Ots 24 > 24038 > Impactas

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY S M Sehgal Foundation is a small and young NGO that is still growing. This organisation is actually a sister concern of Sehgal Family Foundation, USA. The main objective of starting this Foundation in India was and is to fund development activities in India. However, after funding different organisations (NGOs) for two initial years and not getting the desired outcome, the Foundation decided to plan and implement development project on its own and to develop some villages as model villages. There are four major programmes being run by the foundation in four villages of Gurgaon district. These programs are Income enhancement, water management, family life education and rural health. To assess the impact of income enhancement activities being carried out by the Foundation in the four villages and to suggest strategies to be adopted in future to achieve the organisation’s mission. The study covered the four villages namely Agon, Ghaghas, Rangala Rajpur and Goela where the foundation is directly promoting income enhancement program, Firozpur Zhirka where farmers themselves are running such activities and two villages namely Daula and Abhaypur where a partner organisation named Arravali Vikas Sangathan is implementing the program. After developing understanding of the program, parameters were selected for impact assessment of the program, information was gathered from the villages and analysed. After mid course corrections and reviews, recommendations were made. Group discussions and semi-structured interviews were conducted with the participants and non participants of the program. Secondary information was obtained from documents available at the Head office, Gurgaon, as well as Field office, Nagina, of Sehgal Foundation. Foundation is following an integrated approach where different programmes overlapping in objectives and implementation stages. However, only 30% of the households in the four villages have been covered under the income enhancement program. Of these 30% people also, not all of them have benefited to the desired extent and also the reach of the program shows wide variations across the four villages in terms of percentage of households in a particular village getting covered. More community based organizations need to be formed and strengthened and be trained to bear the responsibility of implementing such development projects. In order to ensure better price for farmer’s produce the present arrangements of market linkage need to be strengthened, new market be explored and stress should be on crop diversification.

1

Contents I.

Goal

II. Principles III. Target IV. Activities V.

Research Objective

VI. Methodology VII. Limitations of the study VIII.Parameters for assessment IX. Information Required X.

Sources of information a) Primary Sources b) Secondary Sources

XI. General Observations XII. Observations based on parameters for assessment XIII. a) Quantifiable impact XIII. b) Non quantifiable impact XIV. Recommendations XV. Conclusion

2

INCOME ENHANCEMENT PROGRAMMES I. Goal Wealth creation at village level in a sustainable manner II. Target To raise the income of 60 % of the villagers in the selected villages by 20% by the end of year 2005. III. Principles Collective approach with partners (public, private and non profit and research organizations) & the primary stake holders (the villagers). Environment friendly, sustainable approach. Leverage Information, communication and technology (ICT) IV. Activities 1.

Introducing farmers to efficient practices. Agricultural Practices & Farm Implements. (bed making, Cizeling, pest management) Promoting sustainable agriculture (vermicompost, drip irrigation).

2.

Linking Markets Farmer Association (Leverage Middlemen). Market driven products.

3

Skill training and Entrepreneurship Development Skill development of youth, promoting self employment. Women self help groups.

3

V. Research Objective To assess the impact of Income Enhancement activities on the lives of people and to suggest future strategies. VI. Methodology 1.

Understanding the project with the help of reporting officer and Program leader for Income Enhancement Program.

2.

Understanding the organization and the relevance of Income enhancement program in achieving the mission of the organization.

3.

Selection of parameters for impact assessment.

4.

Information gathering from primary and secondary sources.

5.

Analysis of the data and information gathered.

6.

Mid-course corrections and review (during such an exercise it came out that I shall also visit the organizations like ARRAVIS which are working with the same mandate and are presently acting as an implementing agency for SMSF).

7.

Observations and findings.

8.

Recommendations / future strategies

9.

Conclusion.

