Evaluation of the LDF HSRLM Program

Evaluation of the LDF HSRLM Program

Letz Dream Foundation (LDF) partnered with the Haryana State Rural Livelihood Mission (HSRLM) to provide technical expertise and guidance to the cluster-level staff and coordinate with the community for the project’s effective execution. 

The program focused on institution building, capacity building, and livelihood improvement by identifying key issues and developing sustainable strategies to support the communities. It facilitated backward and forward linkages and leveraged support from different departments/ institutes for training/ technical support to Self Help Group (SHG) members.

In line with the program’s objectives, the study aimed to:

• provide an understanding of the program’s contribution in improving decision-making, financial literacy, and professional capacity,
• measure the program’s impact in boosting women’s income, consecutively contributing to household income and improving lifestyle,
• validate the effective functioning of SHGs, Village Organizations, and Cluster Level Federations, and
• generate insights on institution building of the SHGs and implementation processes and conduct a process evaluation to judge their intensity and fidelity.

Sambodhi undertook the following actions to achieve the program’s objectives:

• Developed a process map to list out key processes under the intervention
• Developed a theory of change to understand and validate the pathways of change under the program
• Conducted Process evaluations (PE) by developing a composite summary of parameters indicating fidelity and intensity of the processes
• Did impact evaluation to assess the changes brought about by livelihood activities by undertaking baseline and end line quantitative surveys
• Conducted FGDs to triangulate findings from quantitative surveys

PE survey involved conducting in-depth interviews with the respondents chosen from six SHGs selected from 6 Village Organizations, selected from three Cluster Level Federations. Baseline surveys for impact evaluation were conducted with 1200 beneficiaries and 1200 non-beneficiaries at the household level from among four districts. A structured quantitative tool was developed and used for the survey. The study also exclusively assessed the state of 135 respondents slated to receive future livelihood interventions. While the baseline survey gave an account of the study area using descriptive statistical techniques and insights from the field, the endline assessment measured the intervention’s impact on improving livelihoods, beneficiaries’ awareness of government schemes, women empowerment, decision-making, etc.