Follow up Study of Slavery and Poverty Kukrouthi Village, St Ravidas Nagar District Uttar Pradesh, India

Follow Up Study of Slavery and Poverty Kukrouthi Village, St Ravidas Nagar District Uttar Pradesh, India

Research Team

Implementation: MSEMVS, Varanasi, India Coordination: Ginny Baumann, Associate Programs Director, Free the Slaves Survey Design: Ginny Baumann, Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, and Jessica Leslie Data Processing: Elaine Graves Data Analysis: Dr. Monti Narayan Datta Editor: Jody Sarich, Director of Research, Free the Slaves Local research team: Ms. Babita, Supervisor Mr. Motilal, Mr. Suresh Kumar, Ms. Asmin, Mr. Rajendra Prasad Surveyors

Date of data collection: From 9/2011 to 10/2011

Location of survey: Kukrouthi Village, St Ravidas Nagar District, Uttar Pradesh

This pre- and post-intervention study, conducted by Free the Slaves’ partner MSEMVS in India, was carried out at the beginning and end of a three year program implemented by MSEMVS with technical assistance from Free the Slaves. The study is intended to provide insight into: i) Whether or not slavery and trafficking have been eradicated in the village of Kukrouthi in St Ravidas Nagar District, Uttar Pradesh; and ii) To determine if other socio-economic conditions of people living in the community have also improved. The survey looks at changes in the economic, social, educational, health, and political status of the households residing in the village.

It is the first of eight similar village level studies, focused on locations where Free the Slaves India partners are implementing a rights-based, community organizing approach to slavery eradication. Follow up data collection at seven further locations (where the baseline was taken in 2010) will take place at the end of 2013. It is hoped that these studies may generate interest in conducting an independent evaluation of the effectiveness and associated benefits of this approach to eliminating slavery and trafficking.

This study was conducted among the residents of three hamlets in Kukrouthi village: Chhoti-mai, Sonahar, and Chhitauna. There were two information sources for this study. The first was a set of 120 household level surveys and the other are Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) held in both communities. A total of 929 people were accounted for by the surveys.

Focus Group Discussions were carried out in all three hamlets and provide insights to the issues facing the community. Various types of Focus Group Discussions occurred, including a “mixed” Focus Group Discussion (in which men, women, and children participated), another discussion for men, another one for women and one for children, as well as a discussion specifically for the members of the Community Vigilance Committee in Sonahar and in Chhoti-Mai – making a total of 14 discussion groups altogether. The discussions addressed key issues affecting the respondents.

The quantitative portions of this report consist of descriptive statistics based on two levels of analysis. The first level is the household, in which we examine variation in responses based on what the head respondent reported for his or her entire household. The second level is the individual, in which we examine variation in responses based on what the head respondent shared for each individual member living within a given household. In this report, we present descriptive statistics that explore a number of dimensions according to these two levels of analysis.

In terms of attribution of the changes, it is important to note that MSEMVS has been the only NGO working in Kukrouthi during the period (confirmed through the Focus Group respondents).

Following international norms, an adult is anyone 18 or above, and a child is anyone below this age, unless otherwise noted.

2 Table of Contents Figures and Tables ...... 4 Key Findings ...... 6 Study findings ...... 8 General Household Characteristics ...... 8 Education ...... 1010 Work/Income Level ...... 13 Food Consumption ...... 21 Health ...... 24 Assets and Durable Goods ...... 29 Debt and Lending ...... 37 Slavery, Trafficking And Debt Bondage ...... 40 Political Process And Perceived Self-Efficacy ...... 43 Interviewer’s Assessment ...... 47

Tables

Table 1: Age Breakdown of Respondents (N = 929) ...... 8 Table 2: Caste (N = 120) ...... 9 Table 3: Marital Status of Respondents 18 and Older (N = 512) ...... 9 Table 4: Reasons Children Do Not Attend School (N = 3) ...... 10 Table 5: Comparison of Adult Literacy Levels ...... 10 Table 6: Types of Employment (N = 365) ...... 13 Table 7: Work Type by Gender (N = 231 for males, 130 for females) ...... 14 Table 8: Work Type by Age (N = 365) ...... 14 Table 9: Comparison of Hours Worked ...... 15 Table 10: Hours Worked by Gender ...... 17 Table 11: Seasonal Employment (N = 336) ...... 17 Table 12: Type of Payment Received (N = 516) ...... 17 Table 13: Payment Type by Hours Worked ...... 18 Table 14: Payment Type by Hours Worked, Separated by Gender ...... 18 Table 15: Average Pay by Hours Worked, Separated by Gender ...... 19 Table 16: Hours Worked Per Day by Age ...... 20 Table 17: Comparison of Number of Meals Consumed Per Day By Household (N = 120) .... 21 Table 18: Interviewer's Assessment of Main Meal (N = 120) ...... 22 Table 19: Comparison of Consumption of Key Foods By Household (N = 120) ...... 22 Table 20: Comparison of Access to Health Care (N = 120) ...... 24 Table 21: Comparison of Access to Free Medical Treatment (N = 120) ...... 25 Table 22: Breakdown of Illnesses Experienced in the Last Month ...... 26 Table 23: Comparison of Child Vaccinations (N = 361 in 2011; N = 337 in 2009) ...... 26 Table 24: Comparison of Birth Control Methods Available and Used (N = 120) ...... 27 Table 25: Comparison of Ability to Limit Number of Babies (N = 120) ...... 28 Table 26: Comparison of Quality of Land (N = 120) ...... 29 Table 27: Comparison of Land Use (N = 120) ...... 30 Table 28: Type of Roofing Material for Each Family's House (N = 120) ...... 31 Table 29: Comparison of Durable Goods (N = 120) ...... 31 Table 30: Comparison of Animals Owned (N = 120) ...... 32 Table 31: Comparison of Animals Owned (N = 120) ...... 32 Table 32: Comparison of Ability to Save Regularly (N = 120) ...... 33 Table 33: Comparison of Savings Locations (N = 99 in 2011; N = 32 in 2009) ...... 34 Table 34: Comparison of Family Remittances (N = 120) ...... 35 Table 35: Comparison of Social Safety Nets (N = 120) ...... 35 Table 36: From Whom Can Your Household Borrow Money? (N = 120) ...... 37 Table 37: Amount of Debt & Purpose of Loan (N = 48) ...... 37 Table 38: Understanding of "Trafficking" (N = 120) ...... 40 Table 39: Aware of Traffickers in Kukrouthi Village (N = 120) ...... 40 Table 40: Not Allowed to Come Home (N = 120) ...... 41 Table 41: Forced to Work? (N = 120) ...... 41 Table 42: Does India Have Laws Against Forced Labor? (N = 120) ...... 41 Table 43: Responses to Potential Trafficking (N = 120) ...... 41 Table 44: Comparison of Participation in the Last Election, by Gender (N = 120) ...... 43 4 Table 45: Comparison of Can You Improve Your Life, by Gender (N = 120) ...... 43 Table 46: Comparison of Can You Improve the Lives of Others, by Gender (N = 120) ...... 44 Table 47: Part of Village Group to Improve Things, by Gender (N = 120) ...... 44 Table 48: Attitudes Toward the Future (N = 120) ...... 45 Table 49: Length of Interview (N = 120) ...... 47

5 Key Findings

§ Most Children In School: 91% of children ages 5-14 attend school in 2011. This is a significant increase compared to 2009, when only 69% of children ages 5-14 attended school.

