Community Based Organisations (CBOs): Can DAY-NRLM Do It? - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Livelihood Promotion Through Community Based Organisations (CBOs): Can DAY-NRLM Do It? H.S.Shylendra IRMA

Independent Assessment of Design, Strategies, and Impacts of DAY-NRLM IRMA, 2017

Introduction • Poverty Reduction is the primary focus of SDG 1 and 2 • Poverty being multidimensional challenge requires a more holistic approach • The past approaches have given mixed, if nor dismal results. Poverty challenge continues especially in rural areas • Newer strategies and interventions are being being explored given the past experience • DAY-NRLM is one the new flagship programmes towards poverty alleviation

DAY-NRLM • In existence since 2011, NRLM has adopted multidimensional approach for poverty alleviation. 1. Livelihood approach: Combine diverse interventions like wage employment and self-employment to address extreme and other types of poverty 2. Promote and nurture sustainable community based organisations (CBOs) to universally cover the poor and to unleash their innate abilities for poverty alleviation 3. Provide dedicate professional support and linkages to these CBOs for livelihood promotion effort.

• Mission statement: “To reduce poverty by enabling the poor households to access gainful self-employment and skilled wage employment opportunities, resulting in appreciable improvement in their livelihoods on a sustainable basis, through building strong grassroots institutions of the poor.” (GOI nd p.6). • Guiding principle of DAY-NRLM: “Social mobilization and building strong institutions of the poor is critical for unleashing the innate capabilities of the poor.” (ibid, p.6).

CBOs and Livelihood • NRLM visualizes promoting and nurturing various institutions of the poor comprising self-help groups (SHGs) their federations and other livelihood collectives. • These CBOs being refered as ‘Institutions of the poor’ are envisaged to emerge as universal catalytic agents of poverty reduction.

Figure 1: Typical Structure of SHG Federation under DAY-NRLM CLFs VOs SHGs

• ‘Platforms for collective action based on self -help and mutual co- operation’. • Building linkages with variety of other support and resource agencies, these institutions would strive towards providing a wide range of services, augmenting in the process capital, skills, employment, productive assets and infrastructure which can help overcome the multiple deprivations and risks faced by the poor.

Collectives and Livelihood • Can collectives of the poor with all their constraint work towards livelihood promotion ? • CBOs of NRLM aims at including all types of poor (9 crore)especially women and would like to address both livelihood protection and promotion needs,besides social issues of women • Experience of working with various types of collectives and community based organizations to address rural poverty and livelihood issues has at best been mixed in the country. • Excessive state control and regulation, elite capture, and absence of linkages have hindered the role of CBOs in the past

Requiem for Good Livelihood Collectives • Role clarity • Go beyond microfinance • Livelihood Centric (promoting and pursuing livelihoods like Amul cooperatives) • Good governance and professional support • Well integrated in terms of functions and linkages • Right legal form

What are CBOs? • CBOs Are peoples’ collectives which may be formal or informal and working at primary or higher levels on democratic and decentralization basis to address relevant social and economic needs of their members who exercise full or significant control and ownership over these organizations .

Objectives, Approach, and Methods • To analyse the policy and approaches of DAY- NRLM in promoting and nurturing SHGs, their federations and other collectives • To examine the structure and working of CBOs • Role in promotion of livelihood • Way forward towards promoting livelihood

Methodology • The Study covered 8 states with varying progress in NRLM implementation • Interaction with diverse stakeholders at various levels • Multiple methods including survey of 4472 households survey

Table 1: Outreach & CBO Formation under DAY-NRLM Details 2017 1 No. of districts covered 530 2 % of total district 81.62 3 No. of blocks covered 3519 4 % to total blocks 53.26 5 Households mobilized 3,86,18,623 6 % of target HHs 43.00 7 Estimated % of total rural households 21.55 9 Estimated % of rural BPL households 83.87 1 Total CBOs: 0 1. Self-Help Groups(SHGs): 32,52,372 2. Village Orgnisations(VOs): 1,81,105 3. Cluster Level Federations(CLFs): 15,665 4. Producer Organizations: 11,297

Table 2: Social Composition of DAY-NRLM SHGs 2017 Social Category % of % of Households Predominant SHGs* Scheduled Castes(SC) 1 22.10 18.95 Scheduled Tribes(ST) 2 13.33 12.03 Minorities 3 8.35 6.14 Differently enabled 4 1.21 1.33 persons Others 5 55.01 61.15 Elderly 6 - 0.40 Total 100.0 100.0 (Actual) (38618623) (3252372)

