Livelihoods in the Za'atari Camp: Impact evaluation of Oxfam’s Cash for Work activities in the Za’atari camp (Jordan)

Abstract

Oxfam GBs Global Performance Framework is part of the organizations efforts to better understand and communicate its effectiveness, as well as enhance learning across the organization. Under this Framework, a small number of completed or mature projects are selected each year for an evaluation of their impact, known as an Effectiveness Review. The project Za'atari Recycling and Livelihood, subsequently extended to all Cash for Work (CFW) activities conducted by Oxfam in the Za'atari camp, was one of the projects selected for the Effectiveness Review in 2017/18. CFW is a humanitarian intervention to provide temporary employment in public projects to vulnerable populations. Oxfam has implemented CFW activities as part of its humanitarian support in the Za'atari camp in Jordan since 2014. It is estimated to have directly involved 3,400 refugees from 2014 to 2018. This Effectiveness Review, which was conducted in July and September 2018, intended to evaluate the impact of Oxfams CFW activities among project participants. Based on a composite index measuring asset ownership and housing conditions, this evaluation has found evidence that Cash for Work (CFW) activities conducted in the Za'atari camp, Jordan, had a positive and significant impact on household w ealth. Moreover, households with at least one member engaged in CFW in the previous 12 months, reported on average 23 percent higher income than comparable households in the camp. When analysing semiskilled workers only, the analysis still finds positive and significant results on household wealth but does not find evidence of positive and significant results on self-reported income. Households engaged in CFW activities are 12 percentage points more likely to have at least one household member engaged in at least one income-generating activity and are 19 percentage points less likely to engage in income opportunities other than CFW. Overall, positive opinions towards CFW are generally high among refugees, with more positive opinions expressed by individuals directly involved in the programme. On average, 49 percent of the respondents in the intervention group agreed with the statement that agencies operate fair and accessible CFW programmes; 46 percent strongly agreed with the statement that agencies treat CFW workers with respect and dignity; finally, 42 percent and 44 percent strongly agreed with the statement that programmes provide a safe environment and give women equal access. There is evidence that CFW activities have improved skills for semiskilled workers. The analysis reveals that semiskilled respondents engaged in CFW activities are 12 percentage points more likely to report increased technical skills since the beginning of the project. However, there is no evidence that refugees recruited for skilled, highly skilled and technical jobs have improved their skills. Similarly, the evaluation finds positive and significant results on indicators investigating self-esteem for semiskilled workers, however estimates on the entire sample (including skilled, high...

Jobs Interventions for Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons

“…Medium to longer-term effects on employment, however, seem less promising. 45 Value-chain and other market-based interventions seem promising, but rigorous evaluations are needed. In the context of forced displacement, humanitarian and development actors increasingly implement interventions aiming to develop or strengthen links along value chains and provide market information, often combined with other measures.…”

Cash and In-Kind Transfers in Humanitarian Settings: A Review of Evidence and Knowledge Gaps

“…Although one study in our review finds a significant reduction in asset ownership (Gilligan and Hoddinott 2017), most of the studies find that humanitarian assistance programs increase asset ownership during emergencies (Lehmann and Masterson 2014;Bonilla et al 2017;Lombardini and Mager 2019;Schwab 2019;Ivaschenko et al 2020;Quattrochi et al 2020;). For instance, Lehmann and Masterson (2014) find that Syrian refugees in Lebanon who received labeled cash transfers intended for "winterization" were more likely to own ovens and heaters than households in the control group.…”

“…Four of these studies find improvements in Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS), although some of the coefficients are not statistically significant. The only exception is Lombardini and Mager (2019), who find that a cash-for-work intervention in a refugee camp in Jordan did not have any positive effect on food security.…”

Country Reviews of Social Assistance in Crises: A Compendium of Rapid Assessments of the Nexus Between Social Protection and Humanitarian Assistance in Crisis Settings

“…An impact evaluation of Oxfam's CFW activities in the Za'atari camp shows positive and significant impact on household wealth, income, technical skills and women's economic inclusion. However, beneficiary households were less likely to engage in income opportunities other than CFW (Lombardini and Mager 2018).…”