## Cash Transfers: What Does The Evidence Say? Annexes

Francesca Bastagli, Jessica Hagen-Zanker, Luke Harman, Valentina Barca, Georgina Sturge and Tanja Schmidt, with Luca Pellerano Overseas Development Institute
203 Blackfriars Road London SE1 8NJ Tel. +44 (0) 20 7922 0300 Fax. +44 (0) 20 7922 0399 E-mail: info@odi.org.uk www.odi.org www.odi.org/facebook www.odi.org/twitter

## Contents

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews
Annex 1	
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews	
4
Annex 2	
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools	
8
Annex 3	
Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams 	
73
Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools
Annex 4	
Summary of the evidence base	
89
Annex 5	
Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects	
95
Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Annex 1 Overview Of Existing Cash Transfers Reviews

This annex provides some additional information on existing cash transfer reviews, which are discussed in Chapter 3. Tables A1.1 and A1.2 below summarise the indicators and methods employed in the systematic reviews covered in Chapter 3. Table A1.3 summarises other review studies that are drawn upon in the discussion on design and implementation features in the same chapter.

## Table A1.1 Main Indicators Reported On In Systematic Reviews

| Reference                                                                                                             | Indicators covered                                                                                                        |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Baird et al., 2013                                                                                                    | School enrolment; school attendance; school test scores.                                                                  |
| Banks et al., 2016                                                                                                    | Meeting basic needs; reducing poverty; employment; health access; mental health.                                          |
| Gaarder et al., 2010                                                                                                  | Indicators reported in meta-analysis: clinic visits; immunisation (partial and full); anthropometric indicators (stunting |
| and wasting).                                                                                                         |                                                                                                                           |
| Other outcomes reported on individual programmes include: morbidity (e.g. anaemia, diarrhoea); self-reported          |                                                                                                                           |
| health; health behaviour (knowledge and practices); mental health.                                                    |                                                                                                                           |
| Glassman & Duran, 2013                                                                                                | Births attended by skilled personnel; tetanus toxoid for mother; giving birth in a hospital; post-partum check-ups/       |
| visits after birth; contraceptive use and HIV status; fertility; low birth-weight; peri-natal, neo-natal and maternal |                                                                                                                           |
| mortality.                                                                                                            |                                                                                                                           |
| Hagen-Zanker et al., 2011                                                                                             | Poverty indices; expenditure; income.                                                                                     |
| IEG, 2014                                                                                                             | Empowerment, voice and agency; domestic violence; fertility; prenatal care, institutional delivery and skilled            |
| birth attendance; political participation; access to productive resources; employment; school enrolment; school       |                                                                                                                           |
| attendance; child labour; anthropometric indicators.                                                                  |                                                                                                                           |
| Kabeer et al., 2012                                                                                                   | Child and adult labour; migration patterns; household consumption; savings and investment; negative coping                |
| mechanisms; informal social protection arrangements; community-wide effects (consumption, loans, transfers,           |                                                                                                                           |
| remittances, poverty).                                                                                                |                                                                                                                           |
| Lagarde et al., 2009                                                                                                  | Health service utilisation (e.g. health care and antenatal care visits); immunisation coverage; child illness;            |
| anthropometric and nutritional indicators.                                                                            |                                                                                                                           |
| Manley et al., 2012                                                                                                   | Anthropometric indicators (child height for age and child height).                                                        |
| Anthropometric indicators (child                                                                                      |                                                                                                                           |
| height for age and child height).                                                                                     |                                                                                                                           |
| (Review in progress) Use of health services and health outcomes.                                                      |                                                                                                                           |
| Saavedra & Garcia, 2012                                                                                               | School enrolment; school attendance; school dropout rate.                                                                 |
| Yoong et al., 2012                                                                                                    | Anthropometric and nutritional indicators; adult labour supply; household expenditure (health, school, clothing,          |
| food); school enrolment; school attendance; investments in business and agriculture; asset ownership; enterprise      |                                                                                                                           |
| performance.                                                                                                          |                                                                                                                           |

Notes: These are the main outcomes reported. There are some further outcomes reported within individual studies. For studies reporting on interventions other than cash transfers, indicators shown are only those associated with impacts of cash transfers. 

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Table A1.2 Study Designs And Methods Included In Systematic Reviews

| Reference                                                             | Study designs accepted for final analysis                     | Quality assessment of included studies                       |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|
| Risk of bias assessed using tool developed by the International       |                                                               |                                                              |
| Development Coordinating Group (IDCG).                                |                                                               |                                                              |
| Baird et al., 2013                                                    | (i) RCT                                                       |                                                              |
| (ii) Quasi-experimental design with controlled comparison.            |                                                               |                                                              |
| Required cross-sectional or longitudinal comparison (pre-post         |                                                               |                                                              |
| control, contemporaneous control, interrupted time series,            |                                                               |                                                              |
| parallel cohort or RDD.                                               |                                                               |                                                              |
| Banks et al., 2016                                                    | No restrictions.                                              | Risk of various types of bias evaluated by two authors using |
| modified versions of the assessment tools RATS and STROBE             |                                                               |                                                              |
| for qualitative and quantitative studies, respectively (Clark,        |                                                               |                                                              |
| 2003; von Elm et al., 2007). Assessment focused on the risk of        |                                                               |                                                              |
| potential biases arising from study design, sampling methods,         |                                                               |                                                              |
| data collection and data analysis interpretation. Studies             |                                                               |                                                              |
| categorized as: (1) 'low' risk of bias, (2) 'medium' risk of bias or  |                                                               |                                                              |
| (3) 'high' risk of bias. No strict cut-offs were used in assigning    |                                                               |                                                              |
| classifications and all papers (including 'high' risk) were           |                                                               |                                                              |
| eventually included.                                                  |                                                               |                                                              |
| None.                                                                 |                                                               |                                                              |
| Gaarder et al., 2010                                                  | (i) Experimental studies                                      |                                                              |
| (ii) Quasi-experimental design (matching, regression                  |                                                               |                                                              |
| discontinuity design (RDD) and multivariate regression).              |                                                               |                                                              |
| Excluded studies that did not control for endogeneity of              |                                                               |                                                              |
| intervention status.                                                  |                                                               |                                                              |
| Glassman & Duran, 2013                                                | Unclear. Report on studies that report 'rigorously calculated |                                                              |
| impacts'.                                                             |                                                               |                                                              |
| None.                                                                 |                                                               |                                                              |
| Hagen-Zanker et al., 2011                                             | 'Solid empirical study with high quality reporting'.          | Scored studies using an index developed by the authors       |
| comprising:                                                           |                                                               |                                                              |
| reporting on targeting incidence,                                     |                                                               |                                                              |
| study design,                                                         |                                                               |                                                              |
| accounted for income foregone and household economy                   |                                                               |                                                              |
| responses,                                                            |                                                               |                                                              |
| reporting statistical significance.                                   |                                                               |                                                              |
| Quality check based on full text review to assess strength of         |                                                               |                                                              |
| internal validity (i.e. assumptions of evaluation methods verified    |                                                               |                                                              |
| and treatment of endogeneity assessed).                               |                                                               |                                                              |
| IEG, 2014                                                             | A quantitative impact evaluation that adopted either (i) an   |                                                              |
| experimental or (ii) quasi-experimental design that relied on a       |                                                               |                                                              |
| credible control group.                                               |                                                               |                                                              |
| Graded studies according to strength of internal validity and         |                                                               |                                                              |
| excluded studies where main methodological assumptions were           |                                                               |                                                              |
| not discussed and proposed causal relationship weak.                  |                                                               |                                                              |
| None.                                                                 |                                                               |                                                              |
| Kabeer et al., 2012                                                   | (i) Experimental                                              |                                                              |
| (ii) Quasi-experimental (RDD, Propensity Score Matching, IV or        |                                                               |                                                              |
| DID).                                                                 |                                                               |                                                              |
| Assessment of risk of bias (based on EOPC) was then carried out       |                                                               |                                                              |
| to determine quality of evidence, tailored to study design.           |                                                               |                                                              |
| Lagarde et al., 2009                                                  | Examined all studies that met the Effective Practice and      |                                                              |
| Organisation of Care Group (EPOC) inclusion criteria for study        |                                                               |                                                              |
| design and compared the effects (on predetermined outcomes)           |                                                               |                                                              |
| of offering CCTs against the absence of CCTs. Then included           |                                                               |                                                              |
| three types of studies:                                               |                                                               |                                                              |
| (i) RCTs or C-RCTs                                                    |                                                               |                                                              |
| (ii) Pre-post control studies                                         |                                                               |                                                              |
| (iii) Interrupted time-series (providing studies defined the point in |                                                               |                                                              |
| time of the intervention and there were three or more data points     |                                                               |                                                              |
| before and after the intervention).                                   |                                                               |                                                              |
| Manley et al., 2012                                                   | Had to be an impact evaluation but no restrictions on study   |                                                              |
| design or methods.                                                    |                                                               |                                                              |
| Used two sets of criteria concerning study design and                 |                                                               |                                                              |
| methods based on the Cochrane handbook and scored studies             |                                                               |                                                              |
| accordingly.                                                          |                                                               |                                                              |
| None.                                                                 |                                                               |                                                              |
| Saavedra & Garcia, 2012                                               | Study had to use a 'treatment-comparison' research design.    |                                                              |
| Non-randomised studies only eligible if they report relevant pre-     |                                                               |                                                              |
| treatment characteristics of treatment and comparison groups.         |                                                               |                                                              |
| Intervention pre-post studies not eligible.                           |                                                               |                                                              |
| Studies scored using quality criteria (see cell to left).             |                                                               |                                                              |
| Yoong et al., 2012                                                    | Had to (i) be an evaluation study of specific programme or    |                                                              |
| programmes and (ii) use an approach aimed at identifying causal       |                                                               |                                                              |
| effects and their size. Further methodological criteria (adapted      |                                                               |                                                              |
| from the Maryland Scale of Scientific Methods) were also applied      |                                                               |                                                              |
| to quantitative studies which had to score 18 or above to be in       |                                                               |                                                              |
| the final set of papers.                                              |                                                               |                                                              |
| Qualitative literature kept for developing conceptual framework       |                                                               |                                                              |
| and contributing relevant insights.                                   |                                                               |                                                              |
| Contents                                                              |                                                               |                                                              |
| Annex 1                                                               |                                                               |                                                              |
| Overview of                                                           |                                                               |                                                              |
| existing cash                                                         |                                                               |                                                              |
| transfers reviews                                                     |                                                               |                                                              |
| Annex 2                                                               |                                                               |                                                              |
| Detailed search                                                       |                                                               |                                                              |
| protocols and study                                                   |                                                               |                                                              |
| assessment tools                                                      |                                                               |                                                              |
| Annex 3                                                               |                                                               |                                                              |
| Summary table                                                         |                                                               |                                                              |
| of searches                                                           |                                                               |                                                              |
| and reasons for                                                       |                                                               |                                                              |
| exclusion and flow                                                    |                                                               |                                                              |
| diagrams                                                              |                                                               |                                                              |
| Annex 4                                                               |                                                               |                                                              |
| Summary of the                                                        |                                                               |                                                              |
| evidence base                                                         |                                                               |                                                              |
| Annex 5                                                               |                                                               |                                                              |
| Evidence:                                                             |                                                               |                                                              |
| results tables for                                                    |                                                               |                                                              |
| overall effects                                                       |                                                               |                                                              |
| disaggregated by                                                      |                                                               |                                                              |
| gender, and cash                                                      |                                                               |                                                              |
| transfer design and                                                   |                                                               |                                                              |
| implementation                                                        |                                                               |                                                              |
| effects                                                               |                                                               |                                                              |

