Development of Women and Children in Rural Areas (DWCRA) program was launched in 1982, as part of the Integrated Rural Development program (IRDP). Its aim was to empower rural women living below the poverty line (BPL) by way of organizing them to create sustainable income generating activities through self-employment. It was the first program of its kind that specifically focused on improving the quality of life of rural women. A unique feature of DWCRA, unlike other IRDP components, was that along with the improvement in income, it also focused on access to health, education, safe drinking water, sanitation, nutrition, etc. Thus it not only aimed at economic development, but also intended promoting social development. Another unique feature of the program was that it emphasised group activity. It was thought that in the long run women’s empowerment depends on creation of a movement that promotes awareness and self-reliance.

The present report is an outcome of the Quick Evaluation Study of DWCRA sponsored by the Ministry of Rural Development and conducted throughout the country, on a sample basis.

The objectives of the Quick Evaluation Study of DWCRA were as follows:

1. Program Implementation: to study the degree of conformity to the guidelines of DWCRA with reference to selection of beneficiaries, selection of projects, utilisation of funds allocated, transparency and involvement of people in the program implementation.
2. Continuity in the Activities: to see what proportion of groups formed under DWCRA have continued to remain active; what are the factors behind continuation or drop-out, and whether the assets created have survived, and are in use.
3. Impact: to understand the impact of the program on poverty alleviation, i.e., whether DWCRA has contributed to increase in production, employment and living conditions of women living below the poverty line.

The study is based on a 20% sample of all the districts in the country. In smaller States such as Goa and small North-Eastern States a minimum of two districts were selected. The sample districts were selected purposively to ensure that (a) the selected districts represent the State adequately with respect to geographical distribution and special conditions, and (b) in at least one district (if available) watershed programs (under DDP, DPAP and IWDP) are implemented.

In all, data were collected from 1803 villages spread over 128 districts in all the States and Union Territories. In these villages 1683 DWCRA groups were studied. This involved interview with 8158 beneficiaries of the program. In addition, to study the dynamics of operation of DWCRA in the field, 1729 women who had not joined DWCRA, but were eligible for becoming DWCRA members, were also interviewed.

The major findings of The Quick Evaluation Study of DWCRA are as follows:

1. Overall, DWCRA was not able to meet the objectives that were set forth. The study showed that a large majority of beneficiaries could not utilise the program to translate into substantial economic benefits. The average per day income of a beneficiary was reported to be only Rs. 42.
2. At the national level DWCRA program was received well. There was wide spread knowledge about the various aspects of DWCRA. However, very small proportion of beneficiaries could tell the different components of program. Lack of commitment of officials, inability to mobilise NGOs for the benefit of program and high illiteracy of rural women were some of the reasons for this.
3. As women became more aware, there was a reduction in family size and time spent on household activities. More women were keen to spare some hours for productive work.
4. Eligible women, from both majority and minority communities, participated in DWCRA, in proportion of their overall population. However, since the program was targeted at BPL families, a greater proportion of beneficiaries belonged to lower classes, and Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SC& ST). The program, as intended, also benefited disabled women. Analysis showed that 52.8% of all beneficiaries were SC/STs, and 2.4% were disabled.
5. DWCRA reached not only married women but it also benefited unmarried and widowed women, though their number was small.
6. As such, DWCRA beneficiaries had more number of children than others (non-beneficiaries), but the average age of beneficiaries was three years more than that of the later. This showed that more women, who had participated in DWCRA, had lower fertility.
7. Data showed that both literate and illiterate women participated in DWCRA. It had mobilized both educated and uneducated women, with better educated women often providing the leadership, as Adhyaksha or Treasurer.
8. DWCRA had no effect on schooling among children because all sections of society attached high significance to children’s education. Data showed that about 85% children in age group of 6-14 years were attending schools, irrespective of whether their mothers had participated in DWCRA or not.
9. DWCRA women had higher daily earnings than other women who had not participated in DWCRA. While the beneficiaries earned Rs.42.00 a day, the non-beneficiaries earned Rs.32.20. The difference was of Rs.9.80. However, the daily earnings of DWCRA women (Rs.42) were also less than the minimum wages. Majorities of DWCRA beneficiaries were daily wagers, self-employed or housewives. Their daily earnings were between Rs.20-40. The annual family income of beneficiaries was Rs.11,925 while that of the non-beneficiaries was Rs.10,978.
10. Data on indicators such as kuccha-pucca house, toilet facilities in the house, and availability of drinking water indicated poor living condition of both beneficiaries of DWCRA and the non-beneficiaries. In both the categories, about 60% lived in kuccha house and about 75% lacked toilet facilities. Moreover, among the BPL families, few owned consumer durable or farm equipment, such as refrigerator, three- wheeler, tractor, power tiller, combined thrasher/harvester. Only 12.5% had TV sets and 17.6% had ceiling fans. Percentage of women whose family owned motorcycle or tractors was almost negligible.