§ Adult Literacy On the Rise: The number of those who were very literate increased by 11% between 2009 and 2010. The number of literate increased by 4% over this time period. Conversely, the number of illiterate declined by 5%.

§ Better Nutrition: There is dramatic increase in the number of families that are able to eat three meals a day, from 31% in 2009 to 71% in 2011.

§ Improved Access to Health Care: In 2011 almost the entire population of these hamlets had access to healthcare. In 2009, just 52% received free health care treatment. By 2011 95% were able to receive free treatment.

§ Improvement in Childhood Vaccinations: In 2009, just one-third of children had the proper number of vaccination (i.e., three vaccinations). By 2011, this had increased to 90%.

§ Greater Access to contraception: In 2009, only 3% of households were using contraceptive pills, but by 2011, this had risen to 42%. In 2009, only 1% used condoms. By 2011, almost one-third were using condoms.

§ More Ownership of Livestock: In 2009, 57% owned animals. This increased to 83% in 2011. Livestock can be vital to nutrition and are also an important form of household economic security.

§ Increased Savings: In 2009, only 30% of households saved regularly. This showed a large increase, to 74% in 2011. Among the families that saved in 2011, on average they saved 73 rupees ($1.39) a week. This is an improvement compared to 2009, when the households that saved regularly were able to save an average of 50 rupees ($1.10) per week.

§ A Decrease in Remittances: The amount of money received by households (from members living elsewhere) each month in 2011 averaged 1,303 rupees ($25). This is a decline from 2009, in which the average amount of these remittances was 1,500 rupees ($32) per month.

§ Effective Use of Social Safety Nets: Families able to access public food distribution for low income households increased from 58% in 2009 to 87% in 2011. Use of NREGA (the government’s Employment Guarantee scheme) increased from 33% in 2009 to 85% in 2011. Households accessing government pensions rose from 21% in 2009 to 59% in 2011. Families accessing other types of government assistance increased from 4% in 2009 to 23% in 2011.

6 § A Steep Decline in Informal Lending and Interest Rates: In 2009, 80% of households in the hamlets were in debt to another person, with the average debt being 19,300 rupees ($367). In 2011, just 43% of households were in debt. This is roughly a fifty- percent decrease in just two years. Moreover, the amount of debt has decreased as well, with the average debt in 2011 being 8,002 rupees ($152). At the same time, the interest rates have decreased substantially between 2009 and 2011. In 2009, the average annual interest rate was 60%. In 2011, the average annual interest rate was 31%.

§ No More Debt Bondage: None of the households in the follow up survey that borrowed money were required to work as part of paying back the loan. This is a spectacular improvement compared to the 2009 baseline survey, in which 17 households reported that household members were required to work to pay off their debt.

§ Small Increase in Voter Turnout: In 2009, 86% of men and 83% of women voted in the last election. This compares to 98% of men and 97% of women who voted in the last recent election in 2011.

§ Small Increase in Self-Empowerment: In 2009, 51% of men and 56% of women felt they could improve their lives. This increased to 53% of the men and 64% of the women in 2011. In 2009, 41% of men and 35% of women felt they could improve the lives of others. This increased to 43% of men and 43% of women in 2011.

§ Dramatic Increase in Group Identity: In 2009, just 7% of men and 27% of women felt they were part a group that could improve things. By 2011, however, 31% of men and 57% of women felt they were part of such a group.

§ Interviewer Perceptions: Of the respondent households, the interviewers believed that none of the households were in debt bondage in 2011. This is a substantial change compared to 2009, when the interviewers believed that half of the households (65) were living in debt bondage. The interviewer also believed that none of the households were living in fear of a landlord/moneylender controlling their lives. This is again a substantial change compared to 2009, when the interviewers felt that 57 families were living in fear of a moneylender.

7 Study findings General Household Characteristics The results from this study show that there is a diverse makeup of families living within the community. A total of 929 people were accounted for in the follow up survey in 2011.

§ Family size ranges from 1 person to 22 people. § The average family size is under 8 persons (7.7). § 52% of people accounted for were male and 46% were female. § This is the age breakdown of those reported on in the survey:

Table 1: Age Breakdown of Respondents, 2011 (N = 929)

Age Range Frequency Percentage 0-5 years 102 11% 6-14 years 236 25% 15-17 years 67 7% 18-25 years 146 16% 26-35 years 157 17% 36-45 years 82 9% 46-55 years 60 6% 56-65 years 49 5% 66+ years 27 3% No Response 3 0.3% Total 929 100%

§ 405 residents are under 18 years old. This is 44% of residents. § There are only 27 people listed as being older than 66. § For households with children, the number of children ranges from 1 to 10. § There are an average of about 3.4 children per household where children under 18 live.

§ Compared to the 2009 baseline study, in 2011 the population size of the sample households increased by 7%, from 869 to 929 respondents.

§ 100% of households reported to be Hindu in 2011. (No comparable data are available for 2009.)

8 § This is a breakdown of the kinds of castes in Kukrouthi Village in 2011 (No comparable data are available for 2009.):

Table 2: Caste (N = 120)

Caste Frequency Percentage Chamar (Harijan) 84 70% Giri (Brahman) 16 13% Gosvami 1 1% Mushar 7 6% Pal 12 10% Total 120 100%

Chamar and Pal castes are Scheduled Castes in Uttar Pradesh (i.e. castes that have been officially recognized as having suffered severe discrimination and social exclusion)

§ This is the marital status breakdown of those reported on in the survey in Kukrouthi in 2011 (comparable data are not available for 2009):

Table 3: Marital Status of Respondents 18 and Older (N = 512)

Marital Status Frequency Percent Single 59 11% Married/Couple 433 85% Widowed/r 20 4% Total 512 100%

§ This is a graph of the breakdown of marital status in Kukrouthi Village in 2011:

Figure 1: Marital Status (N = 512)

Marital Status

Married/ Widowed/r Couple 4% 85% Single 11%

9 Education For this section, no one under 5 or over 14 is examined. In Kukrouthi Village there are 257 children in this age range.

§ 91% of children ages 5-14 attend school in 2011. This is a significant increase compared to 2009, when only 69% of children ages 5-14 attended school, as Figure 3 illustrates.

Figure 2: Change in School Attendance (%)

Percent Children in School

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2009 Baseline 2011 Follow Up

§ Four children are reported not in school in the follow up survey. This is a significant decrease compared to 2009, when ninety-one children did not attend school.

§ Respondents in the follow up survey were asked to list the reasons why these 4 children do not go to school in Kukrouthi Village. This is a breakdown of the reasons:

Table 4: Reasons Children Do Not Attend School (N = 3)

Reason Frequency School too Distant 1 School Not Safe 2 Total 3

§ There were 515 residents aged 15 and older in Kukrouthi Village in 2011. This is a breakdown of adult literacy levels of these individuals compared to the 2009 baseline survey. (Baseline statistics are in italics.)

