The main objective of the study is to measure the change that might have taken place for having various interventions in the rural community. The survey was conducted in two locations: one, where specific program interventions took place (Experimental area) and two, where specific interventions did not take place (Control area). A total of 300 female respondents were interviewed at their residence; of them 200 were from the experimental area and 100 from the control area. They were selected using systemic random sample technique. Data were collected using an interview schedule having both open and close ended questions. Data were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS). Analysis mostly remained at univeraite and bivariate levels. Statistics used are mostly frequency distribution, measures of central tendency, measures of dispersion, and Chi-square tests. The mean and median ages of the respondents were 36 and 35 years respectively. The literacy rate is 70% in experimental area as against 64% in control area. The overwhelming majority of the respondents (91%) are housewives in both study places. The per capita income of the experimental area is Tk. 125,425.0 as against Tk. 101,325.o of the control area and experimental area has 80% nuclear families as against 72% in control area. Experimental area sanitation condition was better (94%) than control area (85%). About 88% respondents (experimental area) have knowledge on hygienic habits as against 65% of the control area. Respondents of experimental area use tube well water (92%) for cooking purpose, 77% for bathing purpose, 84% use own tube well and control area about 80% use water for cooking, 13% for bathing and 49% has own tube well respectively. The contraceptive use rate was in experimental area about 63% while it was only 45% in control area respondents. But home delivery rate is lower (68%) compared to the control area (82%) and experimental area is ahead of the control area on every count of microcredit, such as credit disbursement, saving collection, IGA training and development activities.
Key words: Development interventions, rural setting, impact, programme.
Copyright © 2018 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article.
This article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0