The penetration of mass media among the BPL families in rural areas was very limited. Consequently, among the beneficiaries of DWCRA only 6.3% read newspaper, 15.8% listened to radio, and 12.8% watched TV. This showed that to reach out to the poor women in rural areas, the development programs will still be dependent on the mobilization of village workers and NGOs. Thus in developing communication strategies the role of government was crucial.

1. Women are often constrained with time, as well as location of work. It was heartening to note both beneficiary and non-beneficiary groups were interested in income generating activities. The time they could spare for income generating activities after attending to household chores depends on a number of factors such as season, family circumstances, culture, motivation and type of work. On an average, beneficiaries could spare 4.3 hours per day, and non-beneficiaries could spend 4.7 hours.

1. Under DWCRA different types of activities were chosen in different States. Yet more than half of them were related to the primary sector. Overall, 23.1% groups chose agriculture related activities, and 20.9% chose livestock and fisheries activities. Another 11.6% of the groups chose forest based activities. This is understandable because most women felt that they should take up the projects they understood. Involved as they were in agriculture, livestock, fisheries and forest activities in day to day life, they found it more convenient to engage in related activities.
2. Overcrowding of similar projects in an area often lead to overabundant supply of commodities, resulting in marketing difficulties for groups.
3. In an overwhelming majority of cases the block level officials selected the project. In some cases beneficiaries themselves chose the projects. The role of NGOs in project selection was minimal.

One of the main goals of DWCRA was to promote group activities among the poor women. Observations showed that officials involved formed the groups only on paper. In actuality group members functioned as individuals. At the same time DWCRA had undoubtedly initiated group activities among women. They had come out of the boundaries of the household and learnt to interact with other women, village and block officials and consumers. Nearly half of the groups studied, maintained proper registers of DWCRA activities, which was not a mean achievement looking at the socio-economic milieu in which rural women operated. However, the auditing of records was poor.

1. Another important component of DWCRA was training. The idea was that to initiate income-generating activities in groups women require training in necessary skills. In this respect the program had not done well. Overall, only 26% groups received any training.
2. 81.5% of those who received training received stipend.
3. Average amount of stipend per group was Rs.2490 that had been shared by all the group members. Since the average size of group was 12.3 the amount of stipend per person is Rs.202. In majority of cases the training lasted for 16 weeks or less.
4. Nearly half of all those received training expressed dissatisfaction with the trainers.

1. According to the program, those groups formed under DWCRA were to get interest free revolving fund and subsidised loan. The study showed that only 52.2% of the groups had received the revolving fund. The percentage of groups that took loan was still less. The DWCRA groups were generally not interested in loan. Only 6% of group leaders knew how much subsidy they were entitled for on bank credit. This reflects the low credit taking capacity of the rural poor.

1. A large number of beneficiaries had stated that they had procured some assets under DWCRA. 66.5% of the beneficiaries said that the assets still existed; 9.9% had lost them; and 8.1% had sold their assets.
2. More than half of the beneficiaries said that the assets created under DWCRA were used fully and were still in working condition.

