download one page tour to 50 years of building partners empowering Asian village women to end poverty, design last mile health service and much more- how brac became the ngo world's largest networking economy DAY I ALMOST CHOKED EATING SUSHI WITH FAZLE ABED; he was telling his story: Bangladesh was less than 1 year old- it was 1972 and wanting to do more that being young Asia's leading oil company ceo, his greatest mistake was spending his life savings on building homes for 100000 refugees. Being an engineer I knew how to do that. But as we were opening the meta-village a young lady came up to me : what education/village enterprises do we need to prevent dozens of girls starving every week and scores of infants dying from dehydration? So she & I learnt we needed to innovate 5 last mile services for any space girls are born- safe homes, education, health, food, finance; in searching we found a billion village mothers wanting to COLLAB. 1
Download 2-page guide ...consider cases of new nations after world war 2- how many cases lived up to the peoples simplest dreams, end poverty, food/health/safety for every family member, education geared to decent jobs and happiness? bangladesh did something different- empowering 90% of women to find partners in building their own communities- .over 50 years a new economic model emerged which a billion asian women applied to end extreme poverty- how?.sustainability generation goal 5 100% livesmatter communitY 1 PLATFORMS 1 PLATFORMS 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6; 4 livelihood edu for all 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 ref Safiqul Islam 3 last mile health services 3.1 3,2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 last mile nutrition 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2,6 banking for all workers 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 .
examples from abed builder of largest ngo partnership: Reeta Roy MCF 3.3 1billion$ to vaccinate continent africa 4.3 uganda; Soros 1.1-1.6 ineteconomics bottom-up, 4.4 new university OSUN 3.4 end TB; Gates 1.1-1.6 digital finance; 2.1-2.6 extending mpesa in tanzania's green revolution; world bank 1.3 first 100 ultra poor nations co-researchers, 4,4 first 100 nations early childhood play co-researchers
in contrast tu unicorns, we define hunicorns as billion dollar startup networks to valuable to human life for exiting investors or quarrelsome political parties -hall of fame first 1000 hunicorn collabs with sir fazle abed

36 alumni networks for sustainability generation goal 5 100% livesmatter communities 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6; 4 livelihood edu for all 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 ref Safiqul Islam 3 last mile health services 3.1 3,2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 last mile nutrition 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2,6 banking for all workers 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 .
...2016 bangladesh e-digital schools nationwide :: bangla video:::: brookings video:: :::brac how did this happen?
The Economist 1977

2020s earthlings have the great good fortune that over 50 years from 1970 to 2019, fazle abed helped 1 billion asian women end poverty through 6 connected community building networks celebrating the first 5 sdgs and youth mediating everything else to be first sdg generation -each with a collaboration legacy -we're here to help yu find the network you can most help empower further
ending poverty, celebrating sustainability goals & youthful community building = most enjoyable ways to network; fazle abed (oil company engineer inspired by franciscan values) helped billion asian mothers do this over 50 years - join most exciting action learning networks and lets map AI algorithms = optimal livesmatter community builders -2021 join in glasgow cop26 & dubai rewired greatest youth meetings ever with thanks to &

Which 30 educational and economic partnerships most empower a billion women to end extreme poverty, and value their children’s sustainability? Fortunately for those caring about sustainability 2020s, we can map this by around partners and alumni of 50 years of servant leadership by fazle abed 1970-2019 together with legacy specifications mapped through his final decade

Viewed from 1970, Increasing life expectancy from 25 years below to average helped gravitate development economics world’s most trusted partnership – hence sustainability last mile service markets

3) last mile health
2) agriculture for village food security

4)non-linear livelihood education
5) timing what platforms partners could facilitate entrepreneurial revolution not not just inclusive community but cooperation in full and meaningful entrepreneurial employment

financial entreprenurial revolution for nation's people history excluded from machine age

Friday, July 31, 2015

1.3 ultra poverty asian development bank


Proof in – extreme poverty can end. What are we waiting for?
\The “ultrapoor” spend 80% or more of their income on food. A street beggar in Bandung, Indonesia.

By Betty Wilkinson

The ultrapoor want desperately to escape poverty and have richer, more meaningful lives. Governments and NGOs want inclusive growth and prosperity. There is a proven way we can address all these challenges – the ultrapoor graduation model.