## Table A1.3 Other Review Papers On Impacts Of Cash Transfers

| Reference                                                    | Main outcomes covered                                     | Interventions         | Number of           |
|--------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------|---------------------|
| evaluations                                                  |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Regional focus?                                              |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Adato & Bassett, 2012                                        | Poverty; education; health; food consumption; nutrition.  | UCTs, CCTs and        |                     |
| pensions                                                     |                                                           |                       |                     |
| 40 cash transfer                                             |                                                           |                       |                     |
| programmes                                                   |                                                           |                       |                     |
| including pensions                                           |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Adato & Hoddinott, 2010                                      | Education; health; nutrition; food consumption; women's   |                       |                     |
| status and gender relations; participation and power.        |                                                           |                       |                     |
| CCTs                                                         | Various evaluations                                       |                       |                     |
| for 4 programmes                                             |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Latin America                                                |                                                           |                       |                     |
| UCTs, CCTs non-                                              |                                                           |                       |                     |
| contributory pensions                                        |                                                           |                       |                     |
| and PWPs                                                     |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Arnold et al., 2011                                          | Poverty, vulnerability and inequality; nutrition and food |                       |                     |
| security; education; health and population; protecting       |                                                           |                       |                     |
| productive assets; encouraging livelihood diversification;   |                                                           |                       |                     |
| stimulating local markets; access to credit; gdp growth;     |                                                           |                       |                     |
| labour markets; child labour; empowerment and gender         |                                                           |                       |                     |
| equality; humanitarian assistance; state building and social |                                                           |                       |                     |
| cohesion; climate change adaptation and disaster risk        |                                                           |                       |                     |
| reduction.                                                   |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Social transfers                                             |                                                           |                       |                     |
| (PWPs, CCTs, UCTs,                                           |                                                           |                       |                     |
| social pensions)                                             |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Barrientos & Scott, 2008                                     | Effects on growth at the micro-level:                     |                       |                     |
| alleviating credit constraints;                              |                                                           |                       |                     |
| addressing insurance failures;                               |                                                           |                       |                     |
| improving household resource allocation and dynamics;        |                                                           |                       |                     |
| human development (incl. Health, education and nutrition);   |                                                           |                       |                     |
| labour supply; local economy effects; saving.                |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Bassett, 2008                                                | Nutrition.                                                | CCTs                  | CCTs from 5         |
| countries                                                    |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Latin America                                                |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Bastagli, 2010                                               | Poverty; inequality impacts; education; health.           | CCTs                  | 9 CCTs              |
| Bouillon & Tejerina, 2007                                    | Education (attendance, enrolment, pass rates); nutrition; |                       |                     |
| child labour; health (access and outcomes).                  |                                                           |                       |                     |
| CCTs                                                         | 10 covering 10 CCTs                                       | Latin America and the |                     |
| Caribbean                                                    |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Fiszbein & Schady, 2009                                      | Consumption; poverty; employment;                         |                       |                     |
| education; health.                                           |                                                           |                       |                     |
| CCTs                                                         | Not stated                                                | No                    |                     |
| Harvey, 2005                                                 | Markets and prices; multiplier effects;                   |                       |                     |
| household gender relations;                                  |                                                           |                       |                     |
| CTs, cash for                                                |                                                           |                       |                     |
| work and voucher                                             |                                                           |                       |                     |
| programmes                                                   |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Non-contributory                                             |                                                           |                       |                     |
| social safety nets                                           |                                                           |                       |                     |
| 149 (109 for UCTs                                            |                                                           |                       |                     |
| or CCTs)                                                     |                                                           |                       |                     |
| No                                                           |                                                           |                       |                     |
| IEG, 2011                                                    |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Short-term and intermediate outcomes:                        |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Current income; consumption; poverty;                        |                                                           |                       |                     |
| education; child labour; health; nutrition; labour supply;   |                                                           |                       |                     |
| economic activities; protection against idiosyncratic and    |                                                           |                       |                     |
| systemic shocks;                                             |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Final outcomes:                                              |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Stock of human capital; stock of physical capital;           |                                                           |                       |                     |
| employment, income and consumption trajectories;             |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Indirect effects:                                            |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Remittances and other private transfers;                     |                                                           |                       |                     |
| sexual behaviour, fertility and marriage;                    |                                                           |                       |                     |
| other intra-household behavioural responses; spillover and   |                                                           |                       |                     |
| general equilibrium effects.                                 |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Leroy, Ruel, & Verhofstadt,                                  |                                                           |                       |                     |
| 2009                                                         |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Child nutrition                                              | CCTs                                                      | 7                     | No                  |
| Non-contributory                                             |                                                           |                       |                     |
| transfers                                                    |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Not stated                                                   | No                                                        |                       |                     |
| Mathers & Slater, 2014                                       | Economic growth and its determinants at the micro level   |                       |                     |
| (accumulation of assets and preventing loss of productive    |                                                           |                       |                     |
| capital, increasing innovation and risk-taking, investing in |                                                           |                       |                     |
| human capital, improved employment opportunities) and        |                                                           |                       |                     |
| meso level (multiplier effects from increased consumption    |                                                           |                       |                     |
| and production, accumulation of productive community         |                                                           |                       |                     |
| assets and labour market impacts)                            |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Ranganathan & Lagarde,                                       |                                                           |                       |                     |
| 2012                                                         |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Uptake of health services; immunisation coverage; nutrition; |                                                           |                       |                     |
| health; health behaviour.                                    |                                                           |                       |                     |
| CCTs (with a                                                 |                                                           |                       |                     |
| condition on health)                                         |                                                           |                       |                     |
| 19 (of 13 CCTs)                                              | No                                                        |                       |                     |
| Rawlings & Rubio, 2003                                       | Education; child labour; health; consumption.             | CCTs                  | Various evaluations |
| (3 CCTs)                                                     |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Latin America                                                |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Reimers, DeShano da                                          |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Silva, & Trevino, 2006                                       |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Education                                                    | Non-contributory                                          |                       |                     |
| transfers                                                    |                                                           |                       |                     |
| (scholarships/fee                                            |                                                           |                       |                     |
| waivers, CCTs, food                                          |                                                           |                       |                     |
| transfers)                                                   |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Contents                                                     |                                                           |                       |                     |
| No                                                           |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Annex 1                                                      |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Overview of                                                  |                                                           |                       |                     |
| existing cash                                                |                                                           |                       |                     |
| transfers reviews                                            |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Annex 2                                                      |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Detailed search                                              |                                                           |                       |                     |
| protocols and study                                          |                                                           |                       |                     |
| assessment tools                                             |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Not stated                                                   | No                                                        |                       |                     |
| Annex 3                                                      |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Summary table                                                |                                                           |                       |                     |
| of searches                                                  |                                                           |                       |                     |
| and reasons for                                              |                                                           |                       |                     |
| exclusion and flow                                           |                                                           |                       |                     |
| diagrams                                                     |                                                           |                       |                     |
| At least 31                                                  | No                                                        |                       |                     |
| Annex 4                                                      |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Summary of the                                               |                                                           |                       |                     |
| evidence base                                                |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Annex 5                                                      |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Evidence:                                                    |                                                           |                       |                     |
| results tables for                                           |                                                           |                       |                     |
| overall effects                                              |                                                           |                       |                     |
| disaggregated by                                             |                                                           |                       |                     |
| gender, and cash                                             |                                                           |                       |                     |
| transfer design and                                          |                                                           |                       |                     |
| implementation                                               |                                                           |                       |                     |
| effects                                                      |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Various                                                      | Humanitarian                                              |                       |                     |
| situations                                                   |                                                           |                       |                     |
| No                                                           |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Various evaluations                                          |                                                           |                       |                     |
| for 9 programmes                                             |                                                           |                       |                     |
| (not all traditional                                         |                                                           |                       |                     |
| CCTs)                                                        |                                                           |                       |                     |
| Reference                                                   | Main outcomes covered                                    | Interventions   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------|-----------------|
| evaluations                                                 |                                                          |                 |
| Regional focus?                                             |                                                          |                 |
| Tirivayi, Knowles, & Davis,                                 |                                                          |                 |
| 2013                                                        |                                                          |                 |
| Direct impacts on farm production (agricultural assets,     |                                                          |                 |
| inputs, labour allocation, agricultural output);            |                                                          |                 |
| indirect impacts on farm production (human capital          |                                                          |                 |
| accumulation, off-farm investments, reduction of adverse    |                                                          |                 |
| risk-coping strategies); local economy effects.             |                                                          |                 |
| Non-contributory                                            |                                                          |                 |
| schemes (CTs, PWPs,                                         |                                                          |                 |
| school feeding, food                                        |                                                          |                 |
| aid, social pensions                                        |                                                          |                 |
| and education fee                                           |                                                          |                 |
| waivers                                                     |                                                          |                 |
| CTs                                                         | Unclear                                                  | No              |
| Yablonski & O'Donnell,                                      |                                                          |                 |
| 2009                                                        |                                                          |                 |
| Child mortality and determinants (e.G. Illness, nutrition,  |                                                          |                 |
| access to healthcare, access to food, care for women and    |                                                          |                 |
| children, household environment and hygiene); economic      |                                                          |                 |
| (e.G. Labour market, investments local multiplier effects). |                                                          |                 |
| Barrientos, Niño-Zarazúa,                                   |                                                          |                 |
| & Maitrot, 2010                                             |                                                          |                 |
| Database of key features of numerous social assistance      |                                                          |                 |
| interventions with links to evaluations.                    |                                                          |                 |
| Social assistance                                           |                                                          |                 |
| (including CTs and                                          |                                                          |                 |
| social pensions)                                            |                                                          |                 |
| Devereux, Marshall,                                         |                                                          |                 |
| MacAskill, & Pelham, 2005                                   |                                                          |                 |
| Qualitative review of programme design, delivery issues and |                                                          |                 |
| potential benefits of scaling-up.                           |                                                          |                 |
| UCTs (including social                                      |                                                          |                 |
| pensions, disability                                        |                                                          |                 |
| grants and orphan                                           |                                                          |                 |
| support schemes)                                            |                                                          |                 |
| Garcia & Moore, 2012                                        | Mainly a synthesis describing design and implementation  |                 |
| features                                                    |                                                          |                 |
| UCTs and CCTs                                               | 123 cash transfer                                        |                 |
| programmes                                                  |                                                          |                 |
| Sub-Saharan Africa                                          |                                                          |                 |
| Monchuk, 2014                                               | Review focused on objectives, features, systems, general |                 |
| performance, and financing. Very limited on reviewing       |                                                          |                 |
| impacts.                                                    |                                                          |                 |
| Safety nets (cash                                           |                                                          |                 |
| transfers, public                                           |                                                          |                 |
| works and school                                            |                                                          |                 |
| feeding)                                                    |                                                          |                 |
| Contents                                                    |                                                          |                 |
| Annex 1                                                     |                                                          |                 |
| Overview of                                                 |                                                          |                 |
| existing cash                                               |                                                          |                 |
| transfers reviews                                           |                                                          |                 |
| ~160                                                        | Sub-Saharan Africa,                                      |                 |
| Latin America and                                           |                                                          |                 |
| Asia                                                        |                                                          |                 |
| Annex 2                                                     |                                                          |                 |
| Detailed search                                             |                                                          |                 |
| protocols and study                                         |                                                          |                 |
| assessment tools                                            |                                                          |                 |
| No                                                          |                                                          |                 |
| Includes summary                                            |                                                          |                 |
| of 42 'pure income                                          |                                                          |                 |
| transfers' with links to                                    |                                                          |                 |
| related evaluations                                         |                                                          |                 |
| Annex 3                                                     |                                                          |                 |
| Summary table                                               |                                                          |                 |
| of searches                                                 |                                                          |                 |
| and reasons for                                             |                                                          |                 |
| exclusion and flow                                          |                                                          |                 |
| diagrams                                                    |                                                          |                 |
| East and Southern                                           |                                                          |                 |
| Africa                                                      |                                                          |                 |
| Reviews range of                                            |                                                          |                 |
| schemes in 15                                               |                                                          |                 |
| countries and 4                                             |                                                          |                 |
| in-depth                                                    |                                                          |                 |
| Annex 4                                                     |                                                          |                 |
| Summary of the                                              |                                                          |                 |
| evidence base                                               |                                                          |                 |
| Sub-Saharan Africa                                          |                                                          |                 |
| Mainly based on 22                                          |                                                          |                 |
| safety net and  social                                      |                                                          |                 |
| protection World Bank                                       |                                                          |                 |
| assessments of the                                          |                                                          |                 |
| 22 countries covered                                        |                                                          |                 |
| Annex 5                                                     |                                                          |                 |
| Evidence:                                                   |                                                          |                 |
| results tables for                                          |                                                          |                 |
| overall effects                                             |                                                          |                 |
| disaggregated by                                            |                                                          |                 |
| gender, and cash                                            |                                                          |                 |
| transfer design and                                         |                                                          |                 |
| implementation                                              |                                                          |                 |
| effects                                                     |                                                          |                 |
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

## Annex 2 Detailed Search Protocols And Study Assessment Tools

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

This annex provides additional information on the methods used in the review. Part 1 lists the detailed search protocols used in the literature searches. 

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

Part 2 reports the tools used in the second stage screening process to assess the studies retrieved against agreed methodological criteria. For quantitative impact analysis studies, the final stage of screening incuded assessing studies against: selection bias and confounding factors, attrition bias, statistical significance (biases leading to Type I or Type II errors) and any other bias. To pass, these studies had to demonstrate 'low' risk of bias or 'low' and 'unclear' risk of bias. Qualitative studies retrieved under searches for evidence of links between policy design and implementation features and outcomes, were assessed against: clarity and transparency, credibility of findings, acknowledgement of potential internal bias and limitations, and external validity. Studies passed if they were considered to have either 'no concerns', or 'no concerns' and 'some concerns' within the same study. 

## Part 1. Detailed Search Protocols

Separate protocols were developed to carry out searches for the six outcomes and six key cash transfer design and implementation features put forward in the conceptual framework. A total of 12 separate searches were carried out. The remainder of Part 1 lists the specific search protocols employed in the literature searches for each outcome and cash design and implementation feature.

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Contents

## Sub-Question 1A: What Is The Effect Of Cash Transfers On Monetary Poverty And Inequality?

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

## 1.	The Review Research Questions

The systematic literature reviews should assess the state of knowledge on the following question: 
What is known about the effect of cash transfers on monetary poverty and inequality?

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

## 2.	Methodology

The systematic literature reviews should combine three tracks. These tracks are briefly explained here and further instructions are given below.

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

1.	 **Bibliographic database search:** Searching a previously agreed upon list of academic databases, 
using consistent search strings (see below) that have been tested beforehand and applying inclusion/ exclusion criteria.

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

2.	 **Snowball technique**: Contacting approximately three key experts in the field and asking 
them for recommendations for important studies on the research question. This also includes looking at the experts' websites and publication lists and including relevant studies. Finally, we will be looking for further relevant studies in the bibliographies of the experts' studies and recommended studies. 

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

3.	 **Websites searches**: Searching previously agreed on websites (see below) for relevant studies 
using similar search terms as for the bibliographic databases. This also includes a google search for other grey literature.
Studies will be screened and assessed using the EPPI Reviewer software. After an initial broad screening process that considers overall study design, as well as other broader inclusion/ exclusion criteria, a second round of screening will be conducted and studies will be assessed against a range of criteria to investigate the risk of bias and reliability of findings. Specifically, studies will be assessed against the issues of selection bias, attrition bias or bias associated with interpretation of statistical significance (Type I or Type II errors). Studies that have a high risk of bias or score low on rigour will be not be included in the final analysis.

The relevant studies that make it through both stages of screening will be summarised in an annotated bibliography. The annotated bibliography lists the relevant studies in table format (see below) and briefly summarises each study in terms of relevant information on methodology, intervention and findings. More specifically, the relevant studies will also be summarised and classified in a table summarising the following information: i) publication details, (ii) description of the intervention and context, (iii) methods, data and sampling, (iv) population, v) findings of relevance to the research question including findings of statistically significant and non-significant impacts and disaggregation (e.g. by gender, age and other characteristics), and vi) contextual factors of importance. A narrative synthesis approach will be applied to synthesise the findings.