VII. Limitations of the study 1. The study was restricted to the villages of Agon, Ghaghas, Rangala Rajpur, Firozpur Zhirka, Goela, Dauhla and Abhaypur. 2. Since no base line data regarding the socio-economic status of the families being associated with the foundation’s activities at the beginning was available, hence analysis and impact assessment was mostly qualitative in nature. 3. In programmes like vocational training to adolescent girls at the FLE centers, either no follow up was done or no record maintained as to how many girls have started using the skills to earn a living for themselves. So, I had to rely on the

4

information provided by the Field facilitators or FLE instructors and the few participants I could meet in the villages. 4. The analysis is based on the information gathered from a sample of participants of Sehagal Foundation’s programmes which included •

32 members of 6 out of the 7 SHGs in the three villages of Agon, Ghaghas and Goela,

•

13 members of 3 out of the 15 SHGs formed by the Arravali Vikas Sangathan,

•

participants and FLE instructors present at the 3 FLE centers in Ghaghas, Agon and Abhaypur (near Sohna),

•

11 girls in the three villages of Agon, Goela and Ghaghas who had already completed their training from the FLE centers in the respective villages,

•

2 youth (male) in Agon village who have received training from RUDSET,

•

31 youth, 5 in Agon, 8 in Rangala Rajpur, 7 in Ghaghas, 4 in Goela and 7 in Dauhla village.

•

46 farmers, 4 in Agon, 13 in Ghaghas, 11 in Rangala Rajpur, 13 in Goela village, 5 in Firojpur Zhirka. Of these, 7 farmers from Ghaghas, 8 from Rangala Rajpur, 10 from Goela and 2 from Firojpur Zhirka were all members of Farmer’s association. Rest of the villagers were those who have not been part of any of the activities of Foundation.

•

13 women across the 4 villages of Agon, Ghaghas and Goela who have been part of any of the activities of Foundation.

VIII. Parameters for assessment a) Targeting: Who is being targeted by the program? Is it the relatively well off or the poorest? Men or women? b) Selection : How the activity was selected? Was it participatory? c) Feasibility of the activity in terms of: - Technology and Skills: Traditional or new skills (if new skill, has there been a skill upgradation program is the trade culturally acceptable). 5

- Raw material: Is it locally available - Market: Local or distant, marketing arrangement, channels etc. - Financial feasibility: In terms of returns, is the return adequate (to sustain interest), Where is the initial capital coming from, what about working capital? - Scale of operations: It is important to have the right scale of operations ( for instance, if you train 5 tailors in the same village, definitely not all are going to do well, Similarly for a distant market, the scale could be such that marketing costs are met) - Operating Cycle: A larger operating cycle often leads to loss of interest amongst the community - Is the activity a supplementary one (basically to add to the family income or is the primary one) - Seasonality of the activity: Does seasonality have an effect on the scale of operations and functioning of farmer associations? - Implementation planning: does the organization have differential implementation plan for different villages which differ in several aspects such as total no. of households, average family size, the socioeconomic status of the villagers, the availability of basic infrastructure facilities, etc. d) Institutional Arrangements: How robust is the people's institution? This is important for sustainability. e) Sustainability (Basically to assess whether the enterprise would be successful even after the withdrawal of the foundation) - In terms of people's institution, capital requirements (subsidy). f) Scalability Can the program be taken from 4 to 40 to 400 villages over the years and much beyond? g) What is the overall impact in quantitative terms i.e. income enhancement and in qualitative terms? h) Withdrawal strategy Does the organization have a definite withdrawal strategy for the 4 villages for the different programmes? IX. Information Required 1. Data on different activities being carried out in the different villages.

6

2. Past and present status of the activities. 3. No. of Village Level Institutions created, strengthened, VCs identified and trained. 4. Data on role of PIT staff and their performance X. Sources of information a) Primary Sources 1. Discussions with the Executive Director, Program Leaders and other staff members at the head office of the foundation. 2. Semi structured interviews with the FVGA & PIT members. 3. Meeting representatives of allied organization like Arravis. 4. Focus group discussions with members of farmer’s association and village level institutions. 5. Visiting the villages to have on the site assessment of continuing activities. b) Secondary Sources 1

Study of documents available at the SMSF head office at Gurgaon as well as the field office at Nagina.

