Impact Evaluation of the Economic Inclusion Programme in Kenya

Last registered on April 03, 2025

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Impact Evaluation of the Economic Inclusion Programme in Kenya
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0015643
Initial registration date
March 27, 2025

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
April 03, 2025, 11:13 AM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)
PI Affiliation
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)
PI Affiliation
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)
PI Affiliation
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)
PI Affiliation
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)
PI Affiliation
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)

Additional Trial Information

Status
On going
Start date
2024-04-27
End date
2025-12-31
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This project proposes to evaluate the impact of the Economic Inclusion Program (EIP) in Kenya. The EIP is a poverty graduation program run by the Kenyan government, which is tailored to address the needs of the extreme poor in Kenya. It aims to enhance access to social and economic services by increasing poor households’ access to skills, productive inputs, assets, finance, and economic opportunities. Specifically, the EIP includes: (i) consumption support of 2,000 KES per household per month for 8 months, (ii) an asset grant of 30,000 KES per household, (iii) skills training and mentoring, and (iv) creation of village savings and loan associations. We plan to evaluate the second phase of the EIP program which ran from May to December 2024 across five counties—Kisumu, Marsabit, Makueni, Murang’a, and Taita Taveta. Using a cluster randomized design, we aim to evaluate the impact of the EIP program on economic outcomes (e.g., consumption, income, savings, and assets) as well as other welfare (e.g., food security, diets, intimate partner violence) and psychosocial outcomes (such as self-efficacy, aspirations, mental health, and social cohesion). For this purpose, we conducted a baseline household survey in April – June 2024, and plan to conduct an endline survey approximately one year after the baseline survey. Additionally, we will administer a non-agriculture enterprise census and market survey in study villages to capture enterprise and market-level impacts, including revenues and profits.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Ayalew , Hailemariam et al. 2025. "Impact Evaluation of the Economic Inclusion Programme in Kenya." AEA RCT Registry. April 03. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.15643-1.0
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
The implementation of Cohort II of the EIP program is structured to run for 8 months (May 2024-December 2024) and includes the following components:
• Consumption support which targets households from the National Safety Net Programme (NSNP) and poor Non-NSNP households. The Non-NSNP households will receive a consumption stipend of KES 2000 per month for a period of 8 months to smoothen their consumption. Although the payments were meant to be delivered every other month starting in May, due to delays, the payments were made in three installments. The NSNP households will not receive the consumption support because they regularly receive KES 2000 monthly transfer from the existing NSNP programme.
• Asset transfer/Seed Capital provides a financial grant to participants to jump-start an economic activity tailored to their local context and individual or household needs and abilities. Beneficiaries will receive a total of KES 30,000 as asset transfer/seed capital meant to support their livelihoods enhancement. The disbursement was meant to be done in two tranches but due to delays the total was disbursed as one tranche in December 2024.
• Skills Training and Mentorship, which is mandatory for all programme participants and is designed to equip participants with the necessary skills to successfully manage and grow their enterprises. The training is delivered over three months and includes technical and life skills training to enable participants to manage their productive assets, savings, and enterprises. The training is delivered by mentors who are local residents. Each mentor is assigned to guide 50 participants per village (or village cluster) and a mentor supervisor oversees 15 mentors. The mentorship continues throughout the program (until December 31, 2024), with mentors expected to visit each participant weekly, ensuring sustained support and guidance.
• Village Savings and Loans Association (VSLAs) is a group of (10-25) EIP participants who meet regularly to save money and provide loans to one another from their collective savings. Members of the VSLAs are drawn from both individual participants and business group members within the program. The group’s operations, including how savings and loan profits are distributed, are governed by a constitution agreed upon by its members. Each mentor is tasked with overseeing up to three VSLAs, which were formed with the support of mentors in July 2024 after participant enrollment.
Description of the study population