## 3.	Bibliographic Database Search The Research Question

The research question is 'What is known about the effect of cash transfers on monetary poverty and inequality?' Here we want to know the effect on household income, expenditure, monetary poverty and inequality. In order to understand it better, the research question can be decomposed into population, intervention and outcome:

| Population                                         | Intervention                    | Outcome                                         |
|----------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------|
| Conditional or unconditional cash transfers        | Monetary poverty and inequality | People living in low or middle income countries |
| and who either receive the intervention or are the |                                 |                                                 |
| comparison group                                   |                                 |                                                 |
| Cash transfer                                      |                                 |                                                 |
| Social transfer                                    |                                 |                                                 |
| Financial transfer                                 |                                 |                                                 |
| Monetary transfer                                  |                                 |                                                 |
| Child grant/ disability grant/ old-age grant/      |                                 |                                                 |
| social grant                                       |                                 |                                                 |
| Social assistance                                  |                                 |                                                 |
| Social pension                                     |                                 |                                                 |
| Non-contributory pension                           |                                 |                                                 |
| Old age pension                                    |                                 |                                                 |
| Child benefit/ disability benefit/ old-age benefit |                                 |                                                 |
| Basic income/ minimum income                       |                                 |                                                 |
| UCT/ CCT                                           |                                 |                                                 |
| Income support                                     |                                 |                                                 |

The population has been restricted to people living in low and middle income countries. This includes both beneficiary and control households. The aim of the research question is to analyse the impact of cash transfers on monetary poverty and inequality. The outcome for this subquestion is income, expenditure, monetary poverty and inequality. The table above also includes all synonyms that will be used in the searches.

## Search Strings

The search string will be composed of intervention (part 1), outcome (part 2) and country filter (example below given for SCOPUS filter). In order to capture all possible cash transfers, search strings should include all synonyms listed above. In terms of outcome, we will use synonyms of income, expenditure, monetary poverty and inequality in the search strings. The following search strings will be used (they have been tested in the pilot phase):

1.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "Cash transfer*"  OR  "social transfer*"  OR  "financial transfer*"  OR  
"monetary transfer*"  OR  "child grant*"  OR  "disability grant*"  OR  "old age grant*"  OR "social grant*"  OR  "basic grant*"  OR  "minimum income grant*"  OR  "social assistance" OR  welfare  OR  "social pension*"  OR  "non-contributory pension*"  OR  "old age pension*" 
 
OR  "child benefit*"  OR  "disability benefit*"  OR  "old age benefit*"  OR  cct  OR  uct  OR "income support"  )  
2.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( income*  OR  earning*  OR  cash  OR  expend*  OR  spending  OR  
consumption  OR  purchas*  OR  "Foster Greer Thorbecke"  OR  fgt  OR  "poverty headcount"  OR  "poverty gap"  OR  "poverty depth"  OR  "depth of poverty"  OR  "poverty severity"  OR  "severity of poverty"  OR  gini  OR  inequalit*  OR inequit* OR  distribution )  
-  note this should search title/abstract/keyword or subject fields

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Income
Earning* Cash Expenditure Spending Consumption Purchas* Foster Greer Thorbecke FGT Poverty headcount Poverty gap Poverty depth Poverty severity Gini Benefit incidence Inequality Distribution 
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

3.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( afghanistan  OR  albania  OR  algeria  OR  angola  OR  argentina  
OR  armenia  OR  armenian  OR  aruba  OR  azerbaijan  OR  bangladesh  OR  benin  OR byelarus  OR  byelorussian  OR  belarus  OR  belorussian  OR  belorussia  OR  belize  OR bhutan  OR  bolivia  OR  bosnia  OR  herzegovina  OR  hercegovina  OR  botswana  OR brasil  OR  brazil  OR  bulgaria  OR  "Burkina Faso"  OR  "Burkina Fasso"  OR  "Upper Volta"  OR  burundi  OR  urundi  OR  cambodia  OR  "Khmer Republic"  OR  kampuchea OR  cameroon  OR  cameroons  OR  cameron  OR  camerons  OR  "Cape Verde"  OR "Central African Republic"  OR  chad  OR  china  OR  colombia  OR  comoros  OR "Comoro Islands"  OR  comores  OR  mayotte  OR  congo  OR  zaire  OR  "Costa Rica*" OR  "Cote d'Ivoire"  OR  "Ivory Coast"  OR  cuba  OR  djibouti  OR  "French Somaliland" OR  dominica  OR  "Dominican Republic"  OR  "East Timor"  OR  "East Timur"  OR "Timor Leste"  OR  ecuador  OR  egypt  OR  "United Arab Republic"  OR  "El Salvador" OR  eritrea  OR  ethiopia  OR  fiji  OR  gabon  OR  "Gabonese Republic"  OR  gambia  OR gaza  OR  "Georgia Republic"  OR  "Georgian Republic"  OR  ghana  OR  grenada  OR guatemala  OR  guinea  OR  guiana  OR  guyana  OR  haiti  OR  hungary  OR  honduras OR  india  OR  maldives  OR  indonesia  OR  iran  OR  iraq  OR  jamaica  OR  jordan  OR kazakhstan  OR  kazakh  OR  kenya  OR  kiribati  OR  korea  OR  kosovo  OR  kyrgyzstan OR  kirghizia  OR  "Kyrgyz Republic"  OR  kirghiz  OR  kirgizstan  OR  "Lao PDR"  OR laos  OR  lebanon  OR  lesotho  OR  basutoland  OR  liberia  OR  libya  OR  macedonia  OR madagascar  OR  "Malagasy Republic"  OR  malaysia  OR  malaya  OR  malay  OR  sabah OR  sarawak  OR  malawi  OR  mali  OR  "Marshall Islands"  OR  mauritania  OR  mauritius OR  "Agalega Islands"  OR  mexico  OR  micronesia  OR  "Middle East"  OR  moldova OR  moldovia  OR  moldovian  OR  mongolia  OR  montenegro  OR  morocco  OR  ifni OR  mozambique  OR  myanmar  OR  myanma  OR  burma  OR  namibia  OR  nepal  OR "Netherlands Antilles"  OR  "New Caledonia"  OR  nicaragua  OR  niger  OR  nigeria  OR pakistan  OR  palau  OR  palestine  OR  panama  OR  paraguay  OR  peru  OR  philippines OR  philipines  OR  phillipines  OR  phillippines  OR  "Puerto Ric*"  OR  romania  OR rumania  OR  roumania  OR  rwanda  OR  ruanda  OR  "Saint Lucia"  OR  "St Lucia"  OR "Saint Vincent"  OR  "St Vincent"  OR  grenadines  OR  samoa  OR  "Samoan Islands"  OR "Navigator Island"  OR  "Navigator Islands"  OR  "Sao Tome"  OR  senegal  OR  serbia OR  montenegro  OR  seychelles  OR  "Sierra Leone"  OR  "Sri Lanka"  OR  "Solomon Islands"  OR  somalia  OR  "South Africa"  OR  sudan  OR  suriname  OR  surinam  OR swaziland  OR  syria  OR  tajikistan  OR  tadzhikistan  OR  tadjikistan  OR  tadzhik  OR tanzania  OR  thailand  OR  togo  OR  togolese  republic  OR  tonga  OR  tunisia  OR  turkey OR  turkmenistan  OR  turkmen  OR  uganda  OR  ukraine  OR  uzbekistan  OR  uzbek  
OR  vanuatu  OR  "New Hebrides"  OR  venezuela  OR  vietnam  OR  "Viet Nam"  OR "West Bank"  OR  yemen  OR  yugoslavia  OR  zambia  OR  zimbabwe )  OR  TITLE-ABS- KEY ( "Developing Countries"  OR  africa  OR  asia  OR  caribbean  OR  "West Indies" OR  "South America"  OR  "Latin America"  OR  "Central America"  OR  developing  OR "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR  "middle income"  OR "low* income"  OR  underserved  OR  "under served"  OR  deprived)  OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (poor* W/1   countr*  OR  nation*  OR  population*  OR  world )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (( developing  OR  "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR "middle income"  OR  "low* income" )  W/1  econom* ))  OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY ( low*  W/1 gdp  OR  gnp  OR  "gross domestic"  OR  "gross national" )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (low W/3  middle  W/3  countr* )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (  lmic  OR  lmics  OR  "third world" OR  "lami countr*"  OR  "transitional countr*" )  

4.	 Search strings to run in Scopus: #1 AND #2 AND #3 (limited to 2000 onwards)

Contents

## Inclusion Criteria Stage 1 Screening:

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

Inclusion criteria help in deciding whether a study that has been found is relevant. The following inclusion criteria will be applied during the first stage of the screening process (all criteria need to be satisfied for the study to be included). They will be applied to titles, then abstracts, then full text. All studies that are included on the basis of the first stage screening process, will be included in the Stage 2 screening process. 

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

1.	 **Date**: From 2000
2.	 **Language**: The review is restricted to English studies
3.	 **Population**: People that have received a cash transfer, or control households

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

4.	 **Geographical locations**: Low and middle income countries

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

5.	 **Interventions**: Conditional or unconditional cash transfers. The programmes should be noncontributory, publicly mandated or NGO-provided (so not private transfers, like remittances, or religious donations).
6.	 **Study design**: The study should be a solid empirical study (i.e. based on data and or fieldwork). 
Only studies that use either an experimental design or a quasi-experimental design that relies on a credible control group should be included. This includes those that demonstrate one of the following: (a) an experimental design (i.e. RCT or cluster-RCT)

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

(b)	a quasi-experimental design, including: 
i.	 regression discontinuity design ii.	 matching technique (e.g. propensity score matching) iii.	difference-in-difference iv.	 interrupted time series v.	 other form of multivariate regression, including Instrumental Variable Technique, 
including Instrumental Variable Technique
	
[Exclude studies that are theoretical; literature reviews; not descriptive or don't have an experimental/ quasi-experimental design] 
7.	 **Outcome**: income, expenditure, monetary poverty and inequality
In the second round of screening, studies will be will be assessed against a range of criteria to investigate the risk of bias and reliability of findings. Specifically, studies will be assessed against the issues of selection bias, attrition bias or bias associated with interpretation of statistical significance (Type I or Type II errors). Studies that have a high risk of bias or score low on rigour will be not be included in the final analysis.

## List Of Databases Used

•	 SCOPUS (Elsevier). This database includes 5,682 journals, conference proceedings, trade 
publications and book series in the Social Sciences category. 
•	 Econlit •	 IDEAS-Repec

## 4.	Snowball Technique

The following three people should be contacted and asked for the five most relevant studies on the research question. We will also look at their websites for relevant publications. 

1.	 John Hoddinot, IFPRI
2.	 Armando Barrientos, Manchester 3.	 Ruslan Yemtsov, World Bank
Studies shared by experts will be assessed against Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria. We will also check the reference lists of the studies obtained for any further studies that fit the inclusion criteria. 

## 5.	Websites Searches

The following websites/ search engines should be consulted, if possible using the same search strings as for the academic databases. Any studies found on these websites will be assessed against the same Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria.

•	 Google (the first five pages)
•	 World Bank •	 R4D DFID •	 International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (IPC-IG) •	 International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) •	 Poverty Action Research Lab •	 FAO From Protection to Production website •	 Transfer Project (UNC Chapel Hill) •	 GSDRC •	 OPM website •	 3iE website •	 ECLAC/ CEPAL •	 IADB website •	 ADB website •	 IDS website
•	 BLDS website •	 Social Science Research Network

## 6.	Classification Of Studies

Studies that have passed both screening stages will be classified and described in an annotated bibliography. The classification tables will include the following information:

•	 authors and year of study
•	 geographical coverage •	 detailed description of intervention and context •	 population •	 methods, sampling and data •	 a summary of the main outcomes of the study

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Contents

## Sub-Question 1B: What Is The Effect Of Cash Transfers On Education?

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

## 1.	The Review Research Questions

The systematic literature reviews should assess the state of knowledge on the following question: 
What is known about the effect of cash transfers on education?

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

## 2.	Methodology

The systematic literature reviews should combine three tracks. These tracks are briefly explained here and further instructions are given below.

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

1.	 **Bibliographic database search:** Searching a previously agreed upon list of academic databases, 
using consistent search strings (see below) that have been tested beforehand and applying inclusion/ exclusion criteria.

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

2.	 **Snowball technique:** Contacting approximately three key experts in the field and asking 
them for recommendations for important studies on the research question. This also includes looking at the experts' websites and publication lists and including relevant studies. Finally, we will be looking for further relevant studies in the bibliographies of the experts' studies and recommended studies. 

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

3.	 **Websites searches**: Searching previously agreed on websites (see below) for relevant studies 
using similar search terms as for the bibliographic databases. This also includes a google search for other grey literature.
Studies will be screened and assessed using the EPPI Reviewer software. After an initial broad screening process that considers overall study design, as well as other broader inclusion/ exclusion criteria, a second round of screening will be conducted and studies will be assessed against a range of criteria to investigate the risk of bias and reliability of findings. Specifically, studies will be assessed against the issues of selection bias, attrition bias or bias associated with interpretation of statistical significance (Type I or Type II errors). Studies that have a high risk of bias or score low on rigour will be not be included in the final analysis.

The relevant studies that make it through both stages of screening will be summarised in an annotated bibliography. The annotated bibliography lists the relevant studies in table format (see below) and briefly summarises each study in terms of relevant information on methodology, intervention and findings. More specifically, the relevant studies will also be summarised and classified in a table summarising the following information: i) publication details, (ii) description of the intervention and context, (iii) methods, data and sampling, (iv) population, v) findings of relevance to the research question including findings of statistically significant and non-significant impacts and disaggregation (e.g. by gender, age and other characteristics), and vi) contextual factors of importance. A narrative synthesis approach will be applied to synthesise the findings.

Contents

## 3.	Bibliographic Database Search The Research Question

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

The research question is 'What is known about the effect of cash transfers on education?' Here we want to know the effect on school enrolment, school attendance and school achievement.