2. Study of documents available with the SHGs and Farmers’ Associations (FVGAs) like their books of accounts and other records. 3. Verification of certain documents like case studies prepared by the PIT members by meeting the beneficiaries. XI. General Observations: a) There have been very few cases of a funding agency getting into program implementation at the grass root level with such detailed objectives and plan of action. b) Experienced professionals guiding the programs as per their experience and skill and skilled and devoted workforce a special feature of PIT. c) In-house funding leading to more flexible approach in project implementation. Abundance of resources a big boon to the program and moral of the staff at the grassroots level. However, abundance of resources cutting both ways.

7

d) Integrated approach, different programmes overlapping in objectives and implementation stages. XII. Observations based on parameters for assessment: a) The activities are aimed at improving the wellbeing of the entire community. b) Interventions like formation of Self Help Groups and vocational training to women at the FLE centers depict the gender sensitive approach in the Income enhancement program. c) The activities have been selected by participative approach. d) Feasibility - Technology and skills: Introduction of new technology along with skill upgradation program to use the new technology leading to easy acceptability of the new technology among the villagers. - Raw material: In case of improved agricultural practices, where raw materials are to be brought / bought from outside, guidance has been provided to the people. - Market: Programmes like vocational training to the adolescent girls have been designed keeping in mind the demands in the local market (mostly the village itself). In interventions like FVGAs, where attempt has been to tap the distant market, arrangements for proper market linkage have been made by associating farmers with the Mother dairy which provides them with the required channel. However, the present market linkage is not adequate to absorb the quantity being produced by the farmers. They are also facing problems with the grading and rejection procedure. They have to incur huge losses if the consignment is rejected at the Delhi based collection center of MDFVL. - In terms of return: Returns are adequate to maintain peoples’ interest. It can be proved by the fact that the membership of FVGA or the number of SHGs and their savings, and the number of people taking up improved cropping practices has increased. However, still only a small proportion of the entire population has been covered by these interventions - In terms of initial capital requirements: All those interventions where initial capital requirements for the beneficiaries have been low have been well taken by the people and have yielded good results. However, where initial capital requirements have been more, people have been found to be reluctant in taking up the activities. For example, vocational training through FLE centers has been more successful as compared to the training given to people through RUDSET. In

8

the latter case, people required initial capital to the tune of Rs.50000 to 75000 after the training to start an enterprise on their own, which they could not manage. - Scale of operations: In terms of vocational training to adolescent girls at the FLE centers, since it was basically aimed at serving as the means for attracting the girls towards the center to attend the Family life education program, and not really aimed at generating employment for the girls per se, training any number of girls has not really lead to competition among them to capture the local market. Moreover, not all girls have started using the skills for business purposes. So, the training has led to income enhancement for the few who have started some kind of enterprise. For other interventions, like training through RUDSET, till now very few people have been trained and there is no evident threat of such competition arising in the near future. However, in case of market linkage programs for FVGA, such problem has been arising. After getting training and information from or with the help of Foundation and market linkage with the help of Mother Dairy, most of the farmers have started producing same vegetables like Tomatoes, Brinjal, etc. and it’s but obvious that all of them cannot sell the same produce at remunerative prices because of the demand- supply constraints. - Operating Cycle: In case of activities like selling vegetables through FVGAs, where returns are quick and assured, people have been more willing to participate than activities like chiseling where the return is less immediate and less quantifiable. - Seasonality of the activity: Seasonality of the activities especially those related to agriculture has an effect on the income enhancement program. In case of peak season, when a particular harvest comes to the market, since majority of farmers in the area produce the same crops, they may not be able to realize remunerative prices because of excess supply. Hence, little or no income enhancement may take place. e) Institutional Arrangements & Sustainability People’s institutions’ like SHGs and Farmers’ Associations ensure that more than one person’s interests are linked together. Some of the SHGs have become somewhat independent in terms of carrying out their daily activities while others are not. Same is the case with Farmer’s associations. However, in case of other interventions the foundation has directly been working as the implementing agency and has had to face the uphill task of running after people motivating them to take up their own cause. f) Scalability

