A1.1 Background
ActionAid Nepal in coordination with IDS and Praxis India is engaged in a three-year programme entitled Planning, learning, monitoring and evaluation activities for the South-East Nepal Hotspot. The project aims to support learning about the most effective community and NGO activities in combatting modern-day slavery and bonded labour such as Harwa-Charwa in the Freedom Fund South-East Nepal Hotspot. The project is funded by the Freedom Fund and is directed by the Institute of Development Studies UK (IDS). ActionAid Nepal is subcontracted by IDS to ensure the validity of work using participatory tools and techniques.
Freedom Fund, with its its local partner NGOs, has for the last few years been implementing the Harwa-Charwa empowerment programme in three districts of south-east Nepal. IDS is doing an evaluation of the hotspot as a whole to explore the circumstances and causes of bonded labour using participatory tools and techniques including a participatory prevalence study. Seven local partner NGOs are implementing this participatory research programme at the local level.
Each partner NGO has collected information from 73 respondents (219 households), with 80 respondents (10% of the cohort) being selected for data validity checks /extra information. The 80 respondents were selected randomly based on social mapping. Each respondent gave information for three households (their own and two neighbours).
As a quality control mechanism, ActionAid Nepal undertook data validation twice during the prevalence study. The first time after each partner had completed their prevalence study in one settlement - where variance and problems were found, partners were given inputs to complete the prevalence study -the second validation round came in the middle of prevalence study, designed as such to explore the extent of deviation from the data collected and to understand the reasons for this. Input was given to help partners to complete the rest of the study.
A1.2 Sample
The first step was to generate the sample. Validation visits were to be done in a minimum of 5% of 1,533 households (i.e. 73) and visits were conducted with all seven NGOs in the study. To meet the minimum target, Action Aid Nepal met 27 respondents (covering 81 households) which is 5.14% of the total sample.
Data for between nine and twelve households was collected from one location per organisation. The data were checked halfway during the wider process of collection to allow lessons to be learned and conveyed to the NGOs. The locations and households were selected randomly. The same member of the household who served as the respondent before was interviewed again.
The organisations randomly selected the households for responses in the validations and the number of households for which data was collected is presented in the table below:
31 | P a g e
Table 1: Number of respondents selected for second level of validation
S. N. NGO District Total number of respondents for prevalence study (Plan) Selected number of respondents for spot-check Total number of HHs for prevalence study (Plan) Selected number of HHs for spot-check 1 TSWO Saptari 80 3 240 9 2 JDS Saptari 80 4 240 12 3 UDS Saptari 80 4 240 12 4 BIDC Siraha 80 4 240 12 5 DSAM Siraha 80 4 240 12 6 CDF Siraha 80 4 240 12 7 CIC Dhanusha 80 4 240 12 Total 560 27 1680 81
A1.3 Validation results
The schedules with 27 questions (plus 5 sub-questions) were redone with respondents from 81 households. The table below as well as the graph present the numbers of households that had responses that differed from the first time data was collected. The table also provides an explanation in cases where the variance found was more than 10%.
Table 2: Total variance across questions as per Validation Visit
Questions Total no of
responses
No. of HHs with variation in responses
% of HHs with variation in
responses
Reason for variance
Gender 81 0 0
Relation with head of family 81 0 0
Ethnicity 81 0 0
Religion 81 0 0
Caste 81 0 0
Do you own the land you live on? 81 4 4.94
Land ownership in Kattha landless,
less than 6 Kattha, 6-20 Kattha (1 Bigah), 1 Bigah-4 Bigah and 5 or more Bigah)
81 5 6.17
Number of family members who has citizenship certificate
81 4 4.94
Number of children (below the age of 16) who have birth registration certificate
81 8 9.88
Able to access healthcare (facility is
available but remained closed, yes sometimes, yes always without discrimination)
81 10 12.35 Facilitators found it difficult to make respondants understand the differences between ‘yes sometimes’ and ‘yes always without discrimination’. Each NGO was given training in the field to make sure facilitators could communicate this question
Bank account (yes, no, do not know) 81 7 8.64
Number of family members 81 5 6.17
Number and age of children between 5-14 (including 14)
81 17 20.99 The facilitator asked the question too generally and not according to the guide and did not sufficiently check the status and ages of each child. Some of the ages listed are guesses, because some respondents did not know the actual age of their neighbours. And some answers had the wrong sex with an age. Each NGO was given hands on-training in the field again to make sure facilitators checked sex and age of children
Number of school drop outs and age at drop out
81 2 2.47
Number of children between 5-14 (including 14) who never attended
81 4 4.94
Number of working members in the family with work category
81 20 24.69 The facilitator asked the question too generally and not according to the guide and mixed up working status with slavery status. They did not sufficiently check the working status of each member and if this was bonded or not.
33 | P a g e
Each NGO was given hands on-training in the field again to make sure facilitators would list the categories correctly and check more thoroughly Has household taken a loan?