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

In order to understand it better, the research question can be decomposed into population, intervention and outcome:

| Population                                         | Intervention                                   |
|----------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------|
| Conditional or unconditional cash transfers        | School enrolment, school attendance and school |
| achievement                                        |                                                |
| People living in low or middle income countries    |                                                |
| and who either receive the intervention or are the |                                                |
| comparison group                                   |                                                |
| Annex 3                                            |                                                |
| Summary table                                      |                                                |
| of searches                                        |                                                |
| and reasons for                                    |                                                |
| exclusion and flow                                 |                                                |
| diagrams                                           |                                                |
| Annex 4                                            |                                                |
| Summary of the                                     |                                                |
| evidence base                                      |                                                |
| Cash transfer                                      |                                                |
| Social transfer                                    |                                                |
| Financial transfer                                 |                                                |
| Monetary transfer                                  |                                                |
| Child grant/ disability grant/ old-age grant/      |                                                |
| social grant                                       |                                                |
| Social assistance                                  |                                                |
| Social pension                                     |                                                |
| Non-contributory pension                           |                                                |
| Old age pension                                    |                                                |
| Child benefit/ disability benefit/ old-age benefit |                                                |
| Basic income/ minimum income                       |                                                |
| UCT/ CCT                                           |                                                |
| Income support                                     |                                                |
| Annex 5                                            |                                                |
| Evidence:                                          |                                                |
| results tables for                                 |                                                |
| overall effects                                    |                                                |
| disaggregated by                                   |                                                |
| gender, and cash                                   |                                                |
| transfer design and                                |                                                |
| implementation                                     |                                                |
| effects                                            |                                                |
| Education                                          |                                                |
| School                                             |                                                |
| Enrol*                                             |                                                |
| Registration                                       |                                                |
| Admission                                          |                                                |
| Attend*                                            |                                                |
| Participation                                      |                                                |
| Retention                                          |                                                |
| Drop-out                                           |                                                |
| Completion                                         |                                                |
| Attainment                                         |                                                |
| Achievement                                        |                                                |
| Learning                                           |                                                |
| Progression                                        |                                                |
| Cognitive                                          |                                                |
| Level                                              |                                                |
| Repetition / repeat*                               |                                                |
| Graduation/ graduate*                              |                                                |

The population has been restricted to people living in low and middle income countries. This includes both beneficiary and control households. The aim of the research question is to analyse the impact of cash transfers on any level of education. The outcome for this sub-question is school enrolment, school attendance and school achievement. The table above also includes all synonyms that will be used in the searches.

## Search Strings

The search string will be composed of intervention (part 1), outcome (part 2) and country filter (example below given for SCOPUS filter). In order to capture all possible cash transfers, search strings should include all synonyms listed above. In terms of outcome, we will use school enrolment, school attendance and school achievement and synonyms in the search strings. The following search strings and will be used (they have been tested in the pilot phase):

1.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "Cash transfer*"  OR  "social transfer*"  OR  "financial transfer*"  OR  
"monetary transfer*"  OR  "child grant*"  OR  "disability grant*"  OR  "old age grant*"  OR "social grant*"  OR  "basic grant*"  OR  "minimum income grant*"  OR  "social assistance" OR  welfare  OR  "social pension*"  OR  "non-contributory pension*"  OR  "old age pension*" 
 
OR  "child benefit*"  OR  "disability benefit*"  OR  "old age benefit*"  OR  cct  OR  uct  OR "income support")  
2.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ((school* OR education*) AND ( enrol* OR regist* OR admission* OR 
attend* OR participat* OR retention OR retain* OR drop-out* OR complet* OR attain* OR learn* OR progress* OR cognitive OR repeat* OR repetition OR graduat* OR achiev* ) )

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

3.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( afghanistan  OR  albania  OR  algeria  OR  angola  OR  argentina  
OR  armenia  OR  armenian  OR  aruba  OR  azerbaijan  OR  bangladesh  OR  benin  OR byelarus  OR  byelorussian  OR  belarus  OR  belorussian  OR  belorussia  OR  belize  OR bhutan  OR  bolivia  OR  bosnia  OR  herzegovina  OR  hercegovina  OR  botswana  OR brasil  OR  brazil  OR  bulgaria  OR  "Burkina Faso"  OR  "Burkina Fasso"  OR  "Upper Volta"  OR  burundi  OR  urundi  OR  cambodia  OR  "Khmer Republic"  OR  kampuchea OR  cameroon  OR  cameroons  OR  cameron  OR  camerons  OR  "Cape Verde"  OR "Central African Republic"  OR  chad  OR  china  OR  colombia  OR  comoros  OR "Comoro Islands"  OR  comores  OR  mayotte  OR  congo  OR  zaire  OR  "Costa Rica*" OR  "Cote d'Ivoire"  OR  "Ivory Coast"  OR  cuba  OR  djibouti  OR  "French Somaliland" OR  dominica  OR  "Dominican Republic"  OR  "East Timor"  OR  "East Timur"  OR "Timor Leste"  OR  ecuador  OR  egypt  OR  "United Arab Republic"  OR  "El Salvador" OR  eritrea  OR  ethiopia  OR  fiji  OR  gabon  OR  "Gabonese Republic"  OR  gambia  OR gaza  OR  "Georgia Republic"  OR  "Georgian Republic"  OR  ghana  OR  grenada  OR guatemala  OR  guinea  OR  guiana  OR  guyana  OR  haiti  OR  hungary  OR  honduras OR  india  OR  maldives  OR  indonesia  OR  iran  OR  iraq  OR  jamaica  OR  jordan  OR kazakhstan  OR  kazakh  OR  kenya  OR  kiribati  OR  korea  OR  kosovo  OR  kyrgyzstan OR  kirghizia  OR  "Kyrgyz Republic"  OR  kirghiz  OR  kirgizstan  OR  "Lao PDR"  OR laos  OR  lebanon  OR  lesotho  OR  basutoland  OR  liberia  OR  libya  OR  macedonia  OR madagascar  OR  "Malagasy Republic"  OR  malaysia  OR  malaya  OR  malay  OR  sabah OR  sarawak  OR  malawi  OR  mali  OR  "Marshall Islands"  OR  mauritania  OR  mauritius OR  "Agalega Islands"  OR  mexico  OR  micronesia  OR  "Middle East"  OR  moldova OR  moldovia  OR  moldovian  OR  mongolia  OR  montenegro  OR  morocco  OR  ifni OR  mozambique  OR  myanmar  OR  myanma  OR  burma  OR  namibia  OR  nepal  OR "Netherlands Antilles"  OR  "New Caledonia"  OR  nicaragua  OR  niger  OR  nigeria  OR pakistan  OR  palau  OR  palestine  OR  panama  OR  paraguay  OR  peru  OR  philippines OR  philipines  OR  phillipines  OR  phillippines  OR  "Puerto Ric*"  OR  romania  OR rumania  OR  roumania  OR  rwanda  OR  ruanda  OR  "Saint Lucia"  OR  "St Lucia"  OR "Saint Vincent"  OR  "St Vincent"  OR  grenadines  OR  samoa  OR  "Samoan Islands"  OR "Navigator Island"  OR  "Navigator Islands"  OR  "Sao Tome"  OR  senegal  OR  serbia OR  montenegro  OR  seychelles  OR  "Sierra Leone"  OR  "Sri Lanka"  OR  "Solomon Islands"  OR  somalia  OR  "South Africa"  OR  sudan  OR  suriname  OR  surinam  OR swaziland  OR  syria  OR  tajikistan  OR  tadzhikistan  OR  tadjikistan  OR  tadzhik  OR tanzania  OR  thailand  OR  togo  OR  togolese  republic  OR  tonga  OR  tunisia  OR  turkey OR  turkmenistan  OR  turkmen  OR  uganda  OR  ukraine  OR  uzbekistan  OR  uzbek  
OR  vanuatu  OR  "New Hebrides"  OR  venezuela  OR  vietnam  OR  "Viet Nam"  OR "West Bank"  OR  yemen  OR  yugoslavia  OR  zambia  OR  zimbabwe )  OR  TITLE-ABS- KEY ( "Developing Countries"  OR  africa  OR  asia  OR  caribbean  OR  "West Indies" OR  "South America"  OR  "Latin America"  OR  "Central America"  OR  developing  OR "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR  "middle income"  OR "low* income"  OR  underserved  OR  "under served"  OR  deprived)  OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (poor* W/1   countr*  OR  nation*  OR  population*  OR  world )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (( developing  OR  "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR "middle income"  OR  "low* income" )  W/1  econom* ))  OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY ( low*  W/1 gdp  OR  gnp  OR  "gross domestic"  OR  "gross national" )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (low W/3  middle  W/3  countr* )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (  lmic  OR  lmics  OR  "third world" OR  "lami countr*"  OR  "transitional countr*" ) 

4.	 Search strings to run in Scopus: #1 AND #2 AND #3 (limited to 2000 onwards)

Contents

## Inclusion Criteria Stage 1 Screening:

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

Inclusion criteria help in deciding whether a study that has been found is relevant. The following inclusion criteria will be applied during the first stage of the screening process (all criteria need to be satisfied for the study to be included). They will be applied to titles, then abstracts, then full text. All studies that are included on the basis of the first stage screening process, will be included in the Stage 2 screening process. 

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

## 1.	 **Date**: From 2000

2.	 **Language**: The review is restricted to English studies
3.	 **Population**: People that have received a cash transfer, or control households

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

4.	 **Geographical locations**: Low and middle income countries

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

5.	 **Interventions**: Conditional or unconditional cash transfers. The programmes should be noncontributory, publicly mandated or NGO-provided (so not private transfers, like remittances, or religious donations).
6.	 **Study design**: The study should be a solid empirical study (i.e. based on data and or fieldwork). 
Only studies that use either an experimental design or a quasi-experimental design that relies on a credible control group should be included. This includes those that demonstrate one of the following: (a)	an experimental design (i.e. RCT or cluster-RCT)

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

(b)	a quasi-experimental design, including: 
i	
regression discontinuity design
ii.	 matching technique (e.g. propensity score matching) iii.	difference-in-difference iv.	 interrupted time series v.	 other form of multivariate regression, including Instrumental Variable Technique.
	
[Exclude studies that are theoretical; literature reviews; not descriptive or don't have an experimental/ quasi-experimental design] 
7.	 **Outcome**: School enrolment, school attendance and school achievement
In the second round of screening, studies will be will be assessed against a range of criteria to investigate the risk of bias and reliability of findings. Specifically, studies will be assessed against the issues of selection bias, attrition bias or bias associated with interpretation of statistical significance (Type I or Type II errors). Studies that have a high risk of bias or score low on rigour will be not be included in the final analysis.

## List Of Databases Used

•	 SCOPUS (Elsevier). This database includes 5,682 journals, conference proceedings, trade 
publications and book series in the Social Sciences category. 
•	 IDEAS-REPEC

## 4.	Snowball Technique

The following three people should be contacted and asked for the five most relevant studies on the research question. We will also look at their websites for relevant publications. 

1.	 Sarah Baird, George Washington University
2.	 Jaime Saavedra-Chanduvi, World Bank 3.	 Fernando M. Reimers, Harvard University
Studies shared by experts will be assessed against Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria. We will also check the reference lists of the studies obtained for any further studies that fit the inclusion criteria. 

## 5.	Websites Searches

The following websites/ search engines should be consulted, if possible using the same search strings as for the academic databases. Any studies found on these websites will be assessed against the same Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria.

•	 Google (the first five pages)
•	 World Bank •	 R4D DFID •	 International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (IPC-IG) •	 International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) •	 Poverty Action Research Lab •	 FAO From Protection to Production website •	 Transfer Project (UNC Chapel Hill) •	 GSDRC •	 OPM website •	 3iE website •	 ECLAC/ CEPAL •	 IADB website •	 ADB website •	 UNICEF website
•	 IDS website •	 BLDS website •	 Social Science Research Network

## 6.	Classification Of Studies

Studies that have passed both screening stages will be classified and described in an annotated bibliography. The classification tables will include the following information:

•	 authors and year of study
•	 geographical coverage •	 detailed description of intervention and context •	 population •	 methods, sampling and data •	 a summary of the main outcomes of the study

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Contents

## Sub-Question 1C: What Is The Effect Of Cash Transfers On Health? 1.	The Review Research Questions

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

The systematic literature reviews should assess the state of knowledge on the following question: 
What is known about the effect of cash transfers on health?

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

## 2. Methodology

The systematic literature reviews should combine three tracks. These tracks are briefly explained here and further instructions are given below.

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

1.	 **Bibliographic database search:** Searching a previously agreed upon list of academic databases, 
using consistent search strings (see below) that have been tested beforehand and applying inclusion/ exclusion criteria.

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

2.	 **Snowball technique**: Contacting approximately four key experts in the field and asking them 
for recommendations for important studies on the research question. This also includes looking at the experts' websites and publication lists and including relevant studies. Finally, we will be looking for further relevant studies in the bibliographies of the experts' studies and recommended studies. 
3.	 **Websites searches**: Searching previously agreed on websites (see below) for relevant studies 
using similar search terms as for the bibliographic databases. This also includes a google search for other grey literature.

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

Studies will be screened and assessed using the EPPI Reviewer software. After an initial broad screening process that considers overall study design, as well as other broader inclusion/ exclusion criteria, a second round of screening will be conducted and studies will be assessed against a range of criteria to investigate the risk of bias and reliability of findings. Specifically, studies will be assessed against the issues of selection bias, attrition bias or bias associated with interpretation of statistical significance (Type I or Type II errors). Studies that have a high risk of bias or score low on rigour will be not be included in the final analysis. The relevant studies that make it through both stages of screening will be summarised in an annotated bibliography. The annotated bibliography lists the relevant studies in table format (see below) and briefly summarises each study in terms of relevant information on methodology, intervention and findings. More specifically, the relevant studies will also be summarised and classified in a table summarising the following information: i) publication details, (ii) description of the intervention and context, (iii) methods, data and sampling, (iv) population, v) findings of relevance to the research question including findings of statistically significant and non-significant impacts and disaggregation (e.g. by gender, age and other characteristics), and vi) contextual factors of importance. A narrative synthesis approach will be applied to synthesise the findings.

## 3.	Bibliographic Database Search The Research Question

The research question is 'What is known about effect of cash transfers on health?' Here we want to know the effect of cash transfers on health outcomes, health access, health utilisation, and nutrition. In order to understand it better, the research question can be decomposed into population, intervention and outcome:

| Population                                         | Intervention                           |
|----------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|
| Conditional or unconditional cash transfers        | Health outcomes, health access, health |
| utilisation, and nutrition                         |                                        |
| People living in low or middle income countries    |                                        |
| and who either receive the intervention or are the |                                        |
| comparison group                                   |                                        |
| Cash transfer                                      |                                        |
| Social transfer                                    |                                        |
| Financial transfer                                 |                                        |
| Monetary transfer                                  |                                        |
| Child grant/ disability grant/ old-age grant/      |                                        |
| social grant                                       |                                        |
| Social assistance                                  |                                        |
| Social pension                                     |                                        |
| Non-contributory pension                           |                                        |
| Old age pension                                    |                                        |
| Child benefit/ disability benefit/ old-age benefit |                                        |
| Basic income/ minimum income                       |                                        |
| UCT/ CCT                                           |                                        |
| Income support                                     |                                        |

The population has been restricted to people living in low and middle income countries. This includes both beneficiary and control households. The aim of the research question is to analyse the impact of cash transfers on health. The outcome for this sub-question is health outcomes, health access, health utilisation, and nutrition. The table above also includes all synonyms that will be used in the searches.

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Food diversity
Dietary diversity Food variety Vitamins Diet Food security/ food insecurity Food intake Nutrition* Calor* Nutrition* supplement + Obesity Health utili*ation Health use Number of visits Health access Health service Health centre Hospital Clinic Health care provider Health fee Health payment Prenatal / antenatal/ postnatal care and access Institutional deliver Vaccinations/Immuni* Screening
Health
Healthiness Sickness Illness Disease Stunting Wasting Weight Birth weight Immuni*ation Child height and weight for age Body mass index WAZ/ WHZ/ HAZ/ BMIZ Maternal mortality Newborn mortality Morbidity HIV prevention HIV/ AIDS incidence
Contents

## Search Strings

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

The search string will be composed of intervention (part 1), outcome (part 2) and country filter (example below given for SCOPUS filter). In order to capture all possible cash transfers, search strings should include all synonyms listed above. In terms of outcome, we will use health outcomes, health access, health utilisation, and nutrition and synonyms in the search strings. The following search strings and will be used (they have been tested in the pilot phase):

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

1.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "Cash transfer*"  OR  "social transfer*"  OR  "financial transfer*"  OR  
"monetary transfer*"  OR  "child grant*"  OR  "disability grant*"  OR  "old age grant*"  OR "social grant*"  OR  "basic grant*"  OR  "minimum income grant*"  OR  "social assistance" OR  welfare  OR  "social pension*"  OR  "non-contributory pension*"  OR  "old age pension*" 
 
OR  "child benefit*"  OR  "disability benefit*"  OR  "old age benefit*"  OR  cct  OR  uct  OR "income support"  )  

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

2.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ("food diversity" OR "dietary diversity" OR "food variety" OR vitamin* 
OR diet OR "food security" OR "food insecurity" OR "food intake" OR nutrition* OR calor* OR obesity OR "health service*" OR "health centre*" OR "health center*" OR "health care provider" OR "institutional delivery" OR "health access" OR "health utilisation" OR "health utilization" OR "health use" OR hospital* OR clinic* OR "health fee*" OR "health payment*" OR "prenatal care" OR "post-natal care" OR "ante-natal care" OR vaccinat* OR immuniz* OR immunis* OR health* OR sickness OR illness OR disease OR stunting OR wasting OR "child weight" OR "child height" OR "height for age" OR "weight for age" OR "body mass index" OR BMI OR "maternal mortality" OR "infant mortality" OR morbidity OR HIV W/4 (prevent* OR incidence) OR AIDS W/4 incidence OR WAZ OR WHZ OR HAZ OR BMIZ OR screen*  )

Annex 5 
Evidence: 
results tables for 
overall effects 
disaggregated by 
gender, and cash 
transfer design and 
implementation 
effects

3.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( afghanistan  OR  albania  OR  algeria  OR  angola  OR  argentina  OR  
   armenia  OR  armenian  OR  aruba  OR  azerbaijan  OR  bangladesh  OR  benin  OR  byelarus 
                                                                                              
   OR  byelorussian  OR  belarus  OR  belorussian  OR  belorussia  OR  belize  OR  bhutan  OR  
   bolivia  OR  bosnia  OR  herzegovina  OR  hercegovina  OR  botswana  OR  brasil  OR  brazil  
   OR  bulgaria  OR  "Burkina Faso"  OR  "Burkina Fasso"  OR  "Upper Volta"  OR  burundi  
   OR  urundi  OR  cambodia  OR  "Khmer Republic"  OR  kampuchea  OR  cameroon  OR  
   cameroons  OR  cameron  OR  camerons  OR  "Cape Verde"  OR  "Central African Republic"  
   OR  chad  OR  china  OR  colombia  OR  comoros  OR  "Comoro Islands"  OR  comores  OR  
   mayotte  OR  congo  OR  zaire  OR  "Costa Rica*"  OR  "Cote d'Ivoire"  OR  "Ivory Coast"  
   OR  cuba  OR  djibouti  OR  "French Somaliland"  OR  dominica  OR  "Dominican Republic"  
   OR  "East Timor"  OR  "East Timur"  OR  "Timor Leste"  OR  ecuador  OR  egypt  OR  
   "United Arab Republic"  OR  "El Salvador"  OR  eritrea  OR  ethiopia  OR  fiji  OR  gabon  
   OR  "Gabonese Republic"  OR  gambia  OR  gaza  OR  "Georgia Republic"  OR  "Georgian 
   Republic"  OR  ghana  OR  grenada  OR  guatemala  OR  guinea  OR  guiana  OR  guyana  
   OR  haiti  OR  hungary  OR  honduras  OR  india  OR  maldives  OR  indonesia  OR  iran  OR 
                                                                                              
   iraq  OR  jamaica  OR  jordan  OR  kazakhstan  OR  kazakh  OR  kenya  OR  kiribati  OR  
   korea  OR  kosovo  OR  kyrgyzstan  OR  kirghizia  OR  "Kyrgyz Republic"  OR  kirghiz  OR  
   kirgizstan  OR  "Lao PDR"  OR  laos  OR  lebanon  OR  lesotho  OR  basutoland  OR  liberia  
   OR  libya  OR  macedonia  OR  madagascar  OR  "Malagasy Republic"  OR  malaysia  OR  
   malaya  OR  malay  OR  sabah  OR  sarawak  OR  malawi  OR  mali  OR  "Marshall Islands"  
   OR  mauritania  OR  mauritius  OR  "Agalega Islands"  OR  mexico  OR  micronesia  OR  
   "Middle East"  OR  moldova  OR  moldovia  OR  moldovian  OR  mongolia  OR  montenegro  
   OR  morocco  OR  ifni  OR  mozambique  OR  myanmar  OR  myanma  OR  burma  OR  
   namibia  OR  nepal  OR  "Netherlands Antilles"  OR  "New Caledonia"  OR  nicaragua  OR  
   niger  OR  nigeria  OR  pakistan  OR  palau  OR  palestine  OR  panama  OR  paraguay  OR  
   peru  OR  philippines  OR  philipines  OR  phillipines  OR  phillippines  OR  "Puerto Ric*"  
   OR  romania  OR  rumania  OR  roumania  OR  rwanda  OR  ruanda  OR  "Saint Lucia"  
   OR  "St Lucia"  OR  "Saint Vincent"  OR  "St Vincent"  OR  grenadines  OR  samoa  OR  
   "Samoan Islands"  OR  "Navigator Island"  OR  "Navigator Islands"  OR  "Sao Tome"  OR  
   senegal  OR  serbia  OR  montenegro  OR  seychelles  OR  "Sierra Leone"  OR  "Sri Lanka"  
   OR  "Solomon Islands"  OR  somalia  OR  "South Africa"  OR  sudan  OR  suriname  OR  
   surinam  OR  swaziland  OR  syria  OR  tajikistan  OR  tadzhikistan  OR  tadjikistan  OR  
   tadzhik  OR  tanzania  OR  thailand  OR  togo  OR  togolese  republic  OR  tonga  OR  tunisia  

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

OR  turkey  OR  turkmenistan  OR  turkmen  OR  uganda  OR  ukraine  OR  uzbekistan  OR  
uzbek  OR  vanuatu  OR  "New Hebrides"  OR  venezuela  OR  vietnam  OR  "Viet Nam"  
OR  "West Bank"  OR  yemen  OR  yugoslavia  OR  zambia  OR  zimbabwe )  OR  TITLE-
ABS-KEY ( "Developing Countries"  OR  africa  OR  asia  OR  caribbean  OR  "West Indies"  
OR  "South America"  OR  "Latin America"  OR  "Central America"  OR  developing  OR  
"less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR  "middle income"  OR  
"low* income"  OR  underserved  OR  "under served"  OR  deprived)  OR TITLE-ABS-KEY 
(poor* W/1   countr*  OR  nation*  OR  population*  OR  world )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (( 
developing  OR  "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR  "middle 
income"  OR  "low* income" )  W/1  econom* ))  OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY ( low*  W/1  gdp  OR  
gnp  OR  "gross domestic"  OR  "gross national" )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (low  W/3  middle  
W/3  countr* )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (  lmic  OR  lmics  OR  "third world"  OR  "lami 
countr*"  OR  "transitional countr*" )

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

## 4.	 Search Strings To Run In Scopus: #1 And #2 And #3 (Limited To 2000 Onwards) Inclusion Criteria

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

Inclusion criteria help in deciding whether a study that has been found is relevant. The following inclusion criteria will be applied during the first stage of the screening process (all criteria need to be satisfied for the study to be included). They will be applied to titles, then abstracts, then full text. All studies that are included on the basis of the first stage screening process, will be included in the Stage 2 screening process. 

Annex 5 
Evidence: 
results tables for 
overall effects 
disaggregated by 
gender, and cash 
transfer design and 
implementation 
effects

Inclusion criteria help in deciding whether a study that has been found is relevant. The following 
inclusion criteria should be applied (all criteria need to be satisfied for the study to be included):

1.	 **Date**: From 2000
2.	 **Language**: The review is restricted to English studies
3.	 **Population**: People that have received a cash transfer, or control households
4.	 **Geographical locations**: Low and middle income countries 5.	 **Interventions**: Conditional or unconditional cash transfers. The programmes should be noncontributory, publicly mandated or NGO-provided (so not private transfers, like remittances, or religious donations).
6.	 **Study design**: The study should be a solid empirical study (i.e. based on data and or fieldwork). 
Only studies that use either an experimental design or a quasi-experimental design that relies on a credible control group should be included. This includes those that demonstrate one of the following: (a)	an experimental design (i.e. RCT or cluster-RCT)
(b)	a quasi-experimental design, including: 
i.	 regression discontinuity design ii.	 matching technique (e.g. propensity score matching) iii.	difference-in-difference iv.	 interrupted time series v.	 other form of multivariate regression, including Instrumental Variable Technique.
	
[Exclude studies that are theoretical; literature reviews; not descriptive or don't have an experimental/ quasi-experimental design] 
7.	 **Outcome**: health outcomes, health access, health utilisation, and nutrition

Contents

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

In the second round of screening, studies will be will be assessed against a range of criteria to investigate the risk of bias and reliability of findings. Specifically, studies will be assessed against the issues of selection bias, attrition bias or bias associated with interpretation of statistical significance (Type I or Type II errors). Studies that have a high risk of bias or score low on rigour will be not be included in the final analysis.

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

## List Of Databases Used

•	 SCOPUS (Elsevier). This database includes 5,682 journals, conference proceedings, trade 
publications and book series in the Social Sciences category. 
•	 Global Health •	 POPLINE

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

•	 CAB Global Health •	 Ideas-Repec

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

## 4.	Snowball Technique

The following four people should be contacted and asked for the five most relevant studies on the research question. We will also look at their websites for relevant publications.

1.	 Paul Gertler, Berkley
2.	 Amanda Glassman, Center for Global Development

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

3.	 Mylene Lagarde, LSHTM
4.	 Lucy Bassett, World Bank
Studies shared by experts will be assessed against Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria. We will also check the reference lists of the studies obtained for any further studies that fit the inclusion criteria. 

## 5.	Websites Searches

The following websites/ search engines should be consulted, if possible using the same search strings as for the academic databases. Any studies found on these websites will be assessed against the same Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria.

•	 Google (the first five pages)
•	 World Bank •	 R4D DFID •	 International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (IPC-IG) •	 International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) •	 Poverty Action Research Lab •	 FAO From Protection to Production website •	 GSDRC •	 OPM website •	 3iE website •	 UNICEF •	 Cocrane review website •	 Transfer Project (UNC Chapel Hill) •	 OPM website •	 3iE website •	 ECLAC/ CEPAL •	 IADB website •	 ADB website
•	 IDS website
•	 BLDS website •	 Social Science Research Network

## 6.	Classification Of Studies

Studies that have passed both screening stages will be classified and described in an annotated bibliography. The classification tables will include the following information:

•	 authors and year of study
•	 geographical coverage •	 detailed description of intervention and context •	 population •	 methods, sampling and data •	 a summary of the main outcomes of the study

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Contents

## Sub-Question 1D: What Is The Effect Of Cash Transfers On Investment, Savings And Production?

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

## 1.	The Review Research Questions

The systematic literature reviews should assess the state of knowledge on the following question: 
What is known about the effect of cash transfers on investment, savings and production?

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

## 2.	 Methodology

The systematic literature reviews should combine three tracks. These tracks are briefly explained here and further instructions are given below.

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

1.	 **Bibliographic database search:** Searching a previously agreed upon list of academic databases, 
using consistent search strings (see below) that have been tested beforehand and applying inclusion/ exclusion criteria.

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

2.	 **Snowball technique**: Contacting approximately three key experts in the field and asking 
them for recommendations for important studies on the research question. This also includes looking at the experts' websites and publication lists and including relevant studies. Finally, we will be looking for further relevant studies in the bibliographies of the experts' studies and recommended studies. 

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

3.	 **Websites searches**: Searching previously agreed on websites (see below) for relevant studies 
using similar search terms as for the bibliographic databases. This also includes a google search for other grey literature.
Studies will be screened and assessed using the EPPI Reviewer software. After an initial broad screening process that considers overall study design, as well as other broader inclusion/ exclusion criteria, a second round of screening will be conducted and studies will be assessed against a range of criteria to investigate the risk of bias and reliability of findings. Specifically, studies will be assessed against the issues of selection bias, attrition bias or bias associated with interpretation of statistical significance (Type I or Type II errors). Studies that have a high risk of bias or score low on rigour will be not be included in the final analysis. The relevant studies that make it through both stages of screening will be summarised in an annotated bibliography. The annotated bibliography lists the relevant studies in table format (see below) and briefly summarises each study in terms of relevant information on methodology, intervention and findings. More specifically, the relevant studies will also be summarised and classified in a table summarising the following information: i) publication details, (ii) description of the intervention and context, (iii) methods, data and sampling, (iv) population, v) findings of relevance to the research question including findings of statistically significant and non-significant impacts and disaggregation (e.g. by gender, age and other characteristics), and vi) contextual factors of importance. A narrative synthesis approach will be applied to synthesise the findings.

## 3.	Bibliographic Database Search The Research Question

The research question is 'What is known about the effect of cash transfers on investment, savings and production?' Here we want to know what effects cash transfers have had on investment, assets, savings and production. In order to understand it better, the research question can be decomposed into population, intervention and outcome:

| Population                                           | Intervention                       | Outcome                                         |
|------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------|
| Conditional or unconditional cash transfers          | Investment, savings and production | People living in low or middle income countries |
| and who either receive the intervention or are the   |                                    |                                                 |
| comparison group                                     |                                    |                                                 |
| Cash transfer                                        |                                    |                                                 |
| Social transfer                                      |                                    |                                                 |
| Financial transfer                                   |                                    |                                                 |
| Monetary transfer                                    |                                    |                                                 |
| Child grant/ disability grant/ old-age grant/ social |                                    |                                                 |
| grant                                                |                                    |                                                 |
| Social assistance                                    |                                    |                                                 |
| Social pension                                       |                                    |                                                 |
| Non-contributory pension                             |                                    |                                                 |
| Old age pension                                      |                                    |                                                 |
| Child benefit/ disability benefit/ old-age benefit   |                                    |                                                 |
| Basic income/ minimum income                         |                                    |                                                 |
| CCT/ UCT                                             |                                    |                                                 |
| Income support                                       |                                    |                                                 |

The population has been restricted to people living in low and middle income countries. This includes both beneficiary and control households. The aim of the research question is to analyse the impact of cash transfers on the investment, savings and production. The outcome for this sub-question are investment, assets, savings and production. The table above also includes all synonyms that will be used in the searches.

## Search Strings

The search string will be composed of intervention (part 1), outcome (part 2) and country filter (example below given for SCOPUS filter). In order to capture all possible cash transfers, search strings should include all synonyms listed above. In terms of outcome, we will use investment and savings and synonyms in the search strings. The following search strings and will be used (they have been tested in the pilot phase):

1.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "Cash transfer*"  OR  "social transfer*"  OR  "financial transfer*"  OR  
"monetary transfer*"  OR  "child grant*"  OR  "disability grant*"  OR  "old age grant*"  OR "social grant*"  OR  "basic grant*"  OR  "minimum income grant*"  OR  "social assistance" OR  welfare  OR  "social pension*"  OR  "non-contributory pension*"  OR  "old age pension*" 
 

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Invest*
Disinvestment Income generat* activities Coping strategy Productivity Production Risk Yield Asset House improvement Livestock Smallstock Housing Property Land Tools Equipment Vehicle Bicycle Input* Fertili*er Seed Saving* Borrow* Loan Debt 
Credit
Business / trade Income-generating activity Insurance 
Contents
OR  "child benefit*"  OR  "disability benefit*"  OR  "old age benefit*"  OR  cct  OR  uct  OR "income support"  )  
Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

2.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY invest* OR disinvest* OR "coping strateg*" OR productivity OR 
production OR harvest* OR yield* OR asset* OR livestock OR smallstock OR hous* OR property OR land OR tools OR equipment OR vehicle* OR bicycle* OR input* OR fertilizer* OR fertiliser* OR seed* OR saving* OR borrow* OR loan* OR debt* OR credit OR business* OR trade OR insurance OR "income generat* activit*" OR "risk"  )

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

3.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( afghanistan  OR  albania  OR  algeria  OR  angola  OR  argentina  
OR  armenia  OR  armenian  OR  aruba  OR  azerbaijan  OR  bangladesh  OR  benin  OR byelarus  OR  byelorussian  OR  belarus  OR  belorussian  OR  belorussia  OR  belize  OR bhutan  OR  bolivia  OR  bosnia  OR  herzegovina  OR  hercegovina  OR  botswana  OR brasil  OR  brazil  OR  bulgaria  OR  "Burkina Faso"  OR  "Burkina Fasso"  OR  "Upper Volta"  OR  burundi  OR  urundi  OR  cambodia  OR  "Khmer Republic"  OR  kampuchea OR  cameroon  OR  cameroons  OR  cameron  OR  camerons  OR  "Cape Verde"  OR "Central African Republic"  OR  chad  OR  china  OR  colombia  OR  comoros  OR "Comoro Islands"  OR  comores  OR  mayotte  OR  congo  OR  zaire  OR  "Costa Rica*" OR  "Cote d'Ivoire"  OR  "Ivory Coast"  OR  cuba  OR  djibouti  OR  "French Somaliland" OR  dominica  OR  "Dominican Republic"  OR  "East Timor"  OR  "East Timur"  OR "Timor Leste"  OR  ecuador  OR  egypt  OR  "United Arab Republic"  OR  "El Salvador" OR  eritrea  OR  ethiopia  OR  fiji  OR  gabon  OR  "Gabonese Republic"  OR  gambia  OR gaza  OR  "Georgia Republic"  OR  "Georgian Republic"  OR  ghana  OR  grenada  OR guatemala  OR  guinea  OR  guiana  OR  guyana  OR  haiti  OR  hungary  OR  honduras OR  india  OR  maldives  OR  indonesia  OR  iran  OR  iraq  OR  jamaica  OR  jordan  OR kazakhstan  OR  kazakh  OR  kenya  OR  kiribati  OR  korea  OR  kosovo  OR  kyrgyzstan OR  kirghizia  OR  "Kyrgyz Republic"  OR  kirghiz  OR  kirgizstan  OR  "Lao PDR"  OR laos  OR  lebanon  OR  lesotho  OR  basutoland  OR  liberia  OR  libya  OR  macedonia  OR madagascar  OR  "Malagasy Republic"  OR  malaysia  OR  malaya  OR  malay  OR  sabah OR  sarawak  OR  malawi  OR  mali  OR  "Marshall Islands"  OR  mauritania  OR  mauritius 
 
OR  "Agalega Islands"  OR  mexico  OR  micronesia  OR  "Middle East"  OR  moldova OR  moldovia  OR  moldovian  OR  mongolia  OR  montenegro  OR  morocco  OR  ifni OR  mozambique  OR  myanmar  OR  myanma  OR  burma  OR  namibia  OR  nepal  OR "Netherlands Antilles"  OR  "New Caledonia"  OR  nicaragua  OR  niger  OR  nigeria  OR pakistan  OR  palau  OR  palestine  OR  panama  OR  paraguay  OR  peru  OR  philippines OR  philipines  OR  phillipines  OR  phillippines  OR  "Puerto Ric*"  OR  romania  OR  
rumania  OR  roumania  OR  rwanda  OR  ruanda  OR  "Saint Lucia"  OR  "St Lucia"  OR "Saint Vincent"  OR  "St Vincent"  OR  grenadines  OR  samoa  OR  "Samoan Islands"  OR "Navigator Island"  OR  "Navigator Islands"  OR  "Sao Tome"  OR  senegal  OR  serbia OR  montenegro  OR  seychelles  OR  "Sierra Leone"  OR  "Sri Lanka"  OR  "Solomon Islands"  OR  somalia  OR  "South Africa"  OR  sudan  OR  suriname  OR  surinam  OR swaziland  OR  syria  OR  tajikistan  OR  tadzhikistan  OR  tadjikistan  OR  tadzhik  OR tanzania  OR  thailand  OR  togo  OR  togolese  republic  OR  tonga  OR  tunisia  OR  turkey OR  turkmenistan  OR  turkmen  OR  uganda  OR  ukraine  OR  uzbekistan  OR  uzbek OR  vanuatu  OR  "New Hebrides"  OR  venezuela  OR  vietnam  OR  "Viet Nam"  OR "West Bank"  OR  yemen  OR  yugoslavia  OR  zambia  OR  zimbabwe )  OR  TITLE-ABS- KEY ( "Developing Countries"  OR  africa  OR  asia  OR  caribbean  OR  "West Indies" OR  "South America"  OR  "Latin America"  OR  "Central America"  OR  developing  OR "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR  "middle income"  OR "low* income"  OR  underserved  OR  "under served"  OR  deprived)  OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (poor* W/1   countr*  OR  nation*  OR  population*  OR  world )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (( developing  OR  "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR "middle income"  OR  "low* income" )  W/1  econom* ))  OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY ( low*  W/1 gdp  OR  gnp  OR  "gross domestic"  OR  "gross national" )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (low W/3  middle  W/3  countr* )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (  lmic  OR  lmics  OR  "third world" OR  "lami countr*"  OR  "transitional countr*" ) 

4.	 Search strings to run in Scopus: #1 AND #2 AND #3 (limited to 2000 onwards)

Contents

## Inclusion Criteria Stage 1 Screening:

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

Inclusion criteria help in deciding whether a study that has been found is relevant. The following inclusion criteria will be applied during the first stage of the screening process (all criteria need to be satisfied for the study to be included). They will be applied to titles, then abstracts, then full text. All studies that are included on the basis of the first stage screening process, will be included in the Stage 2 screening process. 

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

## 1.	 **Date**: From 2000

2.	 **Language**: The review is restricted to English studies
3.	 **Population**: People that have received a cash transfer, or control households

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

4.	 **Geographical locations**: Low and middle income countries

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

5.	 **Interventions**: Conditional or unconditional cash transfers. The programmes should be noncontributory, publicly mandated or NGO-provided (so not private transfers, like remittances, or religious donations).
6.	 **Study design**: The study should be a solid empirical study (i.e. based on data and or fieldwork). 
Only studies that use either an experimental design or a quasi-experimental design that relies on a credible control group should be included. This includes those that demonstrate one of the following: (a)	an experimental design (i.e. RCT or cluster-RCT)

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

(b)	a quasi-experimental design, including: 
i.	 regression discontinuity design ii.	 matching technique (e.g. propensity score matching) iii.	difference-in-difference iv.	 interrupted time series v.	 other form of multivariate regression, including Instrumental Variable Technique.
	
[Exclude studies that are theoretical; literature reviews; not descriptive or don't have an experimental/ quasi-experimental design] 
7.	 **Outcome**: Investment, assets and savings
In the second round of screening, studies will be will be assessed against a range of criteria to investigate the risk of bias and reliability of findings. Specifically, studies will be assessed against the issues of selection bias, attrition bias or bias associated with interpretation of statistical significance (Type I or Type II errors). Studies that have a high risk of bias or score low on rigour will be not be included in the final analysis.

## List Of Databases Used

•	 SCOPUS (Elsevier). This database includes 5,682 journals, conference proceedings, trade 
publications and book series in the Social Sciences category. 
•	 AGRIS: Agricultural database •	 AgEcon database •	 CAB Abstracts •	 IDEAS-Repec

## 4.	Snowball Technique

The following three people should be contacted and asked for the five most relevant studies on the research question. We will also look at their websites for relevant publications. 

1.	 Benjamin Davis, FAO
2.	 Michelle Adato, IFPRI 3.	 Rachel Slater, ODI
Studies shared by experts will be assessed against Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria. We will also check the reference lists of the studies obtained for any further studies that fit the inclusion criteria. 

## 5.	Websites Searches

The following websites/ search engines should be consulted, if possible using the same search strings as for the academic databases. Any studies found on these websites will be assessed against the same Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria.

•	 Google (the first five pages)
•	 World Bank •	 R4D DFID •	 International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (IPC-IG) •	 International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) •	 Poverty Action Research Lab •	 FAO From Protection to Production website •	 GSDRC •	 OPM website •	 3iE website •	 Transfer Project (UNC Chapel Hill) •	 GSDRC •	 OPM website •	 ECLAC/ CEPAL •	 IADB website
•	 ADB website •	 IDS website •	 BLDS website •	 Social Science Research Network

## 6.	Classification Of Studies

Studies that have passed both screening stages will be classified and described in an annotated bibliography. The classification tables will include the following information:

•	 authors and year of study
•	 geographical coverage •	 detailed description of intervention and context •	 population •	 methods, sampling and data •	 a summary of the main outcomes of the study

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Contents

## Sub-Question 1E: What Is The Effect Of Cash Transfers On Employment And The Labour Market?

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

## 1.	The Review Research Questions

The systematic literature reviews should assess the state of knowledge on the following question: 
What is known about the effect of cash transfers on employment and the labour market?

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

## 2.	Methodology

The systematic literature reviews should combine three tracks. These tracks are briefly explained here and further instructions are given below.

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

1.	 **Bibliographic database search:** Searching a previously agreed upon list of academic databases, 
using consistent search strings (see below) that have been tested beforehand and applying inclusion/ exclusion criteria.