1. Over the years many groups or individuals had lost interest in DWCRA activities and had become inactive. Comparison of characteristics of active and inactive beneficiaries showed that active beneficiaries had more land, less number of children, better education, better exposure to media, and a greater proportion among them had received the revolving fund. Ironically, the active beneficiaries had lower income and lesser inputs of training and stipend. It can be seen that among the poor there was also a gradation of income and those from relatively poorer sections may continue with activities even if the returns are small. Training and stipend may be influenced more by the interest taken by the functionaries at the lower level and by themselves they did not necessarily lead to continuation of activities.
2. Interviews and statistical analysis of survey data showed that wherever groups became inactive, it was more due to procedural delays in getting the benefits from block or mandal, lack of skills and training, and difficulty in marketing the produce. Shortage of time, lack of family support and lack of interest among the beneficiaries were not the factors. Therefore, better administrative procedures, and helping the groups to market their produce can go a long way in making an income-generating scheme a success.

1. DWCRA had a direct and significant impact on employment and group activities. The biggest achievement of DWCRA was that it raised desire for self-employment among poor, rural women and encouraged them to work in groups. 92.5% beneficiaries reported that DWCRA has created a desire for self-employment. 88.8% beneficiaries feel that DWCRA has raised their income. This may not immediately translate into income figures but in the long run it has a great transformative potential.
2. DWCRA had a visible impact on savings, economic conditions, and social prestige.
3. DWCRA had less impact on heath and sanitation, and drinking water, which are more of community services. It had no impact on schooling of children, as the demand for schooling was already very high.

1. There were significant regional variations in the implementation of DWCRA, number of groups formed per 1000 population, continuation of activity and impact on different indicators.
2. Union Territories have performed better than the large States.
3. According to their overall performance, the major States could be ranked (from best to worst) as follows: Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, Assam, West Bengal, Mizoram, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Orissa, Punjab, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Tripura, Bihar, Jammu & Kashmir, Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh and Haryana. However, it must be noted that the States ranked quite differently on indicators of performance, such as awareness among the target women, motivation to form income-generating groups, functioning of the scheme and the perceptions of impact by beneficiaries, group leaders, and Village Pradhans. Some States had done better in one respect while others in other respect.

The most salient factors behind the success of a program like DWCRA where greater thrust has to be placed are:

• Strong and sustained political will: it has to be accepted that in programs for the development of the poor women, progress would be slow, and only strong political commitment and sustained efforts could yield results. Here it should be noted that the Andhra Pradesh model for DWCRA has emerged very successfully.
• Greater participation of the women in project selection: Specific projects must be chosen keeping in view skills and experience of women, infrastructure and local conditions. Economic activities geared to the demands of micro market have a better chance of success than those geared to demands of urban market. However, in certain cases if the activities are linked to handicraft and village industries, which provide the basic inputs and training to women and help them in marketing the produce, then it can also sustain activities.
• Greater success can be expected when women take up the activities traditionally done in the family and in which men’s support is available.
• Marketing support: DWCRA bazaars and melas have contributed greatly towards demonstration and display of entrepreneurial skills and promoting sales of DWCRA products.
• Focus on savings and internal loaning, promotion of the idea of self-help groups, linking them to problem solving at the village level, skill upgradation, technical inputs and multiple interventions.
• Success has created a great demand for DWCRA activities in several regions. The old and new DWCRA groups require financial and technical help which should come timely from the government and NGOs. In the absence of such

• Adequate staffing at the village level: the staff at the block level was adequate but the staff at the village level was short. Thus the block official responsible for DWCRA had to look after the problems of several groups, and also attend to other tasks such as organizing melas, preparing reports, etc. There is a need to improve staffing at the village level.

At the end, it can be concluded that for the success of the DWCRA like programs:

1. There has to be a greater emphasis on participatory model, rather than the top down approach that was adopted.
2. The identification of beneficiaries should be left to Gram Panchayats.
3. Schemes should be made to achieve impact and not merely meet targets.
4. The model of micro lending through self help groups is a superior model, where in the groups get time to evolve over a period of time.
5. Project selection should involve groups, NGOs as well as bankers. Groups should be taking projects with adequate forward and backward linkages, avoiding overcrowding of projects in an area.
6. Capacity building of NGOs should be taken up at large scale.