(Yes/No)
81 14 17.28 Some respondents had responded by guessing.
Each NGO was given hands on-training in the field again to make sure facilitators would check more thoroughly
If yes where has the loan been taken from? Money Lender/
landlord, Money lender where he/she works, neighbor/relatives, saving groups, bank/ cooperatives, micro finance company, Do not know, not applicable)
81 15 18.52 The facilitator asked the question too generally and not according to the guide Respondents therefore did not correctly specify the different types of loans and wrote for example bank/cooperatives instead of micro finance company. Some sources of loans were missing
Interest rate in case of loan taken from (money lender/ employer/ land
lord (Rs. 1 to 10 per 100 per month)
81 0 0
Interest rate in case of loan taken from relatives/ neighbors
81 0 0
What has triggered the loan?
(illness, Large family, Marriage, Addiction/Gambling, Death in family, Disaster/emergency, Accident at work, Festival/Pilgrimage, Pay outstanding loan,
Maintenance/repair house, Education, start some new, Buy house/land, Agri purpose, Livestock, Luxury, Migration NA)
81 8 9.88
Number of loans in current date 27 3 3.70
Size of biggest loan 27 5 6.17
Why the biggest loan was taken 27 0 0
Part of saving group (Yes, No) 81 4 4.94
*Detailed variation per category of work and per NGO in Table 4 CHART 1: Variance in data as per validations
CHART 2: % of Variance in data as per validations
= Variance above 10% 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
35 | P a g e
Table 3: Variance across questions as per validation visit by NGO
Questions CIC CDF DSAM BIDC TSWO JDS UDS Total
Gender 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Relation with the head of the family 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ethnicity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Religion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Caste 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Do you own the land you live on? 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 4
Land ownership in Kattha (landless, less than 6 Kattha, 6-20 Kattha [1 Bigah], 1 Bigah-4 Bigah and 5 or more Bigah)
0 1 1 2 0 0 1 5
Number of family members who have
citizenship certificate 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 4
Number of children (below the age of 16) who
have birth registration certificate 0 1 1 3 1 1 1 8
Able to access healthcare (Facility is available
but remained closed, yes sometimes, Yes
always without discrimination) 0 3 0 4 0 3 0 10
Bank account (Yes, No, Do not know) 0 0 1 2 1 2 1 7
Number of family members (Male, Female) 0 0 1 1 0 1 2 5 Number and age of children between 5-14
(including 14) 2 2 4 3 2 0 4 17
Number of dropouts and age at which they
dropped out 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 2
Number of children between 5-14 (including 14)
who never attended school 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 4
Number of working members in the family with
work category* 4 0 2 4 2 4 4 20
Has household taken a load (Yes, No) 3 0 2 4 0 1 4 14
If yes, from where the loan has been taken from?
(Money Lender/ landlord, Money lender where
he/she works, neighbor/relatives, saving groups, bank/ cooperatives, micro finance company, Do not know, not applicable)
4 3 1 1 2 3 1 15
Interest rate in case of loan taken from money lender/ employer/ landlord (Rs. 1 to 10 per 100 per month)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Interest rate in case of loan taken from relatives/ neighbors
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
What has triggered the loan? (illness, Large
family, Marriage, Addiction/Gambling, Death in family, Disaster/emergency, Accident at work, Festival/Pilgrimage, Pay outstanding loan, Maintenance/repair house, Education, start some new, Buy house/land, Agri-purpose, Livestock, Luxury, Migration NA)
36 | P a g e
Number of loans in current date 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 3
Size of biggest Loan 1 0 2 1 0 0 1 5
Why the biggest loan was taken 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Part of saving group (Yes, No) 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 4
Marriage in last two years in families) 0 1 3 2 0 1 1 8
Total 17 14 24 36 9 19 24 17
*Breakdown of this number per category and per NGO in separate table below.
Table 4: Number of Bonded Labour in family by NGO
Questions CIC CDF DSAM BIDC TSWO JDS UDS Total
PV SC PV SC PV SC PV SC PV SC PV SC PV SC PV SC Number of working members in the family (who are currently working)
Men>15 13 15 22 23 19 19 21 22 18 18 14 17 20 26 127 140 Women>15 11 12 20 18 23 26 15 16 5 7 13 16 16 17 103 112
Boys<14 3 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 6 2 0 0 10 5
Girls<14 3 3 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 6 4
Numbers of bonded labourers (in side and outside the village – in Nepal)
Men>15 6 5 0 0 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 15 9
Women>15 7 5 0 0 6 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 2 17 12
Boys<14 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1
Girls<14 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3
Gone overseas but unaware of current situation
Men>15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
Women>15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Boys<14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
Girls<14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Risky migration but unaware of current situation
Men>15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Women>15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Boys<14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Girls<14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Risky migration and currently bonded
Men>15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Women>15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Boys<14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Girls<14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0