Figure 1: Typical Structure of SHG Federation under DAY-NRLM CLFs VOs SHGs

Table 2: Working of SHGs Details Total 1 Average Size of SHGs 11.02 2 % of SHGs reporting member withdrawal 37% 3 % of SHGs with Regular Meetings 86.68 4 % of SHGs with regular savings 91.58 5 Per member Savings Rs. 2293 6 % of SHGs with internal lending 96.47 7 % of SHGs with reg repayment in int lending 88.04 8 % of SHGs federated into VO 83.97 9 % of SHGs received training in SHG Mgment 82.61 9 % of SHGs received training in livelihood 45.11 10 20.65 % of SHGs/ members having membership in producer group/organization

Table 3: VOs- Results from VO Survey Details Total 1 No. of VOs surveyed 339 2 Average number of SHGs 10.95 78.98 3 % of ST/SC members on the governing body 476 4 Average membership fee per SHG (Rs.) 5 % of SHGs saving with VO 63.72 6 Average savings per SHG(Rs) 141

Table 4: Services/Activities of VOs (% to total) Services Total 1 70.52 Savings 87.31 2 Credit 36.19 3 Insurance 4 64.18 SHG-Bank Linkage Facilitation 5 82.84 SHG formation 6 73.88 Training for SHGs 45.15 7 Audit 69.03 8 Social issues taken up 9 24.25 Legal Counseling 10 26.12 Convergences attempted 116 45.90 Livelihood Promotion 12 9.70 FPOs formed 4.10 13 Input Supply 5.97 14 Supply of Consumer items

Table 5: DAY-NRLM* and SHG Bank Linkage Particulars 2013-14 2015-16 1 Total SHGs linked (ALL) (Lakh) 74.30 79.03 2 DAY-NRLM SHGs linked (Lakh) 22.62 34.57 3 % of DAY-NRLM SHGs (2/1) 30.45 43.74 4 Savings per SHG(Rs.) 10953 18065 5 No. of SHGs extended loan (Lakh) 2.26 8.16 6 % of SHGs extended loan 9.99 23.60 7 Loan disbursed per SHG (Rs.) 154009 205708 8 SHGs with outstanding loan(lakh) 13.07 21.91 9 % SHGs with outstanding loan 57.78 63.38 10 Loan outstanding per SHG (Rs) 77869 121452 11 Average loan per member 14001 18700

Table 6: Impact of NRLM Particualars Treatment Control 1. Productive Livestock 5.41 3.08 * 2. Non-Livestock 1.51 1.870 *** 3. Per capita Income 1422 1167 4. No. of Enterprises in Village 25.20 14.14 *** 5. % participating in MGNREGA 8.8 15.6 *** 6. No. of days worked 31.42 31.78 7. Per capita consum exp 1054 1180 *** 8. Per capita savings 2066 2438 9. No. of loans 0.44 0.17 *** 10. No. of formal loans 0.41 0.08 *** 11. Average loan received 7584 5143 12. No. of members migrating 0.08 0.05 **

Table7: Problems in SHGs and Support Needed for Livelihoods Details* I. Problems Faced by SHG Members Inadequate loan 18.57 Loan not available 18.25 No support for livelihood 17.13 No timely loan/delay 15.10 No training given 13.39 No savings withdrawal 10.03 Higher interest on Loan 9.87 Internal Conflict 4.86 No proper book keeping 3.04 Leaders dominate 1.81

Table8: Support Needed for Livelihoods Details* II. Support Needed for Improving Household Livelihoods Credit Subsidy 50.21 Credit 49.20 Training in income generation 40.45 Employment/Job; 32.34 Technology (Machines/equipment) 29.24 Other Subsidy 20.01 Marketing of your produce 13.98 Productive Assets 13.98

CBOs of NRLM & Livelihood: Conclusion • The CBOs of NRLM emerging in a fairly widespread way as platforms for socio-economic change for poor and women • Nascent and faced with many challenges in their goal of livelihood generation; long way to go • Institutional issues like capacity, autonomy, legality, role clarity yet to be addressed fully. • Though diverse activities being pursued but depth is weak; livelihood focus /activities very limited and sporadic • Largely microfinance focused; impact so far is largely what microfinance can do or enable (more of livelihood protection than promotion) The required professional support for LH promotion and linkages is found to be very weak; • The required professional support for LH promotion and linkages is found to be very weak;