Table 5: Comparison of Adult Literacy Levels

Extent of Literacy Year Frequency Percentage

10 2011 233 41% Not Literate 2009 258 46%

2011 61 11% Minimal 2009 110 20%

2011 133 24% Literate 2009 112 20%

2011 141 25% Very Literate 2009 80 14%

2011 568 100% Total 2009 560 100%

§ As Table 5 illustrates, the number of adults who reported that they were very literate increased by 11% between 2009 and 2011. The number of literate increased by 4% over this time period. Conversely, the number of illiterate declined by 5%.

§ These graphs are a breakdown of adult literacy in Kukrouthi Village in 2011 and 2009:

Figure 3: Comparison of Adult Literacy Levels

2011 Follow Up

Very Literate Not 25% Literate 41% Literate 23%

Minimal 11%

11 2009 Baseline Very Literate 14%

Not Literate Literate 20% 46%

Minimal 20%

Most of the Focus Groups cited educational improvements as the most important change that they had achieved in their communities. They highlighted high levels of school attendance, proper meals and better teaching. They said that girls were attending as much as boys. For the children in the Chhitauna group the difference is stark: “Because teacher [used to come] only four days in a week and they went after three hours. There were many insects in the food. They cooked rice without washing it. We do not eat this food. We come home and feed. They did not give much food. But now teacher teaches sweet word, we get neat, healthy and sufficient meals in school.”

12 Work/Income Level The NREGA (National Rural Employment Guarantee Act) program is a guaranteed employment system, which provides paid work for unemployed rural adults for 100 days a year. Until the end of 2010, the daily wage was Rs. 100 ($2.23) for NREGA workers.

For this section, everyone above the age of 15 or above is examined, unless otherwise noted.

§ This is a breakdown of types of work performed by adult residents in 2011. Respondents were provided with a list of employments or the opportunity (under “other”) to state their own employment type:

Table 6: Types of Employment (N = 365)

Employment Type Frequency Percentage Agricultural 111 30% Weaving/knitting/tailoring 82 22% Construction 58 16% Company worker 7 2% Driver/Rickshaw puller 8 2% Electrician 2 0.5% Factory worker 7 2% Gardener 2 0.5% ICDS worker 1 0.3% Medical representative 2 0.5% Milk man 1 0.3% Painter 2 0.5% Paper mill worker 3 0.8% Shop employee 5 1% Teacher 5 1% Vegetable seller 1 0.3% Watchman 10 3% Animal husbandry 7 2% Brick kiln worker 8 2% Other (unspecified) 32 9% No Response 11 3% Total 365 100%

§ Similar to the 2009 baseline study, the most common type of employment in 2011 was in agricultural work. In 2009, 136 respondents (37%) of the work force performed agricultural work, compared to 111 respondents in 2011 (30%). Likewise, compared to the 2009 baseline study, the second most common type of employment in 2011 was in weaving/knitting/tailoring. In 2009, 84 respondents (23%) worked in weaving, compared to 82 respondents (22%) in 2011. Lastly, compared to 2009, construction in 2011 was the third most common form of work, with 58 respondents working in construction in 2011 (16%) compared to 51 respondents in 2009 (14%).

13 § This is a breakdown of types of work by gender (when identified) among adult residents in Kukrouthi in 2011:

Table 7: Work Type by Gender (N = 231 for males, 130 for females)

Employment Type Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Male Male Female Female Agricultural 19 8% 91 70% Weaving/knitting/tailoring 73 32% 9 7% Construction 46 20% 10 8% Company worker 7 3% . . Driver/Rickshaw puller 8 4% . . Electrician 2 1% . . Factory worker 7 3% . . Gardener 2 1% . . ICDS worker . . 1 1% Medical representative 2 1% . . Milk man 1 0.4% . . Painter 2 1% . . Paper mill worker 3 1% . . Shop employee 5 2% . . Teacher 2 1% 3 2% Vegetable seller 1 0.4% . . Watchman 10 4% . . Animal husbandry 6 3% 1 1% Brick kiln worker 6 3% 2 2% Other (unspecified) 24 10% 7 5% No Response 5 2% 6 5% Total 231 100% 130 100%

§ Similar to 2009, a far larger number of women in 2011 worked in agriculture compared to men. The same is true of the weaving/knitting/tailoring sector. However, by 2011, more women were at work in construction (8%) compared to 2009 (less than 1%).

§ This is a cross-tabulation of types of work by age range among adult residents in Kukrouthi in 2011 (comparable data for 2009 are not available):

Table 8: Work Type by Age (N = 365)

Employment Type 15-25 yr. 26-35 yr. 36-45 yr. 46-55 yr. 56-65 yr. 66+ yr. Agricultural . 13 32 26 18 16 Weaving/knitting/tailoring . 18 28 18 8 7 Construction 3 14 19 14 4 3 Company worker . 2 3 1 . 1 Driver/Rickshaw puller . 4 3 1 . . Electrician . . 2 . . . Factory worker . 3 2 1 1 . Gardener . . . . 2 .

14 ICDS worker . . 1 . . . Medical representative . . 1 1 . . Milk man ...... Painter . 1 1 . . . Paper mill worker . 1 1 1 . . Shop employee . 3 1 1 . . Teacher . 1 2 1 . 1 Vegetable seller . . 1 . . . Watchman . 2 2 . 6 . Animal husbandry . 2 1 2 1 . Brick kiln worker . 1 5 . 2 . Other (unspecified) 1 11 8 5 4 2 No Response . . 2 . 1 3 Total 4 76 115 72 47 33

§ This is a breakdown of hours worked among adults in Kukrouthi Village compared to the 2009 baseline survey. (Baseline statistics are in italics.)

Table 9: Comparison of Hours Worked

Hours Worked Year Frequency Percentage 2011 11 3% 2 hr. 2009 6 2%

2011 6 2% 3 hr. 2009 1 0.27%

2011 46 13% 4 hr. 2009 18 5%

2011 12 3% 5 hr. 2009 23 6%

2011 45 13% 6 hr. 2009 35 10%

2011 5 1% 7 hr. 2009 4 1%

2011 146 41% 8 hr. 2009 200 55%

2011 9 3% 9 hr. 2009 . .

2011 16 5% 10 hr. 2009 3 1%

15 2011 60 17% 12 hr. 2009 77 21%

2011 356 100% Total 2009 367 100%

§ These graphs are a breakdown of hours worked each day in Kukrouthi Village in 2011 and 2009:1 Figure 4: Comparison of Hours Worked

2011 Follow Up 10 hr. 5% 9 hr 2% 2 hr. 3 hr 12 hr 3% 2% 17%

4 hr 13% 8 hr 6 hr 41% 5 hr 13% 3% 7 hr 1%

2 hr 3 hr 2% 2009 Baseline 0% 4 hr 5 hr 5% 6% 6 hr 12 hr 9% 21% 10 hr 7 hr 1% 1%

8 hr 55%

§ This is a breakdown of hours worked (outside of household work) by gender (when identified) among residents in Kukrouthi in 2011:

1 Note: the 2009 baseline study did not specify the exact age range for adults. This is different for the 2011 follow up study, in which an adult is anyone 15 years or older. 16

Table 10: Hours Worked by Gender

Hours Worked Frequency Frequency Male Female 2 1 10 3 0 6 4 13 33 5 4 8 6 9 35 7 4 1 8 122 22 9 8 1 10 15 1 12 58 1 Total 234 118

§ Of respondents, females averaged 5.37 hours work per day outside of the home and males averaged 8.76 hours per day.