EIP cohort 2 operates in five counties: Kisumu, Marsabit, Makueni, Murang’a and Taita Taveta. Within these counties, the GoK and partners selected 10 sub-counties to be included in the EIP program (2 from each county). The selection of counties and sub counties was done in a participatory process with national and county governments and other relevant stakeholders based on agreed selection criteria that aimed to ensure representation across various agro-ecological and geographical regions, and taking into account poverty levels and vulnerabilities. Although the EIP program is delivered in all 10 sub-counties, the impact evaluation is conducted in 4 of the 5 counties (and thus 8 of the 10 sub-counties). Marsabit is excluded from the impact evaluation due to logistical issues around study design, data collection, and budget constraints.
In each sub-county, the government and implementing partners identified a list of potentially eligible villages (or village clusters) using geographic targeting criteria based on populations and poverty. Within each village or village cluster, the EIP program aimed to reach about 50 eligible households. Villages which are small and hence with a limited number of potential households were merged to create a village cluster that includes about 50 eligible households. The GoK and implementing partners identified several criteria reflecting poverty and vulnerability to identify eligible households, using the Enhanced Single Registry (ESR) database. The ESR includes data on household characteristics (such as education level, and occupation), asset endowment (for example, roof type, wall type, whether the household owns cars, tractors, etc.), and livestock. These indicators were used to undertake Proxy Means Tests (PMTs) to determine poverty status. Households deemed eligible according to the ESR database underwent community validation. The community validation process involved conducting community meetings (Barazas) to confirm whether the targeted households were still residing in the intervention areas and whether their economic situation had improved (which would lead them to no longer be eligible for the program). Once the community validation approves and identifies the list of potential households, potential households go through household-level eligibility and validation process, which involves assessment of household’s preference for EIP participant and ability and potential to conduct a business effectively.
Intervention (Hidden)
Intervention Start Date
2024-05-31
Intervention End Date
2024-12-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
The study’s outcomes of interest are those related to the goals of the program and in particular economic outcomes that include consumption, income, financial inclusion, assets, and enterprise knowledge and activities. In addition, we are interested in outcomes that include other measures of welfare such as food security, dietary diversity, mental health, gender equity, psychosocial skills, intimate partner violence, and social cohesion.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
The primary outcome variables are Consumption, Income, Financial Inclusion, Assets, Enterprise (Business) Activities and Knowledge, Food Security, Dietary Diversity, Mental Health, Psychosocial Skills, Social Cohesion, Gender Equity, and Intimate Partner Violence. Please refer to the pre-analysis plan for further details.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
The study is designed as a cluster Randomized Control Trial (cRCT) whereby villages (or village clusters) were randomly assigned to either a control or treatment group. A cRCT design generates exogenous variation in receipt of the EIP that will allow the study to causally quantify the impact of the EIP on outcomes of interest. Using the process and criteria described above, the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection and partners identified a total of 168 eligible villages or village clusters in the eight sub-counties that form the study villages (or village clusters) for this evaluation. The 168 selected villages (or village clusters) were randomly assigned to two groups: (i) control group (1/3 of villages), and (ii) treatment group (2/3 of villages) that receives the EIP package, including consumption support, asset transfer, skills training and mentoring, and VSLA. The randomization was stratified at sub-county level, so that in each sub-county, the randomization process led to the same 1/3 control – 2/3 treatment ratio.

Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Randomization done in office by a computer
Randomization Unit
Villages (or village clusters) were randomly assigned to either a control or treatment group.
Was the treatment clustered?
Yes

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
168 villages (or village clusters)
Sample size: planned number of observations
168 villages (or village clusters) and 3,300 households
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
168 selected villages (or village clusters) were randomly assigned to two groups: (i) control group (1/3 of villages), and (ii) treatment group (2/3 of villages) that receives the EIP package, including consumption support, asset transfer, skills training and mentoring, and VSLA. The randomization was stratified at sub-county level, so that in each sub-county, the randomization process led to the same 1/3 control – 2/3 treatment ratio.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Strathmore University Institutional Scientific and Ethical Review Committee
IRB Approval Date
2024-04-26
IRB Approval Number
SU-ISERC2154/24
Analysis Plan

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
No
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials