Savings groups as a socioeconomic strategy to improve protection of moderately and critically vulnerable children in Uganda

Abstract

BackgroundIncreasing interest is concentrating in the investigation of whether socioeconomic interventions yield results for children in the area of protection. AVSI Foundation, in Uganda, leads a consortium implementing the “Sustainable, Comprehensive Responses for Vulnerable Children and their Families” (SCORE) Project. The project targets 25,000 moderately and critically vulnerable households in Uganda and addresses them through a multisectoral intervention package encompassing socio-economic, food security, protection and family strengthening. Data from SCORE's monitoring and evaluation system and the mid-term assessment has become available and is used to investigate the topic. ObjectiveThis paper contributes original data and analysis to the discussion of socioeconomic strategies for vulnerability reduction and protection of children. MethodsStatistical analysis of Village Savings and Loan Association Management Information System (VSLA MIS) data from 741 VSLAs was supported by the SCORE Project between 2012 and 2013. Statistical analysis of SCORE Vulnerability Assessment Tool (VAT) data covering 13,327 beneficiary households enrolled by SCORE in its first phase (last quarter 2011–first quarter 2012) and corresponding second assessment (second quarter 2013). Data analysis was carried out using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). ResultsBetween 2011 and 2012, SCORE supported the establishment of 743 Village Savings and Loan Associations (VSLAs), with a total membership of 20,818. Total saving stands at 1,113,185,960 Uganda Shillings. Saving and loans per capita are at 53,754 and 50,093 Uganda Shillings respectively, with regional variation (ranging 33,008–83,073 for savings, and 24,005–93,280 for lending). The overall loan to saving ratio is at 84.45%, with regional variation and range 60.83%–97.97%. Vulnerability data concerning the protection for 13,326 households supported by SCORE shows a reduction by 52%, with regional variation (range 42%–71%). ConclusionResults show that the VSLA approach can be used, besides community development, for direct vulnerability reduction strategies. VSLA approach can be made more inclusive of the most disenfranchised members of the community without losing in efficiency or effectiveness. SCORE Project data is highly suggestive of a positive linkage between socioeconomic interventions and protection outcomes, thereby reinforcing the current literature. More detailed analysis of SCORE databases may allow further understanding of the pathways linking the two result dimensions.