9

At present, the project implementation team is heavily engrossed with the implementation of development projects and achieving physical targets. Village level institutions could not be formed in any of the vilolages except Ghaghas; and there too, the Village level institution has not started functioning. This has lead to the task of community mobilization taking a back seat. In such case, if the foundation plans to expand its area of activities, it will have to increase the size of its PIT under the present circumstances which can not be considered a wise option for any not for profit organization for monetary and other management considerations. XIII. Overall impact in quantitative terms and in qualitative terms. a) Quantifiable impact: 1. Total number of households benefited under Income Enhancement program

-

village

Total HHs

Improved Agri. Practices

FVGA

SHG

Total no. of HHs covered

Agon

602

8

----

24

32

Ghaghas

303

4

86

28

118

Rangala Rajpur

150

-----

86 + 34

----

86

Goela

140

4

34

44

82

Activities like chiseling and use of vermicompost are yet to show results. Other interventions like water management will also lead to income enhancement but have long term and more generalized effect rather than effecting individual households. Other activities like IPM were one time activities carried out by the foundation -and so have been incorporated in the table. No major impact of vocational training given by RUDSET was seen and so not incorporated in the table.

2. Improved cropping practices:

10

Bed making: Farmers’ reported increase in production of vegetables by 25 to 30%. Chizeling: The effect of Chiseling is yet to be realized by the villagers. (Please refer to Annexure 1 for details) 3. Vermicompost: Farmers are yet to realize the effect as it is yet to be put to use. Use of vermicompost was demonstrated in Agon in December 2003; in Ghaghas it was demonstrated in summer tomato and was found to be effective. In fact farmers from nearby villages like Krhera also visited the field and learned from the experience. (Please refer to Annexure 2 for details) 4. Farmers’ associations and Market linkage: Farmers’ getting approximately 20% more value for their produce as compared to when they sell it in the local market. (Please refer to Annexure 3 for details) 5. Self Help Groups: Of the 7 SHGs that I visited (for SMSF only), more than 35% of their members have benefited through interloaning. Of this 35%, 25% of the members had taken loans for productive purposes and the rest 10% for their consumption needs. More than 95% of the members have been saving regularly. No case of default in loan repayment was seen. Of the people who have taken loan for productive purposes, 3 women reported to have daily earning of Rs.100 to 120. While some other women had taken loan to support their family business. (Please refer to Annexure 4 for details) 6. Vocational training: a. Through RUDSET: I could meet 3 people who have received training from RUDSET. However, no income enhancement has taken place in their case. I also came across at least 9 youths who wish to undergo training from RUDSET. b. Through FLE canters: I visited 5 FLE centers in all. 1 of these FLE centers is running more like a stitching training center. Actually the vocational training given at these centers is the main cause which pulls the girls to these centers. I could meet at least 8 girls and women for whom income enhancement has take for sure after the training. 2 of these 8 girls told me that they are able to earn to the tune of Rs.1500 a monthly in peak seasons and Rs.400-500 in the lean seasons. One of the girls has bought a sewing machine with her own income. (Please refer to Annexure 4 for details) b) Non quantifiable impact:

11

1. Interventions like formation of farmers’ associations have made life easier for the villagers. Now they are able to sell their produce from their doorstep which saves them a lot of time and energy. 2. Capacity building of the farmers, impact of grading, quality parameters etc. With time the experience gained by the farmers in conducting the operations of the farmer associations has made them understand the nitty-gritty of running a business. They now understand the use of grading mechanism and have become quality conscious. They now like to grow better quality vegetables which are easily salable and fetch them better prices rather than vegetables traditionally grown in the area. 3. Planning: For people associated with Farmers associations, mother dairy helps them plan their crops such that not all vegetables are required to be plucked at the same time and also not all the farmers are producing the same vegetables. Other interventions related to improved agricultural practices have helped the farmers to plan their crops on the basis of available resources. With savings from SHGs and selling produce through farmers associations, people can plan their future activities. 4. Faith in foundation: the foundation has been able to generate goodwill and faith among people for itself. Now people are more forthcoming in joining hands with the foundation for their own wellbeing. 5. Gender sensitive approach: Foundation’s programmes follow gender sensitive approach. Infact, the programmes with women like Family Life Education and SHGs have been the most successful ones.

XIV. Recommendations

12

1. The amount of effort required for implementing any program in a village like Agon with 602 households is a more difficult task as compared to implementation in a village like Goela with 140 households. Hence, the approach of the foundation in keeping village as the unit of implementation needs to be reconsidered. A fixed number of households can be made as the unit of implementation for a given strength of PIT staff. 2. Instead of working for the people, Foundation should stress on working with the people. It shall focus on its model of development of identification of village champions, their training, formation of village level institutions (VLIs) and enabling the VLIs to take up development activities. 3. Introducing farmers to efficient practices Farmers are forthcoming in adopting any practice which involves little investment and good and quick returns. However, in case of practices like chiseling, where returns are not that immediate and evident, farmers are reluctant to invest in these activities. Hence, one time exposure of the farmers to these practices is not enough. They should be counseled and such activities be promoted for a more sustained period of time. Similarly, in case of practices like integrated pest management and use of biofertilisers, people require guidance and the PIT need to make more regular follow up on the state of activities. 4. Linking Markets In case of market linkage program, farmers have been facing problems due to inadequate demand from MDFVL. Hence, more markets need to be explored where farmers can sell their produce at remunerative prices. Excess supply of vegetables is also due to most of the farmers still producing the same two or three vegetables like tomato, brinjal, etc. Hence, crop diversification is must in case of vegetables. Farmers need to be provided guidance as to what vegetables other than the few grown regularly can be grown and sold at remunerative prices. Farmers are also facing problem due to lack of appropriate grading facilities. ) Improvement in grading facility is required. The farmer associations need to be associated with the nearest TST centers or new TST centers be opened depending on the willingness of the MDFVL. Most of the farmer associations do not work for 4 to 8 months in a year due to non availability of vegetables in off season. Hence, apart from crop diversification, farmer associations can also think of other activities like dairying as there are is huge cattle population in all these villages. Making agricultural inputs available to the farmers can be another way in which services of farmer associations can be utilized. Infact, purchase of Bed maker by the farmer association in Ghaghas and Goela is a right step in this direction. It can also become a source of revenue for such community based organizations. 5. Skill training and Entrepreneurship Development

13

In order to achieve the objective of promoting self employment following approach is suggested: i) Training of the youth in those skills where beginning a new enterprise is less capital intensive. Opportunities in the services sector can be explored to achieve this end. ii) Better access for trainees to institutional finance and hence methods like bank linkage could be explored as done in the case of SHGs. One can also think of promoting such people who are interested in learning the same or complementary skills and can come together to start a business jointly. 6. Withdrawal strategy The villages vary in population, average family size and the socioeconomic status of the inhabitants. The program is at different stages in different villages. Not all activities are running in all the villages. Hence, Foundation needs to assess the state of affairs and the degree of progress made in each village with respect to individual interventions instead of withdrawing simultaneously from all the programs in those villages. Foundation will also have to take into account the preparedness of the villagers and the village level institutions to take up the development activities on their own before it decides upon withdrawing from any village. XV. Conclusion: After studying and analyzing the entire program, and looking at its relevance in achieving the mission of the Foundation, one can easily say that Income Enhancement Program has been one of the most important step in the organisation’s strategy. The simple reason being that people are easily interested in an activity when they see any opportunity to enhance their income. Though it becomes difficult to quantify the level of income enhancement in the absence of baseline data for individual participants of any program, there has been definite positive impact on the lives of people. This can be gauzed from the increasing interest of the people in Foundation’s activities and the increasing membership of Farmer associations and number of SHGs. The way people have started running the activities of these organizations, taking care of group and their individual interes quite effectively is a clear indication of empowerment of people taking place. However, in order to achieve the desired level of success, much more needs to be done as only 30% of the households in the four villages have been brought under the ambit of these programs in a sustained manner. More community based organizations need to be formed and strengthened and be trained to bear the responsibility of implementing such development projects. In order to ensure better price for farmer’s produce the present arrangements of market linkage need to be strengthened, new market be explored and stress should be on crop diversification.

ANNEXURE 1

14

Introducing farmers to efficient practices. Agricultural Practices & Farm Implements. Farmers are being trained to take up improved cropping practices and new farm implements. Initially foundation supports some farmers to buy new farm implements like bed maker and Chisel. Then demonstrations are held on the method and benefits of using these implements. Initially it becomes difficult to persuade farmers to invest in these new farm implements but after seeing the benefits of using these implements, more farmers come forward to buy or hire such implements for use in their fields. Bed making: A bed maker is simple instrument that can be attached to a tractor and used for making raised bed for vegetables cultivation. The bed maker helps save on water and increases productivity also. A crop grown on raised bed consumes upto 30% less water than a field that is flood-irrigated under normal conditions, crop yield on raised bed is 25-30% more than a crop not sown on raised bed. Farmers recognized the use of bed making in agriculture, especially horticulture. Success stories have been created in villages in case of production of different crops / vegetables and especially tomatoes where production increased by approximately 30%. The case study on two farmers named Haji Mohammed and Mohammed Khalil of Agon village is being attached here as annexure. Chizeling: Chizel is used for deep plowing. A permanent crust is formed about 6 inches below the soil owing to the excess use of chemical fertilizers. This crust is impervious. It even does not allow the plant roots to penetrate. Chizel breaks this crust, thus making the soil permeous and allowing the plants to grow better. A farmer needs to chisel the field once in three years for best results.

Here follows a village-wise detail of Bed making and chizeling of land adopted by 15

farmers.

Bed making

Chizeling

2002

2003

2004

Ghaghas -----

9 acres

8 acres

60 acres

Agon

-----

3 acres

2 acres

53 acres

Rangala -----

8 acres

16 acres

28 acres

Goela

8 acres

2 acres

------

-----

Besides bed making and chiseling, on the initiative of Sehgal Foundation, training sessions have been held by several teams of experts which included scientists from institutes like IARI, technical experts from Kisan Vikas Kendras and the representatives of seeds and pesticides industry on better methods of pest control and better cropping practices. Adoption of new crops has been a significant feature of this program. People have now started growing autumn-winter tomatoes which they believed could not be done. Besides tomatoes, other vegetables include green chillies, radish, cucurbits and late summer brinjal. Intercropping like Okra with Cauliflower, Fodder crop (jowar) with vegetables and Radish with leafy vegetables has also been promoted by the foundation. Drip irrigation The geographical region in whch Sehgal Foundation is working suffers from acute scarcity of water domestic and agricultural purposes and still agriculture is the main occupation of the villagers, Hence Sehgal foundation has been trying to promote drip irrigation in the area with the following intended benefits: 1)

To save on the amount of water required (only 30-40% of water required in case of drip irrigation as compared to flood irrigation).

2)

Saving on cost of production (less weed germination and less cost of fuel or water required to take water to the fields).

3)

To improve the quality of produce.

Drip irrigation infrastructure: Cost of setting up the infrastructure ranges from Rs. 12000 to Rs. 50000-60000 per acre. The structure costing Rs. 12000 lasts for 2 years while the other structure lasts for about 10 years. ANNEXURE 2 16

Vermicompost In its effort to promote sustainable agricultural practices, Sehgal foundation has been trying to promote the use of vermicompost in place of chemical fertilizers. Villagers have been encouraged to set up vermicompost units to produce vermicompost for their own use. Intended benefits 1) Increase in quantity and quality of fruits, vegetables and flowers. 2) Decrease in cost of production with less use of chemical fertilizers and less irrigation required. 3) Less risk of crop loss due to pest attack. 4) Soil – increase in humus content, increased water holding capacity of soil, decrease in salinity and acidification of soil (due to less use of chemical fertilizers), reduced soil erosion. 5) Cost effective pollution abatement technology. 6) More ground water recharge and less depletion of ground water. Target group 1) Farmers in general, vegetable growers in particular. 2) Women in general and SHG members in particular. 3) Enterprising youth interested in vermicomposting. Materials required for vermicompost production (For a pit of size 1.5m X 1m X 1m) Dry organic wastes (DOW) =

