced their assets with
the reasons of changing and replacement. Based on the findings, 40% of the beneficiaries
changed their assets due to low income as they might not be able to bear the expenses of
maintenance.
30% of the beneficiaries expected that the asset is not appropriate for their survival and
productivity, for example in livestock 20% respondents claimed that the animals were so weak
and could not survive in future, although 10% replaced their assets due to low-slung breed
production.

Breakup/Reasons of those 3% benificiaries who

changed or replaced their asset

area not suitable for

20%
animals
30%
due to low income I
10% changed the asset
low breed
40%
Animals are very week

Type of change made

In continuation with change/replacement in the assets, some of the worthy areas which had been
selected by the beneficiaries have also been noticed in the results. Like 30% of the beneficiaries
switched to local breed which might be more productive and environment friendly. Similarly 30%
of the beneficiaries opened general stores instead of livestock as it was easier for them to
manage. 20% switched towards poultry farming and the remaining 20% opened other small
business instead of general store. Keeping in view of the reality these initiatives are more
productive and cost-effective for them.
 Type of changes/replacement in asset

Open General Store

20% instead of livestock
30%
bought local breed
20%
Changed poultry into goat
30%
Open Tire puncher shop
instead of general store

Effect on livelihood by changing/switching of asset

About the changing/switching of assets, 90% of the beneficiaries agreed that shifting to another
sector is logically more productive for them, while 10% were unsuccessful.

Degree of effectiveness after switching

10%

Yes
No
90%
Impact of assistance to improve the wellbeing of life and the helpfulness of asset in increasing
income at household level

79% of the beneficiaries acknowledged that they are satisfied with the intervention and the
assistance was very obliging for them in enhancing their quality of life, the comprehensive
findings are as under:

Programme assists regarding improvement of

wellbeing
No
21%

Yes Yes
79%
No

A scrutiny of enhancement in their quality of lives and livelihood status

More importantly, there are some dynamic factors which enabled them to move towards
enhancement. Based on the results change in their income has been recorded from minimum
Rs.300 PKR to Rs.6000 PKR which is very optimistic symbol for their lives. This change is a vital
source which stirred them towards the better wellbeing.

Please see the foundations of enhancement in their quality of lives and status

Approximate minimum and maximum

increase record in household income
6000

300
MINIMUM INCREASE MAXIMUM INCREASE
 Area of improvement (Medical Treatment)
Almost 61% of the beneficiaries including female have now access towards better health/medical
treatment as their financial status have been improved. With the passage of time, the remaining
39% has not seen any such change in their life.

Access to better medical treatment

39%
Yes
61%
No

Area of improvement (Employment)

Nearly 45 % of the beneficiaries have now access towards employment as they are socially
familiarized due to their work and got exposure in the market by all means and their financial
status have also been improved. Now they are in a position to bear the expenditures of their HHs
substantially as compare to the past.

Access to employment

45%
55% Yes
No

Keeping in view of the norms, ethics, customs and a very rigid traditional system, it is very difficult
for women to get an opportunity or pursue employment outside home, however it was a
remarkable achievement of the project that, now 38 % the female are engaged in income
generation activities at HH level, such as livestock management, poultry forming etc.

Access to employment for Female

38%
Yes
62%
No

Area of improvement (Better education)

Almost 47% of the male beneficiaries have now access towards better education, whereas
unfortunately 53% of the do not have access towards better education for their children.

access to better education (male)

53% 47% Yes

No

If we could have a glance over female education in the area, it has always been observed that the
standard access to better education is stigma. Now due to this project, 37% female have access
to education, whereas 63% are still surviving without access.
 Female access to better education

37%
Yes
63%
No

Area of improvement (assets/lands)

Ownership of assets/land plays very important role in family’s income generation. According to
the survey conducted, maximum number of 71% of male has the ownership of land and assets
while the remaining 29% has no ownership of assets as by the numerous reasons.

Ownership of assets/land

29%
Yes
71% No

64% women showed their ownership, which means a greater number of female has the
ownership of assets as compared to that 36% of those female without the ownership of assets
or land. This ownership enhanced their respect in the family and their relevant community.
 Female ownership of assets/land

36%
Yes
64%
No

Area of improvement (social space and visibility)

Visibility and access to social space is an important aspect of life and the below chart shows the
access to social space by the beneficiary to the market. 60% of the project beneficiary (male) has
good access to social space and has really got great advantages by that growth. On the other
hand 40% of the beneficiary has still no visibility and access to the social space as by the reason
of no assets and living in for flung areas and many other factors.

Male visibility and access to social space % wise

No Yes
40%
Yes No
60%

Based on the direct interviews conducted by the female enumerators with the female
beneficiaries, some good pictures of social access to the social space directly or indirectly are
observed. The below mentioned chart shows that 62% of female respondents has access to the
social space as they are involved in the production and earning amount for their survival. The
female are involved in the production and the male use to sale the products in the market. The
remaining 38% of female project beneficiaries have no visibility and access to the social space.

