& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Primary Education Stipend scheme needs overhaul

UNB, Dhaka
Primary Education Stipend (PES), a cash-for-education programme, needs to be redesigned as its overall effects have been remarkably small given its size and expense, according to a study.
"The PES doesn't improve household expenditures, calorie and protein consumption, or even school enrollments — its major objective," said the study conducted by the Chronic Property Research Centre (CPRC) and the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
"Overall, the effects of the PES programme are remarkably small given its size and expense," said Bob Baulch, coordinator of the Poverty Dynamics and Economic Mobility Theme at CPRC.
Under the PES programme, households with qualifying pupils who attend school at least 85 percent of the time receive Tk 100 per month for one child and Tk 125 per month if they have more children in primary school.
The stipend programme involves all rural unions, and approximately 55 lakh children received the stipend during its first phase from 2002-2008. The programme was extended for .mother five years in June 2008.
"The programme has been unsuccessful in reaching only 40 percent of the poorest rural Bangladeshi households -- its intended beneficiaries," Dr Baulch told reporters at a brief -ingonThursday.
In 2006. less than half of the children in the programme came from the poorest two-fifths of the households, 27 percent of the households who received the stipend were not entitled to it,
and more than 30 percent of eligible households in the study did not receive the cash transfer, according to the research findings.
The study' of the primary Education Stipend programme is part of a larger project, 'What Development Interventions Work? The Long-Term Impact and Cost-Effectiveness of AntiPoverty Interventions in Bangladesh1, funded by the UK Department for International Department and the Economic and Social Research Council.
"Given its limited success, particularly with regard to school enrollment, but great potential to move households out of poverty, the PES programme is ripe for re-design," said Agnes Quisumbing, IFPRI senior research fellow and project leader.
"In the future, providing larger cash transfers to fewer households, but the poorest ones, could improve the education, health, and well-beihg of millions of children and ultimately end the cycle of poverty that plagues generation after generation of rural Bangladeshis," Dr Baulch said.
The PES, however, led to significant improvements in nutritional status, as evidenced
by increased height for age in girls and higher Body Mass Indexes (BMls) among boys, unless the children had also participated in earlier Food for Education (FEE) programme, which was replaced by the Primary Education Stipend in 2002-2003.
“This findings contrast with the relative success of the earlier FFE programme, but can be explained in large part by the eroded value of the cash transfers, which has been fixed since 2003, despite risingfood prices."
The recommendations put forward by Dr Baulch for redesigning the EPS include giving more focus on poverty pockets, enlarging the stipend and tightening the household selection process to ensure transparency.