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

2.	 **Snowball technique**: Contacting approximately three key experts in the field and asking 
them for recommendations for important studies on the research question. This also includes looking at the experts' websites and publication lists and including relevant studies. Finally, we will be looking for further relevant studies in the bibliographies of the experts' studies and recommended studies. 

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

3.	 **Websites searches**: Searching previously agreed on websites (see below) for relevant studies 
using similar search terms as for the bibliographic databases. This also includes a google search for other grey literature.
Studies will be screened and assessed using the EPPI Reviewer software. After an initial broad screening process that considers overall study design, as well as other broader inclusion/ exclusion criteria, a second round of screening will be conducted and studies will be assessed against a range of criteria to investigate the risk of bias and reliability of findings. Specifically, studies will be assessed against the issues of selection bias, attrition bias or bias associated with interpretation of statistical significance (Type I or Type II errors). Studies that have a high risk of bias or score low on rigour will be not be included in the final analysis. The relevant studies that make it through both stages of screening will be summarised in an annotated bibliography. The annotated bibliography lists the relevant studies in table format (see below) and briefly summarises each study in terms of relevant information on methodology, intervention and findings. More specifically, the relevant studies will also be summarised and classified in a table summarising the following information: i) publication details, (ii) description of the intervention and context, (iii) methods, data and sampling, (iv) population, v) findings of relevance to the research question including findings of statistically significant and non-significant impacts and disaggregation (e.g. by gender, age and other characteristics), and vi) contextual factors of importance. A narrative synthesis approach will be applied to synthesise the findings.

## 3.	Bibliographic Database Search The Research Question

The research question is 'What is known about the effects of cash transfers on employment?' Here we want to know the effect of cash transfers on labour supply. In order to understand it better, the research question can be decomposed into population, intervention and outcome:

| Population                                           | Intervention   | Outcome                                         |
|------------------------------------------------------|----------------|-------------------------------------------------|
| Conditional or unconditional cash transfers          | Employment     | People living in low or middle income countries |
| and who either receive the intervention or are the   |                |                                                 |
| comparison group                                     |                |                                                 |
| Cash transfer                                        |                |                                                 |
| Social transfer                                      |                |                                                 |
| Financial transfer                                   |                |                                                 |
| Monetary transfer                                    |                |                                                 |
| Child grant/ disability grant/ old-age grant/ social |                |                                                 |
| grant                                                |                |                                                 |
| Social assistance                                    |                |                                                 |
| Social pension                                       |                |                                                 |
| Non-contributory pension                             |                |                                                 |
| Old age pension                                      |                |                                                 |
| Child benefit/ disability benefit/ old-age benefit   |                |                                                 |
| Basic income/ minimum income                         |                |                                                 |
| UCT/ CCT                                             |                |                                                 |
| Income support                                       |                |                                                 |

The population has been restricted to people living in low and middle income countries. This includes both beneficiary and control households. The aim of the research question is to analyse the impact of cash transfers on employment. The outcome for this sub-question is employment. The table above also includes all synonyms that will be used in the searches.

## Search Strings

The search string will be composed of intervention (part 1), outcome (part 2) and country filter (example below given for SCOPUS filter). In order to capture all possible cash transfers, search strings should include all synonyms listed above. In terms of outcome, we will use employment and synonyms in the search strings. The following search strings and will be used (they have been tested in the pilot phase):

1.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "Cash transfer*"  OR  "social transfer*"  OR  "financial transfer*"  OR  
"monetary transfer*"  OR  "child grant*"  OR  "disability grant*"  OR  "old age grant*" OR  "social grant*"  OR  "basic grant*"  OR  "minimum income grant*"  OR  "social assistance"  OR  welfare  OR  "social pension*"  OR  "non-contributory pension*"  OR  "old age pension*"  OR  "child benefit*"  OR  "disability benefit*"  OR  "old age benefit*"  OR  cct 
 
OR  uct  OR  "income support"  )  
2.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY employ* OR labour W/1 (supply OR demand OR participation OR allocation) 
OR labor W/1 (supply OR demand OR participation OR allocation)  OR hiring OR hire* OR job* OR work OR workforce OR  "labour market" OR "labor market" OR OR "hours worked" OR "working hours" OR informal* OR formalisation OR formalization OR migrat* 

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Employment Labo* supply
Labo* demand
Hiring Job* Work workforce Labo*r market Labo*r participation Labo*r allocation Number of hours worked Informal* Formali*ation Migration Time allocation Child care Child labo* Wage Income Salary Earning Diversification of income sources Retirement Pension age
Contents
OR migrant* OR time W/1 allocation OR "child care" OR "child labour" OR "child labor" OR wage* OR income OR salar* OR earn* OR diversif* OR retire* OR "pension age"  )
Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

3.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( afghanistan  OR  albania  OR  algeria  OR  angola  OR  argentina  
OR  armenia  OR  armenian  OR  aruba  OR  azerbaijan  OR  bangladesh  OR  benin  OR byelarus  OR  byelorussian  OR  belarus  OR  belorussian  OR  belorussia  OR  belize  OR bhutan  OR  bolivia  OR  bosnia  OR  herzegovina  OR  hercegovina  OR  botswana  OR brasil  OR  brazil  OR  bulgaria  OR  "Burkina Faso"  OR  "Burkina Fasso"  OR  "Upper Volta"  OR  burundi  OR  urundi  OR  cambodia  OR  "Khmer Republic"  OR  kampuchea OR  cameroon  OR  cameroons  OR  cameron  OR  camerons  OR  "Cape Verde"  OR "Central African Republic"  OR  chad  OR  china  OR  colombia  OR  comoros  OR "Comoro Islands"  OR  comores  OR  mayotte  OR  congo  OR  zaire  OR  "Costa Rica*" OR  "Cote d'Ivoire"  OR  "Ivory Coast"  OR  cuba  OR  djibouti  OR  "French Somaliland" OR  dominica  OR  "Dominican Republic"  OR  "East Timor"  OR  "East Timur"  OR "Timor Leste"  OR  ecuador  OR  egypt  OR  "United Arab Republic"  OR  "El Salvador" OR  eritrea  OR  ethiopia  OR  fiji  OR  gabon  OR  "Gabonese Republic"  OR  gambia  OR gaza  OR  "Georgia Republic"  OR  "Georgian Republic"  OR  ghana  OR  grenada  OR guatemala  OR  guinea  OR  guiana  OR  guyana  OR  haiti  OR  hungary  OR  honduras OR  india  OR  maldives  OR  indonesia  OR  iran  OR  iraq  OR  jamaica  OR  jordan  OR kazakhstan  OR  kazakh  OR  kenya  OR  kiribati  OR  korea  OR  kosovo  OR  kyrgyzstan OR  kirghizia  OR  "Kyrgyz Republic"  OR  kirghiz  OR  kirgizstan  OR  "Lao PDR"  OR laos  OR  lebanon  OR  lesotho  OR  basutoland  OR  liberia  OR  libya  OR  macedonia  OR madagascar  OR  "Malagasy Republic"  OR  malaysia  OR  malaya  OR  malay  OR  sabah OR  sarawak  OR  malawi  OR  mali  OR  "Marshall Islands"  OR  mauritania  OR  mauritius 
 
OR  "Agalega Islands"  OR  mexico  OR  micronesia  OR  "Middle East"  OR  moldova OR  moldovia  OR  moldovian  OR  mongolia  OR  montenegro  OR  morocco  OR  ifni OR  mozambique  OR  myanmar  OR  myanma  OR  burma  OR  namibia  OR  nepal  OR "Netherlands Antilles"  OR  "New Caledonia"  OR  nicaragua  OR  niger  OR  nigeria  OR pakistan  OR  palau  OR  palestine  OR  panama  OR  paraguay  OR  peru  OR  philippines OR  philipines  OR  phillipines  OR  phillippines  OR  "Puerto Ric*"  OR  romania  OR rumania  OR  roumania  OR  rwanda  OR  ruanda  OR  "Saint Lucia"  OR  "St Lucia"  OR "Saint Vincent"  OR  "St Vincent"  OR  grenadines  OR  samoa  OR  "Samoan Islands"  OR "Navigator Island"  OR  "Navigator Islands"  OR  "Sao Tome"  OR  senegal  OR  serbia OR  montenegro  OR  seychelles  OR  "Sierra Leone"  OR  "Sri Lanka"  OR  "Solomon Islands"  OR  somalia  OR  "South Africa"  OR  sudan  OR  suriname  OR  surinam  OR swaziland  OR  syria  OR  tajikistan  OR  tadzhikistan  OR  tadjikistan  OR  tadzhik  OR  
tanzania  OR  thailand  OR  togo  OR  togolese  republic  OR  tonga  OR  tunisia  OR  turkey OR  turkmenistan  OR  turkmen  OR  uganda  OR  ukraine  OR  uzbekistan  OR  uzbek OR  vanuatu  OR  "New Hebrides"  OR  venezuela  OR  vietnam  OR  "Viet Nam"  OR "West Bank"  OR  yemen  OR  yugoslavia  OR  zambia  OR  zimbabwe )  OR  TITLE-ABS- KEY ( "Developing Countries"  OR  africa  OR  asia  OR  caribbean  OR  "West Indies" OR  "South America"  OR  "Latin America"  OR  "Central America"  OR  developing  OR "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR  "middle income"  OR "low* income"  OR  underserved  OR  "under served"  OR  deprived)  OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (poor* W/1   countr*  OR  nation*  OR  population*  OR  world )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (( developing  OR  "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR "middle income"  OR  "low* income" )  W/1  econom* ))  OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY ( low*  W/1 gdp  OR  gnp  OR  "gross domestic"  OR  "gross national" )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (low W/3  middle  W/3  countr* )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (  lmic  OR  lmics  OR  "third world" OR  "lami countr*"  OR  "transitional countr*" )  

4.	 Search strings to run in Scopus: #1 AND #2 AND #3 (limited to 2000 onwards)

Contents

## Inclusion Criteria Stage 1 Screening:

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

Inclusion criteria help in deciding whether a study that has been found is relevant. The following inclusion criteria will be applied during the first stage of the screening process (all criteria need to be satisfied for the study to be included). They will be applied to titles, then abstracts, then full text. All studies that are included on the basis of the first stage screening process, will be included in the Stage 2 screening process. 

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

## 1.	 **Date**: From 2000

2.	 **Language**: The review is restricted to English studies
3.	 **Population**: People that have received a cash transfer, or control households

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

4.	 **Geographical locations**: Low and middle income countries

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

5.	 **Interventions**: Conditional or unconditional cash transfers. The programmes should be noncontributory, publicly mandated or NGO-provided (so not private transfers, like remittances, or religious donations).
6.	 **Study design**: The study should be a solid empirical study (i.e. based on data and or fieldwork). 
Only studies that use either an experimental design or a quasi-experimental design that relies on a credible control group should be included. This includes those that demonstrate one of the following: (a)	an experimental design (i.e. RCT or cluster-RCT)

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

(b)	a quasi-experimental design, including: 
i.	 regression discontinuity design ii.	 matching technique (e.g. propensity score matching) iii.	difference-in-difference iv.	 interrupted time series v.	 other form of multivariate regression, including Instrumental Variable Technique.
	
[Exclude studies that are theoretical; literature reviews; not descriptive or don't have an experimental/ quasi-experimental design] 
7.	 **Outcome**: Employment/ labour supply
In the second round of screening, studies will be will be assessed against a range of criteria to investigate the risk of bias and reliability of findings. Specifically, studies will be assessed against the issues of selection bias, attrition bias or bias associated with interpretation of statistical significance (Type I or Type II errors). Studies that have a high risk of bias or score low on rigour will be not be included in the final analysis.

## List Of Databases Used

•	 SCOPUS (Elsevier). This database includes 5,682 journals, conference proceedings, trade 
publications and book series in the Social Sciences category. 
•	 Econlit •	 ILO Labordoc •	 IDEAS-Repec

Contents

## 4.	Snowball Technique

The following five people should be contacted and asked for the five most relevant studies on the research question. We will also look at their websites for relevant publications. 

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

1.	 Francesca Bastagli, ODI
2.	 Anna McCord, ODI

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

3.	 Fabio Veras Soares, IPC
4.	 Benjamin Davis, FAO 5.	 Christina Behrendt, ILO

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

Studies shared by experts will be assessed against Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria. We will also check the reference lists of the studies obtained for any further studies that fit the inclusion criteria. 

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

## 5.	Websites Searches

The following websites/ search engines should be consulted, if possible using the same search strings as for the academic databases. Any studies found on these websites will be assessed against the same Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria.

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

•	 Google (the first five pages)
•	 World Bank •	 R4D DFID •	 International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (IPC-IG) •	 International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) •	 Poverty Action Research Lab •	 FAO From Protection to Production website •	 GSDRC •	 OPM website •	 3iE website •	 ILO website •	 FAO From Protection to Production website
•	 Transfer Project (UNC Chapel Hill) •	 ECLAC/ CEPAL •	 IADB website •	 ADB website •	 IDS website •	 BLDS website •	 Social Science Research Network

## 6.	Classification Of Studies

Studies that have passed both screening stages will be classified and described in an annotated bibliography. The classification tables will include the following information:

•	 authors and year of study
•	 geographical coverage •	 detailed description of intervention and context •	 population •	 methods, sampling and data •	 a summary of the main outcomes of the study

Contents

## Sub-Question 1F: What Is The Effect Of Cash Transfers On Empowerment?

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

## 1.	The Review Research Questions

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

The systematic literature reviews should assess the state of knowledge on the following question: 
What is known about the effect of cash transfers on social empowerment, political empowerment and psycho-social wellbeing?

## 2.	Methodology

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

The systematic literature reviews should combine three tracks. These tracks are briefly explained here and further instructions are given below.

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

1.	 **Bibliographic database search:** Searching a previously agreed upon list of academic databases, 
using consistent search strings (see below) that have been tested beforehand and applying inclusion/ exclusion criteria.
2.	 **Snowball technique**: Contacting approximately four key experts in the field and asking them 
for recommendations for important studies on the research question. This also includes looking at the experts' websites and publication lists and including relevant studies. Finally, we will be looking for further relevant studies in the bibliographies of the experts' studies and recommended studies. 