§ This is a breakdown of lengths of seasonal employment (when identified) among residents in Kukrouthi in 2011:

Table 11: Seasonal Employment (N = 336)

Length of Season Frequency Percentage Full Year 11 3% 8-10 Months a Year 78 23% 6-8 Months a Year 98 29% 4-5 Months a Year 55 16% Less than 4 Months a Year 94 28% Total 336 100%

§ This is a breakdown of the type of payment workers receive among residents in Kukrouthi in 2011:

Table 12: Type of Payment Received (N = 516)

Payment Type Frequency Percentage Rupees Only 247 71% Mixture of Rupees and Food Grain 9 3% Only Food Grain 93 27% Total 349 100%

§ This is a graph of the breakdown of payment received in Kukrouthi Village in 2011:

17 Figure 5: Payment Received (N = 349)

Payment Received

Only Grain 27% Rupees & Grain Rupees 2% Only 71%

§ The average daily wage for workers in 2011 was 115 rupees ($2.19). The minimum daily wage for workers is 13 rupees ($0.25). The maximum daily wage for workers is 500 rupees ($9.50). § During the Focus Group discussions, some of the groups mentioned the importance of receiving the legal minimum wage.

§ This is a breakdown of payment type by hours worked, where data are available for 2011:

Table 13: Payment Type by Hours Worked

Hours Frequency of Frequency in Frequency of Payment in Payment in Payment in Food Rupees Rupees/Grain Grain 2 0 0 10 3 1 0 5 4 15 1 28 5 4 0 8 6 16 0 26 7 4 0 1 8 124 6 6 9 8 0 0 10 16 0 0 12 55 2 1 Total 243 9 85

§ This is a breakdown of the average payment by hours worked, separated by gender where data are available: for 2011:

Table 14: Payment Type by Hours Worked, Separated by Gender Males

18 Hours Frequency of Frequency in Frequency of Payment in Payment in Payment in Food Rupees Rupees/Grain Grain 2 . . 1 3 . . . 4 7 . 6 5 3 . 1 6 6 . 1 7 3 . 1 8 106 6 1 9 8 . . 10 15 . . 12 53 2 1 Total 201 8 12

Females Hours Frequency of Frequency in Frequency of Payment in Payment in Payment in Food Rupees Rupees/Grain Grain 2 . . 9 3 1 . 5 4 8 1 22 5 1 . 7 6 10 . 24 7 1 . . 8 16 . 5 9 . . . 10 1 . . 12 1 . . Total 39 1 72

§ This is the average pay by hours worked separated by gender, where data are available for 2011:

Table 15: Average Pay by Hours Worked, Separated by Gender

Hours Frequency Average Pay Frequency Average Pay Male (N = 221) Male Female (N = 38) Female 2 . . . . 3 . . 1 Rs. 50 ($0.95) 4 7 Rs. 64 ($1.22) 7 Rs. 68 ($1.23) 5 3 Rs. 87 ($1.65) 1 Rs. 30 ($0.57) 6 7 Rs. 69 ($1.31) 10 Rs. 89 ($1.69) 7 3 Rs. 83 ($1.58) 1 Rs. 120 ($2.28) 8 8 Rs. 150 ($2.85) 16 Rs. 118 ($2.42) 9 8 Rs. 150 ($2.85) . . 10 15 Rs. 123 ($2.34) 1 Rs. 75 ($1.43)

19 12 58 Rs. 160 ($3.04) 1 Rs. 160 ($3.04)

§ In 2011, men who worked 8 hours per day earned an average of 150 rupees ($2.85) per day compared to women who worked 8 hours per day and earned an average of 118 rupees ($2.24). (No comparable data are available from 2009.)

§ This a breakdown of hours worked per day by age range in 2011:

Table 16: Hours Worked Per Day by Age

Hours 15-25 yr. 26-35 yr. 36-45 yr. 46-55 yr. 56-65 yr. 66+ yr. 2 3 3 2 1 0 2 3 0 3 1 2 0 0 4 4 14 10 8 8 2 5 1 2 4 2 2 1 6 7 16 5 8 7 1 7 1 1 1 1 1 0 8 40 45 33 15 11 2 9 1 6 2 0 0 0 10 3 6 4 3 0 0 12 21 22 10 6 0 1 Total 81 118 72 46 29 9

During Focus Group discussions, children (in 3 different groups) were asked about the work that children under 14 do and consistently reported that children were not working but were studying, playing and helping in family work at home (e.g. helping mother with cooking). The FGDs also highlighted that there has been improvement in access to the National Rural Employment Guarantee, so that those without enough paid work can claim days of paid work from the government. Also, by 2011, many more families were receiving pension support (widow pensions and old age pensions).

20 Food Consumption

§ This is a breakdown of the number of meals a family has in a day in the surveyed hamlets of Kukrouthi Village compared to the 2009 baseline survey. (Baseline statistics are in italics.)

Table 17: Comparison of Number of Meals Consumed Per Day By Household (N = 120)

Number of Meals Year Frequency Percentage 2011 26 21.7% Two Meals 2009 76 30.8%

2011 85 70.8% Three Meals 2009 37 30.8%

2011 9 7.5% No Response 2009 4 3.3%

§ Table 17 shows a dramatic increase in the number of families that are able to eat three meals a day, from 31% in 2009 to 71% in 2011.

§ These graphs are a breakdown of daily meals in Kukrouthi Village in 2011 and 2009

Figure 6: Comparison of Breakdown of Daily Meals (N = 120)

2011 Follow Up No Response 7%

Two Meals Three 22% Meals 71%

21 2009 Baseline

Three Meals 31% No Response 3% Two Meals 66%

§ After interviewing each household on the number of meals it consumed per day, the interviewer assessed the overall quality of the main meal per day.

§ This is a breakdown of the interviewer’s assessment of the main meal in 2011:

Table 18: Interviewer's Assessment of Main Meal (N = 120)

The Quality Was Frequency Percentage Sufficient in terms of both nutritional quality 19 16% and quantity for each household member Almost sufficient in both quality and quantity 99 82% Very insufficient in quality and quantity . . No Response 2 2% Total 120 100%

§ This is a breakdown of the consumption of certain food types in Kukrouthi Village compared to the 2009 baseline survey. (Baseline statistics are in italics.). Puri, meat and sweets were chosen as food types that indicated a higher level of income. Compared to 2009, there was a 300% increase in the number of families in 2011 who were eating meat. Families consuming Puri and sweets increased as well. Consumption of nutritional vegetables fell.

