No Evidence of Rationing
: Sambodhi’s research also suggests there was no
significant evidence of rationing or denial of work on demand to households; 94%of the households received employment after placing a demand in the past 12months. The households also reported high awareness levels on MGNREGA forexample, around 90% of the respondents had correct knowledge of the mainprovisions of the Act, including number of days of work, wage rates etc.
49% of the overall respondents felt that theiraccess to credit for agriculture loans has improved due to improvement in theirquality of land and additional income.
Alternative Sources of Livelihood:
34% had taken up alternate sources of livelihoods due to creation of assets and income generated, for example, some of the farmers reported opening their own grocery shops, better linkages to marketsetc.The study also highlighted some issues that require attention.
Need for better planning
: Out of the beneficiaries that have come back to work on MGNREGA, 34% still indicate a need for MGNREGA to augment theirincome. This suggests the need for better planning of land development works,assets and convergence activities to make these farmers/labourers self-reliant.
Better choice of work
: Out of the households that did not come back to work on MGNREGA, 29% of the households believed that the quality and choice of works could have been better. It therefore necessitates the need for greater focustowards ensuring participation of the community while finalizing the works so asto provide greater benefits to the groups that actually need support towardsemployment opportunities.
Enhancing institutional support in asset maintenance:
There is evidenceto support that asset maintenance and monitoring is an area of concern toincrease durability and quality of assets.
Need for Awareness on Individual Works:
While there is high awarenessabout the Scheme, awareness on specific aspects of individual works is low.
Note: Executive Summary of the Impact Assessment is attached below.