A Lancet study in 2013 used a factorial, cluster-randomised controlled trial to determine the effect of women’s groups and peer counselling on health outcomes and behaviors in rural Malawi. Lewycka et al. (2013) found both interventions impressive, reducing maternal mortality, perinatal mortality, neonatal mortality, infant mortality and increasing exclusive breastfeeding. The study also found both approaches to be cost-effective.
Read MoreFindings from a cluster RCT in 55 villages in West Bengal, India, suggest that it is possible to leverage SHGs to reach women and adolescent girls with education on savings and sensitive health topics at minimal expense. Spielberg et al. (2013) reported on the impact of non-formal education on knowledge, attitudes and behaviors for HIV prevention in particular. Women and girls who received HIV education showed significant gains in HIV knowledge as compared to the control group.
Read MoreDeininger and Liu (2012) used two rounds of surveys in 2004 and 2006 to examine the impact of SHGs on 2,517 households in Andhra Pradesh, India. They found that longer exposure to the state government’s District Poverty Initiatives Project (DPIP), which prominently figures SHGs, had a positive impact on nutritional intake, consumption and asset accumulation.
Read MoreLopamudra and Suresh (2012)’s community based qualitative study found that SHGs played an important role in women’s empowerment in rural Pondicherry, India. In Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) for six SHGs, members reported a number of benefits.
Read MoreChatterjee et al. (2009) conducted a longitudinal study examining the effect of community-based rehabilitation on psychotic disorders in Madhya Pradesh, India. They found significant reductions in levels of disability. SHG membership, family engagement with the program and medication adherence were found to be independent determinants of good outcomes.
Read MoreGugerty and Kremer (2004) examined the effect of external funding on SHGs in western Kenya, and found that it had minimal impact on the labor input, agricultural output or assets of the groups. It did not improve group strength or functioning as measured by participation rates, assistance to members and assistance to other community projects. It did however change the demographic of the groups that were originally targeting the most vulnerable in the community.
Read More