Table 19: Comparison of Consumption of Key Foods By Household (N = 120)

Key Food Group Year Frequency “yes” Percentage 2011 92 77% Puri 2009 83 69%

2011 49 41% Meat 2009 14 12%

2011 41 34% Sweets 2009 25 21%

2011 48 40% Cabbage, Tomato, Spinach 2009 55 46%

23 Health

§ This is a breakdown of access to health care in the surveyed hamlets of Kukrouthi Village (i.e., access to a health center, health worker, or hospital) compared to the 2009 baseline survey. (Baseline statistics are in italics.)

Table 20: Comparison of Access to Health Care (N = 120)

Access to Health Care Year Frequency Percent 2011 115 96% Yes 2009 68 57%

2011 3 3% No 2009 51 43%

2011 1 1% Don’t Know 2009 . .

2011 1 1% No Response 2009 1 1%

§ Table 20 illustrates a dramatic increase in access to health care. In 2009 a little over half of the village had access. In 2011 almost the entire village had access to healthcare.

§ These are graphs of the breakdown of the access to health care in Kukrouthi Village in 2011 and 2009:

24 Figure 7: Comparison of Access to Health Care (N = 120)

2011 Follow Up No Response No 1% 2%

Yes 97%

2009 Baseline

No 42% No Response 1% Yes 57%

§ This is a breakdown of who is able to receive free medical treatment in Kukrouthi Village compared to the 2009 baseline survey. (Baseline statistics are in italics.) Table 21: Comparison of Access to Free Medical Treatment (N = 120)

Access to Free Treatment Year Frequency Percent 2011 114 95% Yes 2009 62 52%

2011 4 3% No 2009 57 48%

2011 2 2% No Response 2009 1 1%

§ Table 21 illustrates a dramatic increase in those who are able to receive access to free medical treatment. In 2009, just 52% received free treatment. By 2011, however, 95% were able to receive free treatment.

25 § 35% of everyone who was surveyed in 2011 indicated that they experienced some form of illness in the last month.

§ This is a breakdown of illnesses experienced by people who suffered illness in the last month and whether they obtained medical care:

Table 22: Breakdown of Illnesses Experienced in the Last Month

Illness Number of Percentage Percentage Number of Percentage Percentage of Respondents of of Total Respondents of Total Who Respondents Population Who Respondents Population Experienced Who Surveyed Obtained Who Surveyed This Illness Experienced (N=895) Medical Care Obtained (N = 895) (N = 313) This Illness Who (N = 285) Medical Care Who Obtained Experienced Medical Care This Illness Diarrhea 68 22% 8% 60 21% 7% Diarrhea & Fever 1 0.3% 0.1% 1 0.4% 0.1% Fever 99 32% 11% 91 32% 10% Fever & Cough 2 1% 0.2% 1 0.4% 0.1% Cough 62 20% 7% 59 21% 7% Physical Injury 38 12% 4% 33 12% 4% Pregnancy Complications 11 4% 1% 11 4% 1% Chicken pox 1 0.3% 0.1% 1 0.4% 0.1% Skin disease 1 0.3% 0.1% 1 0.4% 0.1% Stomach pain 4 1% 0.4% 3 1% 0.3% Other (unspecified) 26 8% 3% 24 8% 3% Total 313 100% 35% 285 100% 32%

§ This is a breakdown of child vaccinations in Kukrouthi Village compared to the 2009 baseline survey. (Baseline statistics are in italics.)

Table 23: Comparison of Child Vaccinations (N = 361 in 2011; N = 337 in 2009)

Immunizations Year Frequency Percentage 2011 . . 0 2009 164 49%

2011 12 3% 1 2009 22 7%

2011 24 7% 2 2009 41 12%

2011 325 90% 3 2009 110 33%

26 § Table 23 shows a significant improvement in the number of child vaccinations. In 2009, just one-third of children had the proper number of vaccination (i.e., three vaccinations). By 2011, this level had increased to 90%.

§ These are graphs of the breakdown of the number of child vaccinations in Kukrouthi Village in 2011 and 2009: Figure 8: Comparison of Child Vaccinations (N = 407 in 2011; N = 337 in 2009)

2011 Follow Up One Vaccination 3% Two Vaccinations 7% Three Vaccinations 90%

2009 Baseline

Three Vaccinations 33% Two Vacinations 12% None 49% One Vaccination 6%

§ This is a breakdown of birth control methods available and used based on the number of people who responded for each question compared to the 2009 baseline survey. (Baseline statistics are in italics.)

Table 24: Comparison of Birth Control Methods Available and Used (N = 120)

Method Year Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Available Available Used Used

2011 54 45% 50 42% Pills 2009 3 3% 4 3%

2011 13 11% 14 12% Injections 2009 27 23% 27 23% 27

2011 32 27% 39 32% Condoms 2009 2 2% 1 1%

2011 81 68% 83 70% Sterilization 2009 57 48% 55 46%

2011 . . . . Abortion 2009 6 5% 6 5%

2011 1 1% 1 1% Other 2009 1 1% 1 1%

2011 14 12% 11 9% None 2009 36 30% 37 31%

§ Table 24 shows a substantial increase in the use of condoms, one of the best ways to fight the spread of sexually transmitted infections and reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. In 2009, less than 1% of households used condoms. By 2011, however, about one-third of households were using condoms. There was also a major increase in the proportion of households using contraceptive pills, and an increase in sterilization. There was a reduction in use of long-term injected contraceptives and in abortion.

§ This is a breakdown of women, by household, who felt they could get help to limit the number of babies and children they have compared to the 2009 baseline survey. (Baseline statistics are in italics.) Table 25: Comparison of Ability to Limit Number of Babies (N = 120)

Response Year Frequency Percentage 2011 92 77% Yes 2009 87 73%

2011 12 10% No 2009 12 10%

2011 16 13% No Response 2009 21 18%

§ Table 25 shows that number of women who felt they could get help to limit the number of babies stayed about the same between 2009 and 2011.

Focus Group discussions provide important confirmation of attendance at the village by various types of health workers and that residents are now making use of the hospital. Some residents still feel the need for more attention by health providers.

28 Assets and Durable Goods

§ 83% of families (i.e., 100) own land, though it is not clear whether most of this referred to the actual house site. This is a breakdown of the quality of land owned compared to the 2009 baseline survey. (Baseline statistics are in italics.)

Table 26: Comparison of Quality of Land (N = 120)

Quality Year Frequency Percent 2011 67 56% Good 2009 33 29%

2011 33 28% Adequate 2009 45 38%

2011 . . Poor 2009 10 8%

2011 20 17% No Response 2009 32 27%

§ These are graphs of the breakdown of the quality of land owned in Kukrouthi Village in 2011 and 2009.

Figure 9: Comparison of Land Quality (N = 120)

2011 Follow Up No Response 17%

Adequate Good 27% 56%

29 2009 Baseline

No Good Response 28% 27% Poor 8% Adequate 37%

§ This is a breakdown of how the land is used among those who own land compared to the 2009 baseline. (Baseline statistics are in italics.)