50 kg

Cowdung slurry

(CS)

=

15 kg

Rock phosphate

(RP)

=

2 kg

Earth worms

(EW)

=

500-700 (in number)

Water

(W)

=

5 L every 3 days.

Ratio of

DOW : CS : RP : EW : W:: 5 : 1 : 0.2 : 50-75 : 0.5

Production cycle 45 days Output 50 kg from 1 pit in 1 cycle. Recommended dosage

17

For general use in agriculture

3-4 tons per Ha.

For fruit trees

5-10 kg per tree.

For vegetables

3-4 tons per Ha.

For flowers

500-700 kg per Ha.

Comparative analysis of benefits of different fertilizers: Name of Nutrients fertilizer utilized

Require ment (kg/ha)

Nutrient present (kg/ha)

Price of nutrient available

46

Nutrient Average available to price of plants fertilizer (kg/ha) (Rs./kg) 9.2 4.5

Urea (46% N) SSP (16% P) CAN (20% N) DAP (18% N & 46% P) Vermicompost

Nitrogen 20%

100

Phosphorus 15% Nitrogen 20%

100

15

2.4

2.6

108.82

100

20

4.0

4.2

21.0

Nitrogen 20% 100 Phosphorus 15%

N-18 P-46

N-3.6 P-6.9

DAP=8.5 NTP=13.5

75.94

Nitrogen 2% 4000 Phosphorus 1.75% Potassium 1.5% Microflora 2% Trace elements 1%

82.5

53.625

1.5 to 3.0

28.0

How popular is vermicomposting with villagers: Village Agon Ghaghas Rangala Rajpur Nagina Gummat Nasirbas Goela

No. of V.C. units Initial 55 34

present 50 27 5 2 2 1 8 ANNEXURE 3

18

49.0

Linking Markets Farmer Association (Leverage Middlemen) Sehgal foundation’s priority has been to promote community based activities rather than individual enterprises. Foundation realized that the farmers in this area produce vegetables on large scale. Vegetable cultivation is not only a better option for income but also a labour intensive activity. It has been estimated that each acre of vegetable crop provides for labour outside the family worth of Rs. 5000. this is skilled labour and normally provided by woman @ Rs. 70 per day that is equivalent to approximately 70 days of work. In addition to the above, this also generates employment to various people I the supply chain (transporter, grader, retailer, etc.). in India, the multiplier ratio for food sector is 2.4. this means that for Rs.100 Of revenue generated in food, another Rs. 240 of revenue is generated elsewhere in the country.(source: Food and Agriculture Integrated Development Action {FAIDA}, CII, McKinsey & Co.;1997, New Delhi). Sehgal Foundation decided to promote vegetable cultivation as an option for income enhancement. The villagers were motivated to form village level Farmer’s associations with expert guidance from Mother Dairy Fruits and Vegetables Limited, New Delhi (MDFVL) and sell their produce to directly to MDFVL. Intended benefits: 1) Increasing producers’ share in the price paid by the end consumer. 2) Ensuring market oriented products. 3) Facilitate start-up of allied activities by utilizing the market linkage and infrastructure developed in terms of peoples’ association with the help of this activity. The TST (Taza, Sasta, Turant) Center at Goela Mother Dairy has established a TST center at Goela where on the spot selection and grading of farmers’ produce is done. It ensures good quality product for MDFVL and saves the farmers’ of the uncertainity that if the produce is rejected after sending it to the MDFVL plant and collection center situated at Mangolpuri, New Delhi, then hardly will they be able to realize a remunerative price for the rejected produce. In case of on the spot rejection, they take the rejected produce to the local market and sell them at

19

remunerative prices. The members of other farmer’s associations have raising strong demand with the mother dairy to establish such TST centers in their own villages but due to Logistical constraints with the MDFVL, it has not been possible. Present Status Village Ghaghas

Started/

Membership

restarted

Initial

Present

April’02

24

86

April’02 to May’03 Rs.448000.

