The evaluation of Suchana, a large-scale development program to prevent chronic undernutrition in north-eastern Bangladesh.

Evidence of the impact of community-based nutrition programs is uncommon for two main reasons: the lack of untreated controls, and implementation does not account for the evaluation design. Suchana is a large-scale program to prevent malnutrition in children in Sylhet division, Bangladesh by improving the livelihoods and nutrition knowledge of poor and very poor households. Suchana is being implemented in 157 unions, the smallest administrative unit of government, in two districts of Sylhet. Suchana will deliver a package of interventions to poor people in about 40 randomly selected new unions annually over 4 years, until all are covered. All beneficiaries will receive the normal government nutrition services. For evaluation purposes the last 40 unions will act as a control for the first 40 intervention unions. The remaining unions will receive the program but will not take part in the evaluation. A baseline survey was conducted in both intervention and control unions; it will be repeated after 3 years to estimate the impact on the prevalence of stunted children and other indicators. This stepped wedge design has several advantages for both the implementation and evaluation of services, as well as some disadvantages. The units of delivery are randomized, which controls for other influences on outcomes; the program supports government service delivery systems, so it is replicable and scalable; and the program can be improved over time as lessons are learned. The main disadvantages are the difficulty of estimating the impact of each component of the program, and the geographical distribution of unions, which increases program delivery costs. Stepped implementation allows a cluster randomized trial to be achieved within a large-scale poverty alleviation program and phased-in and scaled-up over a period of time. This paper may encourage evaluators to consider how to estimate attributable impact by using stepped implementation, which allows the counterfactual group eventually to be treated.

Evaluation of a disability-inclusive ultra-poor graduation programme in Uganda: study protocol for a cluster-randomised controlled trial with process evaluation.

BACKGROUND: There is little evidence on how to support ultra-poor people with disabilities to adopt sustainable livelihoods. The Disability-Inclusive Graduation (DIG) programme targets ultra-poor people with disabilities and/or women living in rural Uganda. The programme is an adaptation of an ultra-poor graduation model that has been shown to be effective in many contexts but not evaluated for people with disabilities. METHODS: The DIG programme works with project participants over a period of 18 months. Participants receive unconditional cash transfers for 6 months, training, access to savings-and-loans groups, and a capital asset that forms the basis of their new livelihood. The programme is also adapted to address specific barriers that people with disabilities face. Eligible households are clustered by geographical proximity in order to deliver the intervention. Eligibility is based on household screening to identify the 'ultra-poor' based on proxy means testing-both households with and without people with disabilities are included in the programme. Clusters are randomly selected prior to implementation, resulting in 96 intervention and 89 control clusters. The primary outcome of the trial is per-capita household consumption. Before the start of the intervention, a baseline household survey is conducted (November 2020) among project participants and those not offered the programme, a similar endline survey is conducted with participants with disabilities at the end of programme implementation in July 2022, and a second endline survey for all participants in October 2023. These activities are complemented by a process evaluation to understand DIG programme implementation, mechanisms, and context using complementary qualitative and quantitative methods. Ethical approval for the research has been received from Mildmay Uganda Research Ethics Committee and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. DISCUSSION: DIG is a promising intervention to evaluate for people with disabilities, adapted to be disability inclusive across programme components through extensive consultations and collaboration, and has proven efficacy at reducing poverty in other marginalised groups. However, evaluating a well-evidenced intervention among a new target group poses ethical considerations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registry for International Development Impact Evaluations, RIDIE-STUDY-ID-626008898983a (20/04/22). ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN78592382 . Retrospectively registered on 17/08/2023.