Table 27: Comparison of Land Use (N = 120)

Use Year Frequency Percentage 2011 97 80% Growing Food 2009 70 58%

2011 . . Animal Grazing 2009 3 3%

2011 3 3% Other (unspecified) 2009 . .

2011 20 17% No Response 2009 47 39%

It is hard to reach any conclusions about improvements in land use, due to the number of people who did not respond to the question in 2009.

§ These are graphs of the breakdown of the land use in Kukrouthi Village in 2011 and 2009: Figure 10: Comparison of Land Use (N = 120)

30 2011 Follow Up No Response 17% Other 2%

Growing Food 81%

2009 Baseline

No Response 39% Growing Food 58% Animal Grazing 3%

§ The amount of land owned ranged considerably in 2011, from 23 to 17,560 square meters. The average size of land owned is 2,541 square meters.

§ This is a breakdown of the kind of roofing material each family’s house utilized in 2011 (comparable data from 2009 are not available):

Table 28: Type of Roofing Material for Each Family's House (N = 120)

Material Frequency Percentage Plastic sheets 1 1% Dry grass or paddy straw tied with ropes 7 6% Cement sheets on bamboo sticks or terracotta tiles 58 48% Tin Sheets 27 23% Brick and cement made house 26 22% Total 120 100%

§ This is a breakdown of durable goods per household compared to the 2009 baseline. (Baseline statistics are in italics.)

Table 29: Comparison of Durable Goods (N = 120)

Durable Good Year Frequency Percentage

31 2011 29 24% Radio 2009 59 49%

2011 107 89% Bicycle 2009 94 78%

2011 116 97% Wooden Cot 2009 113 94%

2011 52 43% Bed Matt 2009 34 28%

§ Partner staff explained the interesting fall in possession of radios in terms of residents being more likely to listen to music on cellphones.

§ Families in 2011 had an average of 1 wood cutting tool, 2 digging tools, 1.5 nets (for catching fish and birds), and 1 hammer.

§ This is a breakdown of families that own animals compared to the 2009 baseline. (Baseline statistics are in italics.)

Table 30: Comparison of Animals Owned (N = 120)

Response Year Frequency Percentage 2011 100 83% Yes 2009 68 57%

2011 17 14% No 2009 20 17%

2011 3 3% No Response 2009 32 27%

§ Table 30 reveals a dramatic increase in the number of families reporting that they own animals, though it is not clear how to interpret this due to the number in 2009 who did not respond to the question. In 2009, 57% reported owning animals. This shot up to 83% in 2011.

§ Of the respondents who own animals, this is a breakdown of the animals they own compared to the 2009 baseline. (Baseline statistics are in italics.):

Table 31: Comparison of Animals Owned (N = 120)

Animal Year Frequency Approximate Average # among those families that own this animal

32 Chickens 2011 31 2 2009 10 2

Goats 2011 52 1 2009 29 2

Cows 2011 65 2 2009 39 1

Buffalo 2011 28 1 2009 17 .

Bullocks 2011 21 1 2009 . .

Pigs 2011 1 1 2009 . .

§ This is a breakdown of those who are able to save money in Kukrouthi Village compared to the 2009 baseline. (Baseline statistics are in italics.):

Table 32: Comparison of Ability to Save Regularly (N = 120)

Response Year Frequency Percentage Yes 2011 89 74.2% 2009 36 30.0%

No 2011 27 22.5% 2009 73 60.8%

No Response 2011 4 3.3% 2009 11 9.2%

§ Table 32 reveals a dramatic increase in those households that report they are able to save regularly. In 2009, only 30% of households saved regularly. This increased to 74% in 2011.

§ These are the graphs of those who are able to save money in Kukrouthi Village in 2011 and 2009: Figure 11: Comparison of Ability to Save Regularly (N = 120)

33 2011 Follow Up

No Response 3% No 23%

Yes 74%

No Response 9% 2009 Baseline

Yes 30%

No 61%

§ Among the families that saved in 2011, they saved on average 73 rupees ($1.39) a week. This is an improvement compared to 2009, when the families that were able to save were saving an average of 50 rupees ($1.10) per week.

Various of the Focus Group discussions also confirmed increased participation in group savings.

§ This is a breakdown of where families put their savings in Kukrouthi Village compared to the 2009 baseline. (Baseline statistics are in italics.):

Table 33: Comparison of Savings Locations (N = 99 in 2011; N = 32 in 2009)

Location Year Frequency Percentage Bank 2011 32 32% 2009 11 34%

Home 2011 1 1% 2009 4 13%

Self Help Group 2011 52 53% 2009 16 50% 34

Bank & Self Help Group 2011 9 9% 2009 . .

Private Insurance Company 2011 5 5% 2009 1 3%

§ This is a breakdown of households that receive money from family members outside the village compared to the 2009 baseline. (Baseline statistics are in italics.):

Table 34: Comparison of Family Remittances (N = 120)

Response Year Frequency Percentage Yes 2011 46 38% 2009 53 44%

No 2011 72 60% 2009 43 36%

No Response 2011 2 2% 2009 24 20%

§ The amount of money received by these families each month in 2011 averaged 1,303 rupees ($24.76). This is a decline from 2009, in which the average amount of these remittances was 1,500 rupees ($32) per month, with about 41% of the remittances being more than 1,500 rupees.

§ This is the breakdown of people with access to social safety nets compared to the 2009 baseline. (Baseline statistics are in italics.):

Table 35: Comparison of Social Safety Nets (N = 120)

Type of Social Safety Year Frequency Percent Public Food Distribution 2011 104 87% 2009 70 58%

NREGA 2011 102 85% 2009 39 33%

Government Pension 2011 71 59% 2009 25 21%

Government Other 2011 28 23% 2009 5 4%

Other 2011 4 3% 2009 18 15%

35 § There is marked increase in the number of families effectively using social safety nets across the board.

Many of the Focus Groups described reductions in corruption of social safety nets. For example, one of the men’s FGD was asked about changes in levels of corruption: “Yes, teacher attitudes have changed against student. Village head is not able to hatch-patch any matter. PDS [Public food distribution system] runs fairly and so on.” The groups explained that they are quite ready to take cases of corruption to the higher authorities and to directly confront the village leader, if needed.

Changes in access to the police were also mentioned by the Focus Groups. Before the police had mainly been seen as likely to disturb the community, rather than provide services to the community, but now residents expect the police to help them. As one mixed FGD respondent explained “Some day ago, it was not like that. People were afraid from police. They run away when police comes in village. But now this thinking is changed. Now when any crime happens, then first we go to the village head. If he can’t handle it then we go to the police station, and when they don’t get any response from there then we go to police headquarters and at last we can go to the DM or SDM [District Magistrate or Sub-Divisional Magistrate]”

36 Debt and Lending

§ This is a breakdown of where households can borrow money:

Table 36: From Whom Can Your Household Borrow Money? (N = 120)

Lender Frequency Percentage Local Moneylender 5 4% Neighbor 22 18% Landowner 1 1% Self Help Group 15 13% Bank 1 1% Weaver 1 1% Relative 3 3% No Response 72 60% Total 120 100%

§ Forty-three percent of households (that is, fifty-one households) in these hamlets of Kukrouthi are currently in debt. § Among these households, the average amount of debt is 8,002 rupees ($152). § This is a breakdown (when available) of the amount of debt, purpose of the loan, age of the loan, interest rate and the lender among the households that are in debt. The average annual rate of interest is 31%.

