Livelihood Asset Status Tracking

The Livelihood Asset Status Tracking (LAST) method is a "rapid impact monitoring system designed along with primary stakeholders and based on the Sustainable Rural Livelihoods conceptual framework." (2002:3)

The approach was developed in 2000 on major livelihood projects in India, funded by DFID and implemented by the Indian Farm Forestry Development Co-operative and the Gramin Vikas Trust. By 2007, it had been trialled at scale in Uganda, South Africa, Sudan, Malawi, Pakistan and five Indian states.

The method involves:

1. Develop a LAST Assessment Sheet. A sheet is created for each of the five classes of assets in the sustainable livelihoods framework: natural, physical, human, financial and social. The sheet identifies specific qualitative indicators and criteria for different levels of assets, using local terms, on a loose 0% - 100% scale. It is developed in discussion with groups of professional and local informants.

2. Survey intended beneficiaries. The sheets allow criteria to be assessed during a brief household visit. Local enumerators visit a randomly selected sample of intended beneficiaries and conduct assessment on the basis of semi-structured interview and observation. The visits are reported as taking 20 minutes each. (2007: 303)

3. Analyse and report data. Data are processed on computer and can be aggregated and summarised into a single 'LAST score'. They can be disaggregated by wealth ranking, gender or project site. Trends can be monitored over time.

Results

Specific results can be reported, such as an increase in average LAST scores from 36% to 55% over a period of 5 years from 2000 to 2005 in the Western India Rainfed Farming Project. The data show the percentage of households in the top two wealth categories increased from 15% to 64%, and a corresponding decrease in the lowest wealth categories. (2007:304)

 

A 2007 review concludes:

  • Field work can be rapid enough to allow 5-15% sample coverage of large livelihood programs.
  • The precision of scores, tested between different enumerators using the same assessment sheets, can be 5-10% for household scores. Precision can be improved with training, monitoring and experience.
  • Analysis of the results provides useful information to directly monitor achievement of logframe indicators. The results concur with the observations of experienced field workers.
  • On-going analysis for managerial learning is not being done systematically. Analysis was carried out for donor reports or at a highly aggregated level.

 More information


The 2007 review is available as a restricted access journal paper: "Monitoring the livelihood platform: reflections on the operation of the Livelihood Asset-Status Tracking method from India and Malawi", Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 25(4), Dec 2007. Some of the same material is available in the 2003 paper, above.