Benin - Off-Grid Energy Access

Metadata Updated: May 14, 2019

The evaluation of OGEAP has two main components. The first is a more qualitative performance evaluation of the Enabling Environment Activity and the OCEF grant facility functioning (as a facility or mechanism, rather than looking at results of individual grants). The second component is a more quantitative impact evaluation centered on a collection of grants. Performance Evaluation Questions:

  1. Was the OCEF grant facility designed and implemented in a way that encouraged high-quality proposals and projects? Design: a. Were the selection criteria and procedures defined in the manual well-aligned to the objectives of selecting and scaling effective, sustainable models of off-grid energy services, and expanding access to energy to underserved communities? b. To what extent did the grant facility's evaluation criteria incentivize the proposal and acceptance of grants that best advanced its intended outcomes as defined in the theory of change? c. Was OCEF and the application process and requirements designed in a way that effectively led to applications and projects that addressed relevant gender and social inclusions issues? d. To what extent did the evaluation criteria incentivize all applicants to reveal the minimum subsidy required for their investment to move forward? e. Was the cost-sharing amount sufficient to allocate the risks appropriately to the grantee? Implementation f. To what extent was the technical assistance provided to grantees relevant to the gaps identified in the grantee proposals and to the grantee's objectives? g. Did grantees perceive the technical assistance and more general communications and support they received from OCEF as hindering or enabling their ability to meet the grant's objectives? h. To what extent were OCEF grants implemented in accordance to the grantees' implementation plans? i. To what extent did OCEF support projects that are financial sustainable and scalable?

  2. To what extent has the regulatory framework for off-grid energy been implemented? a. Are relevant Government entities, specifically ARE and ABERME, fulfilling the functions required for implementation of the framework? b. How do organizations interested in the off-grid electricity market in Benin perceive the framework? c. How do relevant Government entities, specifically ARE and ABERME, perceive the framework and the progress in its implementation? d. What are private sector actors' experiences in attempting to enter or grow in the off-grid clean energy market? e. Did the presence of an off-grid regulatory framework make private sector actors more or less likely to enter the off-grid clean energy market in Benin?

  3. To what extent did OGEAP encourage additional investment in the sector in Benin? a. To what extent did the grant facility generate information externalities that encouraged subsequent investment in the off-grid clean energy sector? b. Did the grant facility catalyze additional commercial financing of the off-grid energy sector in Benin? c. To what extent did the grant facility resolve discovery and/or coordination market failures limiting investment in Benin's off-grid clean energy sector? d. Did the grant facility demonstrate scalable business models that would be sustainable in the absence of subsidies? e. To what extent did the facility encourage coordinated, complementary investments that increased the viability/sustainability of facility investments?

Impact Evaluation Questions: Grant Outcomes

  1. What were the impacts of the investments on beneficiaries? Specifically, did the grants: a. Increase access to and consumption of energy? Was connection status and consumption sustained over time? b. Affect expenditures on energy? c. Increase appliance ownership? d. Increase the hours of operation and coverage of businesses and public services? e. Increase revenue generation, net income, consumption of perishables, and/or productivity?

  2. What was the distribution of those impacts? Were the above impacts distributed differently across key population sub-groups, namely gender, age, or income groups?

  3. How did impacts vary according to the exposure period?

  4. What factors - contextual, household-specific, targeting or business models, other - drive or constrain adoption of new connections, appliances, and energy services related to off-grid energy?

  5. Via what mechanisms did revenue generation or productivity increase? (i.e., for what types of activities/businesses did energy stimulate investment and growth?)

  6. Can the OCEF-supported investments be considered cost-beneficial or cost-effective, relative to alternatives?

Exposure to treatment

The impact evaluation samples households or businesses randomly from the lists of only those customers signing up for new connections from the grantees, and collect baseline and follow-up data from these individuals. Such lists will need to be obtained promptly from grantees once new customers are identified, and surveys will need to be deployed rapidly to collect baseline data, prior to connections being installed (baseline surveying will need to occur on a rolling basis).

Control zones will be oversampled at baseline, to allow ex post matching from a representative sample of households or businesses in control communes to those actually signing up to receive connections in treatment zones. This approach requires a larger sample of controls at baseline but would allow a full panel analysis of households and businesses for the matched sample of observations. Importantly, treatment is defined at the household or business level in this approach for Windows 2 and 3, and probably at the community level (given that the investments there are for public services) for Window 1. (The appropriate level of assignment for Window 4 is currently unclear.)

Access & Use Information

Public: This dataset is intended for public access and use. License: No license information was provided. If this work was prepared by an officer or employee of the United States government as part of that person's official duties it is considered a U.S. Government Work.

Downloads & Resources

Dates

Metadata Created Date May 14, 2019
Metadata Updated Date May 14, 2019

Metadata Source

Harvested from MCC Data.json

Additional Metadata

Resource Type Dataset
Metadata Created Date May 14, 2019
Metadata Updated Date May 14, 2019
Publisher Millennium Challenge Corporation
Unique Identifier DDI-MCC-BEN2-ENERGY-OFFGRID-SI-2019-V1
Maintainer
Monitoring & Evaluation Division of the Millennium Challenge Corporation
Maintainer Email
Public Access Level public
Bureau Code 184:03
Metadata Context https://project-open-data.cio.gov/v1.1/schema/catalog.jsonld
Schema Version https://project-open-data.cio.gov/v1.1/schema
Catalog Describedby https://project-open-data.cio.gov/v1.1/schema/catalog.json
Harvest Object Id e055553e-27cf-4053-bbcc-bf29943912fd
Harvest Source Id 56258383-6604-4f83-87c7-7d7be329c1b3
Harvest Source Title MCC Data.json
Homepage URL https://data.mcc.gov/evaluations/index.php/catalog/241
Data Last Modified 2019-05-14
Program Code 184:000
Source Datajson Identifier True
Source Hash 4264850991a483831f160c6a290129a983a9a2e6
Source Schema Version 1.1

Didn't find what you're looking for? Suggest a dataset here.