“Much of the news about global poverty is depressing, but this is fabulous: a large-scale experiment showing, with rigorous evidence, what works to lift people out of the most extreme poverty.” – Nicholas Kristof, The New York Times columnist. People want to help. All of us do. We in ADB want to eliminate poverty. The poorest—those who spend 80% or more of their income on food, and consume on average only 80% of basic nutritional needs—want desperately to escape poverty and have richer, more meaningful lives. Governments and NGOs want inclusive growth and prosperity. There is a proven way we can address all these challenges – the ultrapoor graduation model. Essentially the argument is this: we need a blend of measures to pull people out of extreme poverty and be sustainably better off over time. The needs of the poorest are complex, so responses have to be holistic; the poorest households are too busy finding enough food to have energy, time, or hope for anything else. The ultrapoor graduation program, created and shaped by BRAC in Bangladesh, is a cluster of services provided over a 24-month period. These include a grant for a productive asset such as a cow or goat, skills training and support, life skills coaching and follow-up, temporary cash consumption support, and, typically, access to savings accounts and health information or services. Implementing partner organizations, mainly NGOs, work with the beneficiaries, visiting households weekly. The program involves significant and careful field monitoring.

This multi-pronged approach is relatively expensive, but the theory of change is that the combination of these activities is necessary to obtain a persistent impact. The hoped-for result is that a single intensive engagement over two years can provide households with increased assets and food security, improved savings and money management, better coping and productive skills, better health, and more optimism about the future. And that the results would be sustained after the program closes.

Productive assets like farm animals make a huge difference for the “ultrapoor.” Women farmers feed a cow in rural Bangladesh.

Supported by the Ford Foundation and financial inclusion group CGAP, 10 organizations in 8 countries piloted the graduation model in areas in Ethiopia, Ghana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Pakistan, Peru, and Yemen. About 3,700 individuals and their families were selected as the poorest by careful onsite participatory wealth ranking. In most places the implementers were microfinance- and livelihood paired-NGOs, although in Yemen 2 government agencies implemented the program.   This might be one of the most intensively studied models that I have ever observed. Research was conducted during implementation between 2007 and 2014 by a blend of academics and implementers from various organizations. The most well known are Dean Karlan, the founder of Innovations for Poverty Action and a Yale professor, and his colleague Nathanael Goldberg; and Esther Duflos and Abhijit Bannerjee of MIT and Harvard, respectively, who are also the leaders and founders of the Abdul Jameel Poverty Action Lab. The research involved randomized control trials, often called the gold standard of evaluations, as well as qualitative research in the field and market survey work. The academics examined the “sufficiency” claim of the package of interventions: A year after the conclusion of the overall program, and 3 years after the asset transfer, were program participants earning more income and achieving stable improvements in their wellbeing? The researchers measured impacts on consumption, food security, productive and household assets, financial inclusion, time use, income and revenues, physical health, mental health, political involvement, and women’s empowerment. Details of the methodology, work and findings were published in May in Science, a respected, peer-reviewed journal. The researchers established beyond any reasonable doubt that this 24-month-long multifaceted approach to increasing income and well-being for the ultra-poor is sustainable and cost-effective.

Let’s talk about the changes after the program. Income increases on average by 11.7% and is sustained over time. There are significant and sustained improvements in food security (5% increase over the control level), household productive assets of 15% more than the control group, which do not decline after the program is over, nor does debt increase), household savings higher than comparators by 55%, people spending 10.6% more time in productive work, and have better mental health.

Families that benefited from the “ultrapoor” graduation program reported to be happier and have less stress a year after the program closed. Smiling children in Suva, Fiji.

Households continue to report that they are happier and have lower stress a year after the program closes. Participants were more likely to become involved in village-level group activities, and women reported having a greater say in household decisions on health and home improvements during the program (although, unfortunately, not thereafter). The results varied per country, but the robust data shows that the results are consistently achieved in all countries. And no one was worse off. Scaling up is now starting in 20 countries, with replication ranging from 105 households in Zambia to 3 million in Ethiopia; most are either a small pilot under 2,000 people or a medium scale-up of 10-50,000 people. The researchers and implementers are fully committed to assist with reducing the costs of implementation while sustaining the results. They believe in this and are putting brainpower, time, and money behind it. And there are some serious minds at work. So what can you do? Treat this as a key intervention worthy of immediate action. Empower your teams to implement the ultrapoor graduation program.

  • No donor is currently taking ownership of this model and scaling it up significantly across countries. Push the development community to replicate.
  • Discuss these results with all country governments where poverty is an issue for action. Do field trials or scale this up now in countries, particularly those with high numbers of very poor; or those where government interest is already evident.
  • Incorporate missing elements of this holistic program into existing “partial” programs such as cash transfer, financial inclusion projects, agricultural development projects to make the model complete; talk to researchers about how to modify existing programs to make them complete.

With tools like these, we do have a real opportunity to eliminate extreme poverty. We just need to grasp them.