Table 37: Amount of Debt & Purpose of Loan (N = 48)

Amount of Debt Amount of Loan Purpose Age of Loan Lender Annual Indian Rs. Debt $U.S. Interest Rate % 1000 19 Medical Care 6 months-2 years Neighbor 6 1000 19 Medical Care Less than 6 months Neighbor 6 1500 28.5 Medical Care 3 years-5 years Self-help group 7.5 2000 38 Family Marriage 3 years-5 years Relative None 2000 38 Family Marriage 6 months-2 years Self-help group 7.5 2000 38 Family Marriage 3 years-5 years Self-help group 7.5 2000 38 Family Marriage Less than 6 months Neighbor 7.5 2000 38 Medical Care Less than 6 months Self-help group 7.57 2000 38 Medical Care Less than 6 months Self-help group None 2000 38 Family funeral 6 months-2 years Neighbor None 2000 38 Family Marriage 6 months-2 years Neighbor None 2000 38 Home repair 6 months-2 years Neighbor None Business Materials; 2000 38 Education 6 months-2 years Relative None 2000 38 Medical Care 6 months-2 years Neighbor 60 2500 47.5 Family Marriage 6 months-2 years Self-help group 60 2500 47.5 Other 6 months-2 years Bank 4 2600 49.4 Medical Care 6 months-2 years Self-help group 0.5 3000 57 Family Marriage Less than 6 months Self-help group 7.5 3000 57 Medical Care 6 months-2 years Neighbor None 3000 57 Medical Care 6 months-2 years Self-help group 36

37 3000 57 Home repair 6 months-2 years Self-help group 7.5 4000 76 Business Materials 6 months-2 years Self-help group 60 5000 95 Medical Care 3 years-5 years Self-help group 60 5000 95 Medical Care Less than 6 months Self-help group 7.5 5000 95 Family Marriage Less than 6 months Neighbor None 5000 95 Home repair Less than 6 months Neighbor None 5000 95 Home repair Less than 6 months Neighbor None Local 5000 95 Medical Care 6 months-2 years moneylender 60 Local 5000 95 Home repair 3 years-5 years moneylender 60 6000 114 Other (education) 6 months-2 years Neighbor 6000 114 Medical Care 6 months-2 years Neighbor None Medical Care; Family 6000 114 Marriage 6 years-10 years Self-help group 36 6000 114 Other (piggery) 6 months-2 years Landowner 60 7000 133 Family Marriage 3 years-5 years Relative Home repair; Family 7000 133 Marriage 6 months-2 years Neighbor None 8000 152 Medical Care 6 months-2 years Other (weaver) 10000 190 Equipment/Assets 6 years-10 years Neighbor None 10000 190 Family Marriage 6 months-2 years Self-help group 7.5 10000 190 Medical Care 6 months-2 years Neighbor None Business Materials; 10000 190 Family Marriage 3 years-5 years Neighbor None Medical Care; Business 10000 190 Materials 6 months-2 years Neighbor None 14000 266 Medical Care; Funeral 6 months-2 years Neighbor 5 20000 380 Family Marriage 6 years-10 years Neighbor None Local 20000 380 6 months-2 years moneylender 60 Local 20000 380 Medical Care 3 years-5 years moneylender 60 40000 760 3 years-5 years Neighbor None Business Materials; Other Local 40000 760 (open school) 6 months-2 years moneylender 60 Home repair; Family 50000 950 Marriage 6 months-2 years Neighbor 60

§ These lending statistics are an impressive improvement compared to the 2009 baseline survey. In 2009, 80% of households in Kukrouthi were in debt, with the average debt being 19,300 rupees ($367). In 2011, 43% of households were in debt. This is roughly a fifty-percent decrease in just two years. Moreover, the amount of debt has decreased as well, with the average debt in 2011 being 8,002 rupees ($152). At the same time, the interest rates have decreased substantially between 2009 and 2011. In 2009, the annual average interest rate was 60%. In 2009, the average annual interest rate was 31%.

§ None of the households in the follow up survey that borrowed money were required to work as part of paying back the loan. In the past year, no households experienced any threats from the person who lent them money. In the past one year, however, one household experienced violence from the person who lent them money. This is a major 38 improvement compared to the 2009 baseline survey, in which 17 households reported that household members were required to work to pay off their debt.

During the Focus Group Discussions, various groups were asked about the proportion of residents in debt bondage, and the response was unanimous that no-one was in debt bondage. For example, one of the mixed groups said “Yes, before some years, this type of work was taken forcefully under less payment, but now, it is not so. If they give fewer amounts, we shall not work.” They believe the situation has changed because of forming a group, gaining awareness and becoming resistance. Likewise one of the children’s Focus Groups explained “If the owner is not paying wages, we would go to police and file FIR [First Information Report]. Police would help”.

Two Community Vigilance Committees functioning in parts of Kukrouthi were asked to explain the difference between a fair loan and debt bondage, which they were able to do accurately. They also explained the rights that are protected by the Bonded Labour Act 1976.

39 Slavery, Trafficking And Debt Bondage

§ This is a breakdown of respondent’s understanding of the term “trafficking” in 2011 (no comparable data are available in 2009):

Table 38: Understanding of "Trafficking" (N = 120)

Understanding of term is Frequency Percentage Correct 53 44% Partially Correct 64 53% Incorrect Answer or Unable to Answer 2 2% No Response 1 1% Total 120 100%

§ This is a graph of respondents’ understanding of the term

Figure 12: Understanding the Term "Trafficking" (N = 120)

Understanding "Traficking"

Partially Correct Incorrect 53% 2% No Response 1%

Correct 44%

§ This is a breakdown of those who are aware of any traffickers visiting Kukrouthi Village over the past year:

Table 39: Aware of Traffickers in Kukrouthi Village (N = 120)

Response Frequency Percentage No 119 99% No Response 1 1% Total 120 100%

§ This is a breakdown of those who know anyone in their family taken away from their home area for work and then not been allowed to come home:

40 Table 40: Not Allowed to Come Home (N = 120)

Response Frequency Percentage No 118 98% No Response 2 2% Total 120 100%

All of the Focus Groups were also clear that trafficking is not taking place any more. One group explained “There are some who migrate for work, but they get paid and can come home.” Awareness of trafficking has spread effectively in the community, so that even the children’s groups could give a clear explanation of trafficking, including risks of organ trafficking.

One of the Community Vigilance Committees explained the steps that a migrant worker should take to mitigate the risks of trafficking. They also indicated that if they heard of trafficking cases in nearby villages, they would take action and involve the police.

§ This is a breakdown of any households in Kukrouthi Village who are currently forced to work through violence or threats

Table 41: Forced to Work? (N = 120)

Response Frequency Percentage No 119 99% No Response 1 1% Total 120 100%

§ This is a breakdown of answers to the question of whether India has laws against forcing people to work through violence or threats.

