farkl›l›klara rastlamak mümkün oluyor. Mesela, görüflme yapt›¤›m›z SYD vak›flar›ndan iki tanesinde, bize hamilelik yard›m› vermeyi reddettiklerini, çünkü bu yard›m›n uygulanmas› halinde nüfusta ciddi bir art›fl olaca¤›n› söylediler. Alan araflt›rmam›z s›ras›nda, fiNT uygulamas›n›n do¤um oranlar›n› artt›r›c› bir etki yapabilece¤i fikrinin farkl› kurumlardaki baflka sosyal yard›m uygulay›c›lar› taraf›ndan da ifade edildi¤ine tan›k olduk. Proje süresi içinde ayn› do¤rultuda baz› köfle yaz›lar›n›n da yay›nlanm›fl olmas›, bu konuda, uygulay›c›lardan bafllayarak, ciddi bir kamuoyu ayd›nlatma girifliminde bulunman›n yararl› olabilece¤ine iflaret ediyor. Uygulamalar yaln›zca hamilelik yard›m› konusunda farkl›laflm›yor. SYDGM ve Dünya Bankas›’n›n öngördü¤ü sistem, baflvuru formlar›ndaki bilgilerin bilgisayar arac›l›¤› ile SYDGM’ye aktar›lmas›na ve yerel uygulay›c›lar›n keyfi kararlar almas›n›n engellenerek adaylar›n bir puanlama formülüne dayal› olarak belirlenmesine dayal›. Puanlama formülünün
amac› hak sahibi belirleme ifllemlerinin daha objektif ve bilimsel temellere oturtulmas› olarak belirtilmifl. Fakat alan araflt›rmam›z esnas›nda birçok kez ekonomik durum tespitinin yerel uygulay›c›lar taraf›ndan
farkl›
illerde,
örgütlendi¤ine tan›k olduk.
farkl›
biçimlerde
Baz› illerde SYD
vak›flar› adaylar› belirleme konusunda genifl bir karar alma yetkisi kullanabilirken, baz›lar›nda
hak
kazananlar yaln›zca SYDGM’nin puanlama sistemi ile belirleniyor. Bir ilde ve ilin ilçelerinde fiNT’den kaç ailenin ve kaç kiflinin faydalanaca¤› konusunda da standartlar belirli de¤il. Görüfltü¤ümüz baz› SYD vak›flar› yetkilileri illerindeki en yoksul yüzde 6’l›k nüfusu hedeflediklerini ve buna göre baflvuran adaylar›n baz›lar›n› bilgisayar sistemine girmeden elediklerini belirtirlerken, baz› illerde ise baflvuran adaylar›n tamam› prosedüre uygun olarak Ankara’ya gönderiliyor ve baflvuranlar›n aras›nda yard›m alanlar›n oran› yoksulluk oran›n›n yüksek oldu¤u illerde yüzde 80-90’lara kadar ç›kabiliyordu.
18
believed that such a practice would increase birth rates. During our field research, we witnessed that this sentiment was shared by other social assistance administrators in various other institutions as well. The fact that this view was expressed by some newspaper columnists throughout the project period shows that, beginning with the actual practitioners, it would be useful to launch a clarification campaign for the larger public. Pregnancy assistance is not the only matter in which practices differ. The system prescribed by SYDGM and the World Bank is based on a point-scoring formula that allows for all information on applications to be sent directly to the SYDGM via the internet, which in turn, should prevent local implementers from arbitrary decision-making. The purpose of this point formula system is to establish a process that is objective and scientific in selecting beneficiaries. However, during our field research we observed on several occasions that the process of determining economic conditions varied across provinces and
implementers. In some provinces the SYD foundations maintained more authority in determining beneficiaries, while in others the point formula system was strictly applied. There are no clear standards for determining how many families and individuals can benefit from CCT in a province and its sub-provinces. Some of the SYD foundation authorities told us that they aimed to capture the poorest 6 percent of the population and accordingly eliminated certain applications even before entering them into the computer, while in other provinces, all applications were sent to Ankara and the rates of applicants receiving aid in provinces with high rates of poverty could reach 80 to 90 percent. Another project regarding poverty and social exclusion within the SRMP framework is the Local Initiatives project. This project consists of five components including income generating projects, employability training projects, temporary community employment, and various comprehensive projects for the development and maintenance of