Social Protection in Rwanda

• unconditional cash transfers to 18 879 households

• 104 425 people participated in 302 public works projects

• 13 559 loans to 53 228 borrowers

Over the last 5 years...

– poverty down from from 57% to 45%

– extrem poverty down from 36% to 24%

Social Protection Sector

• Genocide Survivors Fund

• Demobilisation and re-integration program

• And more…

• Vision 2020 Umurenge Program (VUP)

VUP

• Direct Support

• Public Works

• Financial Services

• Training and Sensitisation

VUP: Direct Support

• Unconditional

• Entitlement

• For poorest families with no members that can work

• Avarage payment of USD 22/month – adjusted to family size

• Two thirds of DS households are female headed

VUP: Public Works

• For poorest families with members able to work

• One person from each household

• 1½ - 2 $ /per day • mean days worked per HH 68

• About 50% women

Inclusion and exclusion errors

…

• Public Works projects – Anti-erosive ditches

– Radical terraces

– Roads and bridges

– Agriculture

– Schools

– Water supply

– Markets

– Electrification

– Health Centers

– Sports facilities

VUP: Financial Services

• For the poorest… and some others

• Other criteria – Project related (profitability) – Borrower’s credibility

• To: Loans Borrowers – Individuals 9 140 9 140 – Groups 4 290 41 485 – Cooperatives 129 2 603

• 42% women

…

• Amount 100 – 170 $ / borrower

• Repayment in one year

• 2% “interest”

…

• Household Impacts

– Increased food consumption 68%

– HH income increase 66%

– Increased ability to pay med. insurance 55%

– HH savings increased 51%

…

• Impact for the individual

– Increased hope for the future and self confidence

Targeting

Ubudehe Categorisation

• A Participatory Poverty Assessment (updated yearly)

• 6 poverty categories

• Category 1 and 2 eligible for DS and PW

• Category 1, 2 and 3 eligible for FS

VUP, Development Partners and Funding

• Sida, DFID, WB, EU, UNICEF

• Coordinated around a Social Protection Sector Strategy – Sector Leadership team and

– technical sub-committees on finance, policy, M&E…

• Specific VUP-DP meetings

• Joint Sector Reviews twice a year

…

• Use national systems and coordinate

• DPs provide more than 50% of VUP funds

• Results evidence and communication important for domestic and external support for SP

…

• Conflict and political conditionality currently biggest risk for funding

• GoR will need a strategy for prioritising (core social protection)

• Explore other funding possibilities (e.g. climate change funds)

Challenges and opportunities

• A leadership serious about poverty reduction

• Results are followed up and rewarded

– But, push to deliver community development (many and fast) → SP objectives becomes secondary

…

• Continuously improved PFM and a successful fight against corruption

– But, still weak local government PFM

• And, thin administrative capacity in general (dependent on International TA)

… • Costly cash transfer (bank charges) for

beneficiaries

• Keeping up/improving the quality of the targeting process (including dealing with strategic behaviour)

• Getting a robust impact evaluation approach in place

• Creating confidence for the complaints mechanism