Table 42: Does India Have Laws Against Forced Labor? (N = 120)

Response Frequency Percentage Yes 118 98% No Response 2 2% Total 120 100%

§ This is a breakdown of what the respondent would do if someone tricked or forced a family member to go somewhere with them and forced them to work or into prostitution

Table 43: Responses to Potential Trafficking (N = 120)

Response Frequency Percentage Talk to others in the community and go to the police 84 70% to file a case (or just file a case on own initiative) Talk to others in the community, try to get help 35 29%

41 No Response 1 1% Total 120 100%

42 Political Process And Perceived Self-Efficacy

§ This is a breakdown by gender of participation in the last local or national election compared to the 2009 baseline. (Baseline statistics are in italics.):

Table 44: Comparison of Participation in the Last Election, by Gender (N = 120)

Did You Vote? Year Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Male Male Female Female 2011 117 98% 116 97% Yes 2009 103 86% 100 83%

2011 2 2% 2 2% No 2009 5 4% 4 3%

2011 1 1% 2 2% No Response 2009 12 10% 16 13%

§ Table 44 reveals a marginal improvement in voter turnout in these hamlets of Kukrouthi Village, though the change is less clear due to the number who did not respond to this question in 2009.

The Focus Groups said they do not have complaints about the voting system and they feel free to vote. One of the women’s groups mentioned how they had got one of their members elected as village head: “Before 2 years we have not courage for doing all these. But now we have more courage. Because of this our lives are better than before.”

§ This is a breakdown by gender of whether or not people feel they are able to improve their lives compared to the 2009 baseline. (Baseline statistics are in italics.):

Table 45: Comparison of Can You Improve Your Life, by Gender (N = 120)

Response Year Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Male Male Female Female 2011 64 53% 77 64% Yes 2009 61 51% 67 56%

2011 9 8% 25 21% Probably Yes 2009 24 20% 29 24%

2011 . . 1 1% Probably No 2009 . . 2 2%

2011 47 39% 17 14% No Response 2009 34 28% 21 18%

2011 . . . . No 2009 1 1% 1 1%

§ Table 45 reveals a small improvement in how men and women perceive their ability to improve their lives. In 2009, 51% of men and 56% of women felt they could improve their lives. This increased to 53% of the men and 64% of the women in 2011. In both 2009 and 2011, there were a large number of respondents who did not answer this question and if they are removed from the analysis, this shows a much great improvement especially in male self-efficacy.

§ This is a breakdown by gender of whether or not people feel they are able to improve the lives of others compared to the 2009 baseline. (Baseline statistics are in italics.):

Table 46: Comparison of Can You Improve the Lives of Others, by Gender (N = 120)

Response Year Frequency Male Percentage Male Frequency Female Percentage Female 2011 51 43% 51 43% Yes 2009 49 41% 42 35%

2011 18 15% 48 40% Probably Yes 2009 36 30% 52 43%

2011 2 2% 2 2% Probably No 2009 . . 2 2%

2011 2 2% 2 2% No 2009 1 1% 2 2%

2011 47 39% 17 14% No Response 2009 34 28% 22 18%

§ Table 46 shows a small increase in the extent to which households in Kukrouthi believe they can improve the lives of others. In 2009, 41% of men and 35% of women felt they could improve the lives of others. This increased to 43% of men and 43% of women in 2011. If the non-respondents are removed from the analysis, the improvement becomes more distinct, especially for males.

§ This is a breakdown by gender regarding whether people are part of any kind of village group that is trying to improve things, compared to the 2009 baseline. (Baseline statistics are in italics.):

Table 47: Part of Village Group to Improve Things, by Gender (N = 120)

Response Year Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Male Male Female Female Yes 2011 37 31% 68 57% 2009 8 7% 32 27%

No 2011 33 28% 37 31% 2009 67 56% 69 58%

No Response 2011 50 42% 15 13% 2009 45 44% 19 16%

§ Table 47 reveals a dramatic increase in men’s and women’s participation in groups working to improve things. In 2009, just 7% of men and 27% of women were part such a group. By 2011, however, 31% of men and 57% of women were part of such a group.

§ This is a breakdown of expectations about the future for Kukrouthi residents in 2011 (N = 120)

Table 48: Attitudes Toward the Future (N = 120)

Response Frequency Percentage Better 105 88% Worse . . No Different 1 1% No Response 14 12% Total 120 100%

§ This is a graph of respondents’ attitudes toward the future

Figure 13: Attitudes Toward the Future (N = 120)

Attitudes Toward the Future No Response No Different 12% 1%

Better 87%

An important part of making changes in Kukrouthi are the Community Vigilance Committees. They report that these groups meet at least once a month, and see their task as addressing problems in local amenities as well as in watching over residents to prevent slavery and trafficking. One of the CVCs particularly mentioned giving help to any returned trafficking survivor, both financial and moral support. They expect to achieve a lot together and to continue the CVC for the future. They gave examples of getting a road, better education, improvements in food distribution, housing, pensions, hand pump, job cards

45 (under NREGA) and electric lighting. In one of the communities drinking water remains a problem, and two of the groups mentioned the need for vocational training opportunities for school leavers. They feel disappointed that children are leaving school in their late teens and entering work such as stonebreaking.

One of the important areas of progress has been the reduction in domestic violence that was consistently reported across all of the Focus Groups, including the children’s groups. As one male Focus Group member explained “This type of incident often was happening in our community before two years. Men were come back to home after drinking and beat his wife and children. But in present time, they are not doing so because they know well by MSEMVS that this is the crime.”

Their description of the CVC gives insight to the reasons for their successes so far: They explained that the CVC is made up mostly of those who have come out of slavery: “Yes, near about we all are survivors. Some members were working in carpet factory and some were brick kiln. But in present time, we are totally free and we organized a group in the help of MSEMVS and participate in the meeting.” Other groups confirmed good participation in the meetings and that they know what steps to make if the authorities do not respond to their demands.

They also highlighted that they are part of a network of similar CVCs. They expect that if they are having difficulties dealing with an issue, then the other CVCs would help them. “It gives us more power and more courage.”

Interviewer’s Assessment

At the end of each interview, the interviewer was asked a number of questions about the household and the interview. These were mostly to gain a better understanding of the conditions of the household.

§ Of the respondent households, the interviewers believed that none of the households were in debt bondage. This is a substantial change compared to 2009, when the interviewers believed that half of the households (65) were living in debt bondage.

§ The interviewers also believed that none of the households were living in fear of a landlord/moneylender controlling their lives. This is again a substantial change compared to 2009, when the interviewers felt that 57 families were living in fear of a moneylender.

§ The interviewer felt that 99% of the respondents were able to speak freely in answering the questions.

§ The following is a breakdown of the length of the interviews:

Table 49: Length of Interview (N = 120)

Length Frequency Percentage 0-30 min. . . 1-1.15 hours 58 48% 1.5+ hours 4 3% 30-60 min. 58 48% No Response . . Total 120 100%