Evaluation of PL-480 Title II school feeding program in India

Evaluation is based on statistical analysis of data from a quantitative assessment (conducted by India's National Council for Education, Research and Training - NCERT) of program impact on primary school enrollment and retention; the period covered is not indicated. CARE's SF program has effectively targeted poorer districts and has probably increased school attendance. In both 1973 and 1978, districts with SF programs had higher school enrollment rates than did districts with none (perhaps reflecting a cumulative impact, as SF programs were introduced in most districts between 1962 and 1965). Female school enrollment (including that of scheduled caste and tribal girls) was significantly higher in SF districts. The likelihood of future fertility and mortality reductions is clear, given the established relationship between literacy and future income levels, birth rates, and infant mortality. Although SF effects on student retention remain unknown, a positive relation was observed in NCERT's block-level analysis. Mean retention rates were higher for SF feeding blocks in two states than for non-SF blocks. The intensity of student coverage in the CARE program has declined on a district basis. This occurred because the food available to CARE for SF has not kept up with increases in the student population and because CARE chose not to concentrate the program in fewer districts. The decline in intensity of coverage raises the question of how to allocate food so as to obtain maximum impacts on enrollment and retention while taking into account the cost per unit of food delivered. Still, while the program is becoming more dispersed, it is perhaps achieving a greater impact on its target group. It is not clear how much these findings will influence decisions as to the future of the SF program. Account must also be taken of other factors, e.g., the management implications for CARE of an SF phase-down (as was agreed to by CARE and USAID/I in FY82), the Indian Government's capacity to absorb additional SF food requirements, the availability of Title II resources worldwide, and competing demand by India's expanding maternal child health program. Recommendations are to: (1) attempt to bring A.I.D.'s long-range strategic concerns and CARE's shorter-range operational requirements into harmony; (2) consider a global A.I.D. evaluation of non-nutritional SF impacts; (3) not orient SF toward nutritional rehabilitation; and (4) study SF impacts on fertility and mortality (e.g., by assessing impacts on adults who attended SF schools 20 years ago), and if a positive relationship is found, compare SF cost-effectiveness to that of conventional family planning and health projects. (Adapted from ANE Executive Summary, PD-AAT-669, pp. 20-21.)