Exploring impacts of multi-year, community-based care programs for orphans and vulnerable children: a case study from Kenya.

The Community-Based Care for Orphans and Vulnerable Children (CBCO) program operated in Kenya during 2006-2010. In Eastern Province, the program provided support to approximately 3000 orphans and vulnerable children (OVC) living in 1500 households. A primary focus of the program was to support savings and loan associations composed of OVC caregivers (typically elderly women) to improve household and OVC welfare. Cross-sectional data were collected in 2011 from 1500 randomly selected households from 3 populations: program participants (CBCO group, n=500), households in the same villages as program participants but not in the program (the local-community-group = Group L, n=300), and households living in nearby villages where the program did not operate (the adjacent-community-group, Group A, n=700). Primary welfare outcomes evaluated are household food security, as measured by the Household Food Insecurity Access instrument, and OVC educational attainment. We compared outcomes between the CBCO and the subset of Group L not meeting program eligibility criteria (L-N) to investigate disparities within local communities. We compared outcomes between the CBCO group and the subset of Group A meeting eligibility criteria (A-E) to consider program impact. We compared outcomes between households not eligible for the program in the local and adjacent community groups (L-N and A-N) to consider if the adjacent communities are similar to the local communities. In May-June 2011, at the end of the OVC program, the majority of CBCO households continued to be severely food insecure, with rates similar to other households living in nearby communities. Participation rates in primary school are high, reflecting free primary education. Among the 18-22 year olds who were "children" during the program years, relatively few children completed secondary school across all study groups. Although the CBCO program likely provided useful services and benefits to program participants, disparities continued to exist in food security and educational outcomes between program participants and their non-OVC peers in the local community. Outcomes for CBCO households were similar to those observed for OVC households in adjacent communities.

How to calculate the annual costs of NGO-implemented programmes to support orphans and vulnerable children: a six-step approach.

BACKGROUND: Information on the costs of implementing programmes designed to provide support of orphans and vulnerable children (OVC) in sub-Saharan Africa and elsewhere is increasingly being requested by donors for programme evaluation purposes. To date, little information exists to document the costs and structure of costs of OVC programmes as actually implemented "on the ground" by local non-governmental organizations (NGOs). This analysis provides a practical, six-step approach that NGOs can incorporate into routine operations to evaluate their costs of implementing their OVC programmes annually. This approach is applied to the Community-Based Care for Orphans and Vulnerable Children (CBCO) Program implemented by BIDII (a Kenyan NGO) in Eastern Province of Kenya. METHODS AND RESULTS: The costing methodology involves the following six steps: accessing and organizing the NGO's annual financial report into logical sub-categories; reorganizing the sub-categories into input cost categories to create a financial cost profile; estimating the annual equivalent payment for programme equipment; documenting donations to the NGO for programme implementation; including a portion of NGO organizational costs not attributed to specific programmes; and including the results of Steps 3-5 into an expanded cost profile. Detailed results are provided for the CBCO programme. CONCLUSIONS: This paper shows through a concrete example how NGOs implementing OVC programmes (and other public health programmes) can organize themselves for data collection and documentation prospectively during the implementation of their OVC programmes so that costing analyses become routine practice to inform programme implementation rather than a painful and flawed retrospective activity. Such information is required if the costs and outcomes achieved by OVC programmes will ever be clearly documented and compared across OVC programmes and other types of programmes (prevention, treatment, etc.).