Intervention with Microfinance for AIDS and Gender Equity Study 2001-2003

All households in these villages were eligible for inclusion in the IMAGE Study Baseline survey. Households in settlement areas outside village boundaries we re not included in the sampling frame. 200 households were randomly selected in each of the eight study villages (total sample size 1600). A household in this study was defined as a group of people who are permanently resident on the same property (or dwelling) and who eat from the same pot of food when staying at home. Within selected households, all individuals aged 14-35 years at the date of interview were eligible for inclusion in the study. Individuals listed as permanent household members we re eligible for inclusion, including those household members staying staying away from the home. The total expected sample size, including adjustment for people who refuse and those who could not be traced, was 3000.

A sampling frame including all households within recognised boundaries of the eight study villages was generated from Participatory Wealth Ranking (PWR) data.

The Participatory Wealth Ranking (PWR) process assisted the project to identify households eligible for inclusion in IMAGE in both intervention and comparison villages. Community members were invited to attend an open meeting in the village. Those who attended were sub-divided by neighbourhood and these groups each drew a map of their village section (usually of 50-200 households), providing a list of all the households. Following this, groups of 4-6 village section residents who know the community well (known as reference groups) held a discussion on aspects of poverty in their section. Participants were asked to characterise households that are poor, those that are doing a bit better and those that are doing well. Households are then ranked in categories by these residents, from the poorest to the most well off households, according to the poverty definitions provided. Each house was ranked on three occasions by different groups of individuals, providing an aggregate "score". Consistent agreement between the three reference groups is usually achieved through this process. The groups must produce results that are consistent in identifying poor households for the results to be accepted. After this process, participants were asked to describe the characteristics of the households in each category. The number of categories was not set in advance, but at least four categories had to be delineated for the results to be deemed valid. Ranking information was recorded on pre-designed forms at all stages of the process. The discussions were then assessed by a trained SEF staff member, who assigns a cut-off score. Households below a given "cut-off" are characterised as poor enough to be eligible for loans.

C o h o rt Study I: The impact of IMAGE on loan re c i p i e n t s
Eligible women in villages where IMAGE was operating joined the pro g r a m m e t h rough a self-selection process in response to house-to-house visits from SEF staff. All such loan recipients recruited in the first year of program operation were asked to join the study. Comparison women ("non-loan recipients") were recruited from randomly selected households that were eligible to be involved in IMAGE (on the basis of PWR), but from a village where IMAGE was not operating. Comparison women were current residents, matched to a loan recipient both on village type and age (in groups of 18-25, 26-35, 36-45, 46-55, over 55 yrs).
Sample size
Approximately 500 new loan recipients were recruited in Intervention villages. This represents programme penetration such that approximately 10% of households in intervention villages will be likely to have an IMAGE client. The recruitment period was approximately 12 months. Each loan recipient was matched to a single comparison woman. The total sample size was thus double the number of loan recipients recruited during the recruitment period, i.e. about 1000.

C o h o rt Study II: The impact of IMAGE on young-people living in the households of loan recipients
All individuals of both sexes aged 14 - 35 years who are currently re s i d e n t members of households of loan recipients and non-loan recipients enrolled to Cohort Study I were eligible for inclusion to Cohort Study II. IMAGE clients
falling in this age group were also recruited to IMAGE Cohort Study II.
Sample size
Demographic data suggested that there will be, on average, three individuals in this age group in every two households recruited to Cohort Study I. The total sample size was thus approximately 750 in each arm of the study (Total 1500).

C o h o rt Study III: The impact of IMAGE on communities
Individuals of both sexes aged 14 - 35 years living in randomly selected households from the study villages were eligible for this study. Both young people currently staying in the home (the de facto population), and young people who are recorded as
"permanent household members", but who are not currently staying in the home were eligible for Cohort Outcome Study III.
Sampling and sample size