26

120

April’04 to May’04 Rs.207121 Jan’03 to Dec’03 Rs.770413

11

34

October’03

34

Rs.1414322. Jan’03 to Dec’03 Rs.610000.

RangalaRajpur Goela (TST center) Firozpur-

October’03 -------------

---------

Turnover

to

May’04

Zhirka Market driven products MDFVL does not only provide market linkage to the Farmer associations, it also provides them technical support and helps them plan their horticultural activities. MDFVL has its own resource center at Azadpur wholesale market, New Delhi, which collects information regarding the demand pattern and the price trends for different vegetables. Accordingly the farmers are guided by the experts from mother dairy well in advance as to what vegetables to grow, when to sow the seeds and how to grow them.

ANNEXURE 4 Skill training and Entrepreneurship Development

20

Skill development of youth In order to generate more self employment opportunities for youth, Sehgal Foundation arranged for providing vocational training to through RUDSET (Rural Development and Self Employment Training Institute). A document showing the list of training in the various kinds of activities is being attached as annexure. Present status: In my field visit to Agon village, I could meet 2 youth who have taken training in welding and fabrication work. However, no self employment opportunity could be created for any of them because of the want of initial capital required which they could hardly manage. Infact, they had undergone the training, though they already knew the work, for the sole reason that they will become eligible for some financial assistance from Banks but they could not get the desired support. I could meet at least 13 more youth in Agon and the other three villages of Ghaghas, Rangala Rajpur and Goela who were willing to undergo the training. 3 of them had already tried but failed to qualify in the basic eligibility test set by RUDSET. Women self help groups Sehgal Foundation aims to empower women in the villages. Economic support providing control of women over their own life, SHGs have proved to be an effective means of meeting the consumption credit needs as well as the need of credit for productive purposes. For Sehgal Foundation, SHGs have been a very successful intervention. In all there are 7 SHGs in 3 villages of Agon, Ghaghas and Goela. Of these 7 SHGs, 1 SHG in Agon is a male SHG. Rest 6 are women SHGs. In all these SHGs, members have been saving regularly. Members have taken loans for productive as well as consumption purposes. Some of them have already repaid the loans while still others are repaying it. After talking to these members, it was evident that they are aware of the basic purpose of SHG formation. They convincingly say that they are willing to run their SHG even if Foundation does come to help them. However, they want the field facilitators of Sehgal Foundation to keep guiding them for some more time. Present status.

21

Village

Agon

No.

Names

of

of SHGs

SHGs 2 Krishna

members Contri- Total

12

(F) Kisan

Loans

bution

collection total

Productive

Rs.50

Rs. 6000

purpose Rs.1000

Rs.1000

Per 10

month

For Rs.5000

none

Samuh Ghaghas

2

nursery raising

(M) Ronak

14

Rs.100 Rs.11000

Rs.31000 Rs.20000

Jannat

12

Per

Rs.28000

Rs.16000 Rs.8000

---------

----------

Rangala

0

--------

-----

month --------

Rajpur Goela

3

Tulsi

20

Rs.100 Rs.30000

Rs.60000 Rs.17000

Roja

10

Per

Rs.6000

Rs.10000 Rs.6000

----------

3 3

Shabnam 10 ---------- ------------------- ----------

month ---------------

Rs.6000 -----------------

Rs.5000 ---------

Rs.5000 ---------------------

1

----------

----------

--------

----------

-----

----------

Harchandpur 1

----------

----------

--------

----------

-----

-----------

-------------------

-------------------

---------------

-------------------

---------

---------------------

Dauhla Damdama Lodhki

Abhaypur Kerla

4 1 (new)

22