2. COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS-KITCHEN GARDENS INTERVENTION

3. “Women and Children/Infants Improved Nutrition in Sindh”- WINS
WINS is EU funded four years initiative.
Overall objective to improve the nutrition status of children and pregnant/lactating women.
The specific objective is to address the high rates of malnutrition.
These objectives will be achieved through a combination of direct nutrition interventions and nutrition-sensitive actions.
Cost benefit analysis-Kitchen Gardens intervention
14 November 2016

4. 01 03 02 04 CBA Methodology Learning Agenda Step Step 3 Step Step
Data Analysis – Monetizing Benefits
Outcome Mapping (Proxy indicators)
Step
Step 3 01 03
Calculations of Returns on Investment-
Step
Data collection – Survey
Step 02 04
Cost benefit analysis-Kitchen Gardens intervention
14 November 2016

5. Outcome mapping and development of proxy indicators1 2 3 4 5
Increased Income
Savings
Food security
Women Empowerment
Improved skills
Total KG Produce by HH
Proportion of KG produce utilized at HH
Food Consumption Score
Ownership of Produce
Cost of learning same skills from any other institute
% saving in healthcare costs
% produce Sold
Ownership of Income
Average Price
Average Price
Saving because of KG
Baseline v/s KG study
Linkages with market
Cost benefit analysis-Kitchen Gardens intervention
14 November 2016

6. Costs to SC and Beneficiaries
Tools and input cost - $11571
Trainers cost, Trainees per diem - $3219
Inputs
Travel cost to sell produce in market - $119
Trainings
Opportunity cost in term of paid work ($13.2/month/ beneficiary)
HR and follow up cost (not included)
Travel
HR cost
Labor
Cost incurred by SC
Cost incurred by the households
Cost benefit analysis-Kitchen Gardens intervention
14 November 2016

7. Returns to Beneficiaries: Production & Income
Yield from KG per week
Average yield 10 kg per week
44% sold the surplus at local market
The average monthly income from kitchen gardens was USD 14
Yield from KG per week
Cost benefit analysis-Kitchen Gardens intervention
14 November 2016

8. Household vegetable consumption & saving
89% of the all household members used KG vegetables
56% consumed produce domestically from their kitchen gardens and did not sell in the market
The average household savings because of kitchen gardens was USD 10 per month
Own grown vegetables usage in a week
Cost benefit analysis-Kitchen Gardens intervention
14 November 2016

9. Translating increased consumption to health outcomes
Health expenses reduced to 23% due to KG intervention
CoD model estimated a positive impact on quality of the diet as a result of KG: The average meal frequency for 2-17 years of boys and girls is three .
Cost benefit analysis-Kitchen Gardens intervention
14 November 2016

10. Sustainability of KG Reasons for discontinuity: Lack of interest
Not enough yield
Affordability
Short term benefits
Are you practicing kg Now?
Cost benefit analysis-Kitchen Gardens intervention
14 November 2016

11. Women’s empowerment
81% women own the production of KG but only 37% can decide about the utilization of the income earned through the sale of vegetables
26% of women are directly selling the produce in market and are primary owners of the income they get from KG.
Improving access of women to markets and intra household decision making remains a challenge ;
Cost benefit analysis-Kitchen Gardens intervention
14 November 2016

12. Returns on Investment Returns to Beneficiaries with SC support
$14 : $24/ month/ beneficiary
Returns to Beneficiaries without SC Support.
$ 45 ; $ 24 / month/ beneficiary
Returns to SC (overall benefits to beneficiaries)
$ 1 : $0.32
Kitchen Gardens are only profitable to beneficiaries with Save the children Support. Looking at the present cost/benefits calculated in this study, if SC invest $ 1 , it only generate benefits equivalent to $.30.
Cost benefit analysis-Kitchen Gardens intervention
14 November 2016

13. Limitations
Additional stages to the analysis that could have strengthened the findings did not take place due to limitations in time and resources
In this analysis some important costs and benefits could not be monetized
As field data was collected by program staff who have implemented the kitchen gardens activity, so element of biasness is present
Cost benefit analysis-Kitchen Gardens intervention
14 November 2016

14. Recommendations Kitchen Gardens Programming:
Need to carefully consider whether supporting Kitchen Gardening is an effective approach for food security and nutrition, and outcomes it produces for children.
Develop a cost-effective KG model for beneficiaries to continue without SC inputs
Form a home producers/farmers group that should be linked with relevant government line department for technical support and establish community owned business centers
Need to consider additional approaches to enhance women empowerment e.g. linking women with markets, financial inclusion, skills development, intra-household control of resources; Women empowerment could be used as a key strategy to address child poverty on longer term.
Lessons for Wider Programming:
Future projects should develop Value For Money indicators at the start of intervention and continue to track them over the project period
Save the Children should apply this modeling approach at the design stage to ensure that interventions are scrutinized for their potential economic and social viability and sustainability in the longer term
Develop Learning agenda at the onset of projects
Cost benefit analysis-Kitchen Gardens intervention
14 November 2016

15. Cost benefit analysis-Kitchen Gardens intervention
14 November 2016