Here I cite 2 outside evaluations of The Freedom Fund’s anti-bonded labour work in N. India and in S. India. You will see that they measured the reduction in HOUSEHOLDS that included at least one bonded laborer—rather than estimating the reduction in the number of bonded laborers. (My estimate for the reduction in the number of bonded laborers came directly from The Freedom Fund.)
I literally do not know how to put links here (or anywhere). But if you Google the stuff I mentioned, those sources should be easy to find.
Here’s how I calculated the cost-effectiveness of The Freedom Fund:
$ 12.1 million Total spending in 2 states in Northern India (2014 thru 2019)
+ $6.8 million Total spending in 1 state in Southern India (2015 thru 2019)
_________
$18.9 million TOTAL SPENDING in the 3 states
Each year, FF’s cumulative spending in the 2 states in Northern India is stated in its Annual Impact Report. Ditto, FF’s cumulative spending in the 1 state in Southern India. So by subtraction, I computed FF’s annual spending in N. India and also in S. India.
For N. India, where the baseline for evaluating the work was early in 2016 and the endline was late in 2018, I subtracted FF’s spending there in 2014, 2015 & 2019. This gave me a figure for 2016 through 2018 that I was confident overstated the exact amount.
For S. India, where the baseline was mid-2018, I subtracted FF’s spending there in 2015 (that’s when the work started) and 2019. But because FF’s spending there in 2017 was much lower than in 2016 or in 2018, I was concerned that the 2017 figure might be some kind of anomaly, and so I decided NOT to estimate FF’s baseline-to-endline spending in S. India as: 2017 + half of 2016 + half of 2018. Instead, to be conservative, I added those 3 years of spending, and then multiplied the sum by 2⁄3. Estimating the baseline-to-endline cost this way gave me confidence that I was not underestimating it.
So:
$ 18.9 million TOTAL SPENDING in the 3 states
-$ 8.9 million FF SPENDING excluded due to being before the baseline or after the endline
__________
about $10 million in F.F. SPENDING in the 3 states between baseline and endline
$10 million divided by 125,000 (reduction in bonded labour) = $80 (cost per person spared bonded labour)
I’m going to post this & then respond soon re: assumptions.
Thanks for this writeup—I’d greatly appreciate any further information you could provide about anti-slavery.
What are the links for these sources?
Can you share your cost-effectiveness calculations for The Freedom Fund? What does it assume?
What are the best writeups of the problem? Could you link to them?
Here I cite 2 outside evaluations of The Freedom Fund’s anti-bonded labour work in N. India and in S. India. You will see that they measured the reduction in HOUSEHOLDS that included at least one bonded laborer—rather than estimating the reduction in the number of bonded laborers. (My estimate for the reduction in the number of bonded laborers came directly from The Freedom Fund.)
Institute of Development Studies & Praxis Institute for Participatory Practices, Northern India Hotspot Prevalence Study and Evaluation, 2019
https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/handle/123456789/14653
Institute of Development Studies & Praxis Institute for Participatory Practices, Southern India Hotspot Prevalence Study and Evaluation, 2019
https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/handle/123456789/14651
CORRRECTION in what I just posted re: how I calculated The Freedom Fund’s cost-effectiveness:
In Southern India, the baseline was mid-2016 and the end line was mid-2018.
I literally do not know how to put links here (or anywhere). But if you Google the stuff I mentioned, those sources should be easy to find.
Here’s how I calculated the cost-effectiveness of The Freedom Fund:
$ 12.1 million Total spending in 2 states in Northern India (2014 thru 2019)
+ $6.8 million Total spending in 1 state in Southern India (2015 thru 2019)
_________
$18.9 million TOTAL SPENDING in the 3 states
Each year, FF’s cumulative spending in the 2 states in Northern India is stated in its Annual Impact Report. Ditto, FF’s cumulative spending in the 1 state in Southern India. So by subtraction, I computed FF’s annual spending in N. India and also in S. India.
For N. India, where the baseline for evaluating the work was early in 2016 and the endline was late in 2018, I subtracted FF’s spending there in 2014, 2015 & 2019. This gave me a figure for 2016 through 2018 that I was confident overstated the exact amount.
For S. India, where the baseline was mid-2018, I subtracted FF’s spending there in 2015 (that’s when the work started) and 2019. But because FF’s spending there in 2017 was much lower than in 2016 or in 2018, I was concerned that the 2017 figure might be some kind of anomaly, and so I decided NOT to estimate FF’s baseline-to-endline spending in S. India as: 2017 + half of 2016 + half of 2018. Instead, to be conservative, I added those 3 years of spending, and then multiplied the sum by 2⁄3. Estimating the baseline-to-endline cost this way gave me confidence that I was not underestimating it.
So:
$ 18.9 million TOTAL SPENDING in the 3 states
-$ 8.9 million FF SPENDING excluded due to being before the baseline or after the endline
__________
about $10 million in F.F. SPENDING in the 3 states between baseline and endline
$10 million divided by 125,000 (reduction in bonded labour) = $80 (cost per person spared bonded labour)
I’m going to post this & then respond soon re: assumptions.