Female Visibility & access to social space

No
38% Yes
Yes No
62%

Area of improvement (Paying liabilities)

Paying the liabilities was also included in the questionnaire as to know that either they still they
pay their liabilities or not. 34% of the male respondent beneficiaries answered positively as they
still pay their liabilities with the reason that less production and low income generation. The
remaining 66% of the project beneficiary are without liabilities as either they had paid or they
were not under liability.

% wise beneficiaries (male) paying liabilities

Yes
34% Yes
No
No
66%

37% of the female beneficiary are now able to pay their liabilities but the remaining 63% of the
female beneficiary are still not able to pay their liabilities with reasons of less production low
income generation etc.
 Female's % wise paying liabilities status

Yes
37% Yes
No
No
63%

Area of improvement (Housing structure)

Improvement in housing structure was also observed and assessed in the study as 38 % of the
project male beneficiary has done slight changes in their housing structure like construction of
small room, construction of latrine, construction of coat yard and roofing structure. But, rest of
the 62 % are still having the same status.

% wise improvment in housing structure(Male)

Yes
38% Yes
No No
62%

Same findings are observed in the case of female beneficiary as 41% of them have done some
improvement like construction of room and roofing structure. But, rest of the 59 % are still having
the same status.
% wise improvment reported in housing
structure of female beneficiaries

Yes
41% Yes
No
No
59%
Most Significant Change (MSC)

Story of Shah Alam.

Intervention of BRSP through Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Found (PPAF) project of Livelihood
Enhancement and Project (LEP) has remarkably changed the fortune of many beneficiaries and out of
them, Shah Alam with family of five members live in the village of Sharan in Union Council of Dilsora of
District Pishin. Shah Alam works on daily wages and was unable to find permanent means of income
generation. He was fully involved in the process of Poverty Score Card (PSC), developing LIPs, attended
trainings and was member of Common Interest Group (CIG).

Shah Alam himself proposed the sector of livestock and got the training of livestock skill management. He
received 2 sheep. Commenting on the satisfaction on training and assets received, Shah Alam said, “He is
fully satisfied with assets provided and the training received and more importantly, he has made full use
of Livestock skills. The production has increased up to 4 sheep and with that change, now he obtains his
dairy products from his current flock for his family needs and also sells extra production in market if in
excess. He is now able to save 3500 per month”. He further added that he found himself an important
constituent of the CIG which enhanced his skills to look after animals in a better way and were able
establish linkages with markets. Shah Alam got access to better medical treatment, education and other
facilities which he never dreamt of.

The end line survey showed that now he is in the category of Non Poor with the score of 65 as compared
to the score of 14 of base line survey. He said.

“I worked hard to look after the animals provided to me for my livelihood which turned my poverty and
hopelessness into prosperity and happiness. I am now determined and hopeful that my current flock will
expand and I am very grateful to BRSP & PPAF for bringing substantial change in my living standards”
Story of Noor Muhammad.

Noor Muhammad is one of the beneficiaries of Livelihood Enhancement and Protection LEP project
funded by Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Found (PPAF) implemented by Balochistan Rural Support Program
(BRSP). Noor Muhammad family is comprised of 4 four members and he was having hard times due to
low income generation.

Noor Muhammad was fully engaged in the process of Poverty Score Card (PSC) and development of LIP
to be member of Common Interest Group (CIG). He received training of livestock skill management and
received 2 sheep as asset. When asked about satisfaction regarding the training and the assets received,
Noor Muhammad said “He is not only satisfied but also considers the intervention as a complete span
change in the life circle”. He further added, “The training skills are fully utilized and more notably the
linkages that are developed as a member of CIG will play an important role for the future transactions”.
Today, the livestock production has increased up to 4 and he is now able to save 5500 per month because
of dairy production of his current flock. This saving lead him to better medical treatment, has ownership
of the assets and good visibility and access to social life, although he is not having school going children
but has strong desire of sending his children for better education”.

Noor Muhammad further commented, “Now I am able to save a decent amount for my rainy days and
most importantly, I can cater for my family requirements. I have never thought of being so independent
and I pray for the sustainability of your organization which brought revolution in my life”
Story of Bakhat Bibi

Bakhat Bibi is a widow female with family comprised of 7 members live in Sharan village in Union Council
of Dilsora in district Pishin. She became one of the female beneficiaries of the project Livelihood
Enhancement and Protection (LEP) implemented by Balochistan Rural Support Program (BRSP) through
the support of Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Found (PPAF).

She has been fully involved in the process of Poverty Score Card, development of LIP and the other
requirement were fully ensured. She opted for the livestock and the received the 2 sheep as assets. The
training was attended by her husband. She showed her satisfaction over the trainings and assets
provided... She added, “The production of my flock has increased and now I am in this position to save an
amount of approx. 5000 per month. Now I own an asset, I do not have to borrow money as I have my own
savings. . This has not only brought prosperity to my house, but also raised my honor and dignity within
my village. . Now I feel that my capability has been enhanced in terms of children related issues, wellbeing,
schooling and provision of health facilities”.

Now she sells additional butter and milk produced from her flock after fulfilling her family requirements.
She is grateful to BRSP & PPAF for providing her an opportunity to make her capable to earn the livelihood
for her family and earn money.