This study is an impact evaluation on the overall effect of the PURP on both project recipients and their neighbors. Key outcomes are household agricultural income, milk yields from cattle, and restriction of herd size to the carrying capacity of the land. A separate but coordinated study will examine the long term effect of the project on land degradation patterns. In Phase 1 areas, eligible applicants to the project went through an extensive screening process, including a requirement to obtain permission from all neighbor households, and all groups that passed through this process were admitted into the project. A comparison group was created through propensity score matching, using households from three populations: 1) applicants who did not pass the full screening process and so were rejected from the project, 2) neighbors of accepted and rejected groups, 3) a random sample of herder households from soums where the project was being implemented.
Kind of Data
Sample survey data [ssd]
Unit of Analysis
Anonymized dataset for public distribution
pollution and protection
income, property and investment
land use and planning
Phase I of PURP consists of three peri-urban areas, surrounding the three largest cities in Mongolia: Ulaanbaatar, Darkhan, Erdenet.
Herder households in rural Mongolia, in the areas around Ulaanbaatar, Darkhan, and Erdenet cities.
Producers and sponsors
Innovations for Poverty Action
Millennium Challenge Corporation
1) All herder households that applied to participate in the PURP Phase 2 were included in the survey (total 1240 interviewed out of 1492 targeted)
2) applicants who did not pass the full screening process and so were rejected from the project (total 345 interviewed out of 628 targeted)
3) neighbor herder households of accepted and rejected groups (total 326 interviewed out of 532 targeted)
4) a random sample of herder households from soums where the project was being implemented (total 1649 interviewed out of 1895 targeted).
1) All herder households that participated in Phase 1 of PURP were included in the survey
2) Non-project households that were interviewed in the baseline survey, were also included in the follow-up survey. Response rate for this category is lower because some households were deemed "low priority" based on propensity score matching with project households. See the Phase 1 Follow-up report for more details on the sampling procedure.
Baseline: Overall response rate for the Household Survey was 73%
Follow-up: Overall response rate for the Household Survey was 87%
Dates of Data Collection
Interviewing was conducted by 2 teams of interviewers. Each interviewing team comprised of 1 team leader, 6 interviewers, and 2 drivers. Each team used 2 four wheel drive vehicles to travel from cluster to cluster (and where necessary within cluster). The role of team leader was to ensure the overall coordination and technical oversight of all the tasks, maintain the communication with IPA and MCA-Mongolia, coordinate with local authorities, and make arrangements for accomodation and travel. Additionally, the team leader was responsible for ensuring the quality of data collection by checking all the paper copy of questionnaires that are filled out by interviewers at the end of everyday.
Joint affiliation of MEC and MCDS LLC
Household questionnaire - collects basic socio-economic and key herding related outcomes from the households (in Mongolian), Herder Group Leader questionnaire - collects information about group members and their joint business activities (in Mongolian), Soum Governor questionnaire - collects information about soum level demography, livestock census, land information, and development projects (in Mongolian)
Data editing took place at a number of stages throughout the processing, including:
a) Field check by survey firm team leaders
b) Checking the discrepencies of 1st and 2nd data entry
c) Internal logic check by survey firm
d) Manual data entry check by IPA
e) Logic control check by IPA
f) Data cleaning by IPA
g) Check of outliers by IPA
Data entry was conducted by 6 data entry staff. All the data entry was conducted at Survey firm internally developed software, which was approved by IPA. First all the questionnaires were scanned and entered twice by 2 different data entry staff. Then the two entries were reconciled to produce a third dataset. Next, IPA took a random sample of 1500 data points fromt his third dataset and manually checked them against the paper copies of the questionnaires. The data was accepted from the data collection contractor when the error rate found by the manual check was below 0.5%.
Version1 (August 2014). The metadata file has been updated to incorporate information for the Wave 2 survey.
Version 2.1 (May 2015). Edited version based on Version 01 (DDI-MCC-MON-IPA-PURLS-2011-v02) that was done by Millennium Challenge Corporation.