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

3.	 **Websites searches**: Searching previously agreed on websites (see below) for relevant studies 
using similar search terms as for the bibliographic databases. This also includes a google search for other grey literature.
Studies will be screened and assessed using the EPPI Reviewer software. After an initial broad screening process that considers overall study design, as well as other broader inclusion/ exclusion criteria, a second round of screening will be conducted and studies will be assessed against a range of criteria to investigate the risk of bias and reliability of findings. Specifically, studies will be assessed against the issues of selection bias, attrition bias or bias associated with interpretation of statistical significance (Type I or Type II errors). Studies that have a high risk of bias or score low on rigour will be not be included in the final analysis. The relevant studies that make it through both stages of screening will be summarised in an annotated bibliography. The annotated bibliography lists the relevant studies in table format (see below) and briefly summarises each study in terms of relevant information on methodology, intervention and findings. More specifically, the relevant studies will also be summarised and classified in a table summarising the following information: i) publication details, (ii) description of the intervention and context, (iii) methods, data and sampling, (iv) population, v) findings of relevance to the research question including findings of statistically significant and non-significant impacts and disaggregation (e.g. by gender, age and other characteristics), and vi) contextual factors of importance. A narrative synthesis approach will be applied to synthesise the findings.

## 3.	Bibliographic Database Search The Research Question

The research question is 'What is known about the effect of cash transfers on empowerment?' Here we want to know about the effects on social empowerment, political empowerment and psycho-social wellbeing. In order to understand it better, the research question can be decomposed into population, intervention and outcome:

| Population                                         | Intervention                                  |
|----------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|
| Conditional or unconditional cash transfers        | Social empowerment, political empowerment and |
| psycho-social wellbeing                            |                                               |
| People living in low or middle income countries    |                                               |
| and who either receive the intervention or are the |                                               |
| comparison group                                   |                                               |
| Cash transfer                                      |                                               |
| Social transfer                                    |                                               |
| Financial transfer                                 |                                               |
| Monetary transfer                                  |                                               |
| Child grant/ disability grant/ old-age grant/      |                                               |
| social grant                                       |                                               |
| Social assistance                                  |                                               |
| Social pension                                     |                                               |
| Non-contributory pension                           |                                               |
| Old age pension                                    |                                               |
| Child benefit/ disability benefit/ old-age benefit |                                               |
| Basic income/ minimum income                       |                                               |
| UCT/ CCT                                           |                                               |
| Income support                                     |                                               |

The population has been restricted to people living in low and middle income countries. This includes both beneficiary and control households. The aim of the research question is to analyse the impact of cash transfers on empowerment. The outcome for this sub-question are economic empowerment, social empowerment, political empowerment and social relations. The table above also includes all synonyms that will be used in the searches.

## Search Strings

The search string will be composed of intervention (part 1), outcome (part 2) and country filter (example below given for SCOPUS filter). In order to capture all possible cash transfers, search strings should include all synonyms listed above. In terms of outcome, we will use economic empowerment, social empowerment, political empowerment and social relations and synonyms in the search strings. The following search strings and will be used (they have been tested in the pilot phase):

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Empowerment
Decision making Voice Confidence Violence Choice Control Power Political participation Community meeting Social audit Participatory monitoring Community Score Card Gender relations Relationship* Dynamics Social inclusion Social exclusion Mobility Discrimination Pride Dignity Social capital Social network* Social participation Stigma
Acceptance
Respect Self-esteem Reciprocity Informal transfer Child / early/ forced marriage Sexual debut Eating order
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

1.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "Cash transfer*"  OR  "social transfer*"  OR  "financial transfer*"  OR  
"monetary transfer*"  OR  "child grant*"  OR  "disability grant*"  OR  "old age grant*" OR  "social grant*"  OR  "basic grant*"  OR  "minimum income grant*"  OR  "social assistance"  OR  welfare  OR  "social pension*"  OR  "non-contributory pension*"  OR  "old age pension*"  OR  "child benefit*"  OR  "disability benefit*"  OR  "old age benefit*"  OR  cct 
 
OR  uct  OR  "income support"  )  

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

2.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY (empower* OR "decision making" OR confiden* OR violen* OR power* 
OR voice* OR choice* OR control OR "political participation" OR "community meeting*" OR "social audit*" OR "participatory monitoring" OR "community score card*" OR relation* OR dynamic* OR "social inclusion" OR "social exclusion" OR discrimination OR pride OR dignity OR "social capital" OR stigma OR "social network*" OR "social participation" OR "informal transfer*" OR respect OR acceptance OR "self-esteem" OR "child marriage*" OR "early marriage*" OR "forced marriage*" OR "sexual debut" OR mobility OR "eating order")

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

3.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( afghanistan  OR  albania  OR  algeria  OR  angola  OR  argentina  
OR  armenia  OR  armenian  OR  aruba  OR  azerbaijan  OR  bangladesh  OR  benin  OR byelarus  OR  byelorussian  OR  belarus  OR  belorussian  OR  belorussia  OR  belize  OR bhutan  OR  bolivia  OR  bosnia  OR  herzegovina  OR  hercegovina  OR  botswana  OR brasil  OR  brazil  OR  bulgaria  OR  "Burkina Faso"  OR  "Burkina Fasso"  OR  "Upper Volta"  OR  burundi  OR  urundi  OR  cambodia  OR  "Khmer Republic"  OR  kampuchea OR  cameroon  OR  cameroons  OR  cameron  OR  camerons  OR  "Cape Verde"  OR "Central African Republic"  OR  chad  OR  china  OR  colombia  OR  comoros  OR "Comoro Islands"  OR  comores  OR  mayotte  OR  congo  OR  zaire  OR  "Costa Rica*" OR  "Cote d'Ivoire"  OR  "Ivory Coast"  OR  cuba  OR  djibouti  OR  "French Somaliland" OR  dominica  OR  "Dominican Republic"  OR  "East Timor"  OR  "East Timur"  OR "Timor Leste"  OR  ecuador  OR  egypt  OR  "United Arab Republic"  OR  "El Salvador" OR  eritrea  OR  ethiopia  OR  fiji  OR  gabon  OR  "Gabonese Republic"  OR  gambia  OR gaza  OR  "Georgia Republic"  OR  "Georgian Republic"  OR  ghana  OR  grenada  OR guatemala  OR  guinea  OR  guiana  OR  guyana  OR  haiti  OR  hungary  OR  honduras OR  india  OR  maldives  OR  indonesia  OR  iran  OR  iraq  OR  jamaica  OR  jordan  OR kazakhstan  OR  kazakh  OR  kenya  OR  kiribati  OR  korea  OR  kosovo  OR  kyrgyzstan OR  kirghizia  OR  "Kyrgyz Republic"  OR  kirghiz  OR  kirgizstan  OR  "Lao PDR"  OR laos  OR  lebanon  OR  lesotho  OR  basutoland  OR  liberia  OR  libya  OR  macedonia  OR madagascar  OR  "Malagasy Republic"  OR  malaysia  OR  malaya  OR  malay  OR  sabah  
OR  sarawak  OR  malawi  OR  mali  OR  "Marshall Islands"  OR  mauritania  OR  mauritius OR  "Agalega Islands"  OR  mexico  OR  micronesia  OR  "Middle East"  OR  moldova OR  moldovia  OR  moldovian  OR  mongolia  OR  montenegro  OR  morocco  OR  ifni OR  mozambique  OR  myanmar  OR  myanma  OR  burma  OR  namibia  OR  nepal  OR "Netherlands Antilles"  OR  "New Caledonia"  OR  nicaragua  OR  niger  OR  nigeria  OR pakistan  OR  palau  OR  palestine  OR  panama  OR  paraguay  OR  peru  OR  philippines OR  philipines  OR  phillipines  OR  phillippines  OR  "Puerto Ric*"  OR  romania  OR rumania  OR  roumania  OR  rwanda  OR  ruanda  OR  "Saint Lucia"  OR  "St Lucia"  OR "Saint Vincent"  OR  "St Vincent"  OR  grenadines  OR  samoa  OR  "Samoan Islands"  OR "Navigator Island"  OR  "Navigator Islands"  OR  "Sao Tome"  OR  senegal  OR  serbia OR  montenegro  OR  seychelles  OR  "Sierra Leone"  OR  "Sri Lanka"  OR  "Solomon Islands"  OR  somalia  OR  "South Africa"  OR  sudan  OR  suriname  OR  surinam  OR swaziland  OR  syria  OR  tajikistan  OR  tadzhikistan  OR  tadjikistan  OR  tadzhik  OR tanzania  OR  thailand  OR  togo  OR  togolese  republic  OR  tonga  OR  tunisia  OR  turkey OR  turkmenistan  OR  turkmen  OR  uganda  OR  ukraine  OR  uzbekistan  OR  uzbek OR  vanuatu  OR  "New Hebrides"  OR  venezuela  OR  vietnam  OR  "Viet Nam"  OR "West Bank"  OR  yemen  OR  yugoslavia  OR  zambia  OR  zimbabwe )  OR  TITLE-ABS- KEY ( "Developing Countries"  OR  africa  OR  asia  OR  caribbean  OR  "West Indies" OR  "South America"  OR  "Latin America"  OR  "Central America"  OR  developing  OR "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR  "middle income"  OR "low* income"  OR  underserved  OR  "under served"  OR  deprived)  OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (poor* W/1   countr*  OR  nation*  OR  population*  OR  world )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (( developing  OR  "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR "middle income"  OR  "low* income" )  W/1  econom* ))  OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY ( low*  W/1  

Contents

gdp  OR  gnp  OR  "gross domestic"  OR  "gross national" )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (low W/3  middle  W/3  countr* )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (  lmic  OR  lmics  OR  "third world" OR  "lami countr*"  OR  "transitional countr*" )

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

4.	 Search strings to run in Scopus: #1 AND #2 AND #3 (limited to 2000 onwards)

## Inclusion Criteria

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

Inclusion criteria help in deciding whether a study that has been found is relevant. The following inclusion criteria will be applied during the first stage of the screening process (all criteria need to be satisfied for the study to be included). They will be applied to titles, then abstracts, then full text. All studies that are included on the basis of the first stage screening process, will be included in the Stage 2 screening process. 

1.	 **Date**: From 2000
2.	 **Language**: The review is restricted to English studies

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

3.	 **Population**: People that have received a cash transfer, or control households
4.	 **Geographical locations**: Low and middle income countries 5.	 **Interventions**: Conditional or unconditional cash transfers. The programmes should be noncontributory, publicly mandated or NGO-provided (so not private transfers, like remittances, or religious donations).

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

6.	 **Study design**: The study should be a solid empirical study (i.e. based on data and or fieldwork). 
Only studies that use either an experimental design or a quasi-experimental design that relies on a credible control group should be included. This includes those that demonstrate one of the following: (a)	an experimental design (i.e. RCT or cluster-RCT)
(b)	a quasi-experimental design, including: 
i.	 regression discontinuity design ii.	 matching technique (e.g. propensity score matching) iii.	difference-in-difference iv.	 interrupted time series
v.	 other form of multivariate regression, including Instrumental Variable Technique.
	
[Exclude studies that are theoretical; literature reviews; not descriptive or don't have an experimental/ quasi-experimental design] 
7.	 **Outcome**: Social empowerment; economic empowerment; psycho-social wellbeing
In the second round of screening, studies will be assessed against a range of criteria to investigate the risk of bias and reliability of findings. Specifically, studies will be assessed against the issues of selection bias, attrition bias or bias associated with interpretation of statistical significance (Type I or Type II errors). Studies that have a high risk of bias or score low on rigour will be not be included in the final analysis.

## List Of Databases Used

•	 SCOPUS (Elsevier). This database includes 5,682 journals, conference proceedings, trade 
publications and book series in the Social Sciences category. 
•	 IDEAS-Repec

Contents

## 4.	Snowball Technique

The following four people should be contacted and asked for the five most relevant studies on the research question. We will also look at their websites for relevant publications. 

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

1.	 Maxime Molyneux, UCL
2.	 Nicola Jones, ODI

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

3.	 Babken Babajanian, LSE
4.	 Christina Behrendt, ILO
Studies shared by experts will be assessed against Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria. We will also check the reference lists of the studies obtained for any further studies that fit the inclusion criteria. 

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

## 5.	Websites Searches

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

The following websites/ search engines should be consulted, if possible using the same search strings as for the academic databases. Any studies found on these websites will be assessed against the same Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria.

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

•	 Google (the first five pages)
•	 World Bank •	 R4D DFID •	 International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (IPC-IG) •	 International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) •	 Poverty Action Research Lab •	 FAO From Protection to Production website •	 GSDRC •	 OPM website •	 3iE website •	 FAO From Protection to Production website •	 Transfer Project (UNC Chapel Hill) •	 ECLAC/ CEPAL •	 IADB website
•	 ADB website •	 IDS website •	 BLDS website •	 Social Science Research Network

## 6.	Classification Of Studies

Studies that have passed both screening stages will be classified and described in an annotated bibliography. The classification tables will include the following information:

•	 authors and year of study
•	 geographical coverage •	 detailed description of intervention and context •	 population •	 methods, sampling and data •	 a summary of the main outcomes of the study

Contents

## Sub-Question 2A: What Is The Effect Of Core Cash Transfer Design Parameters On Programme Outcomes?

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

## 1.	The Review Research Questions

The systematic literature reviews should assess the state of knowledge on the following question: 
What is known about the effect of core cash transfer design parameters on programme outcomes?

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

## 2.	Methodology

The systematic literature reviews should combine three tracks. These tracks are briefly explained here and further instructions are given below.

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

1.	 **Bibliographic database search:** Searching a previously agreed upon list of academic databases, 
using consistent search strings (see below) that have been tested beforehand and applying inclusion/ exclusion criteria.

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

2.	 **Snowball technique**: Contacting approximately three key experts in the field and asking 
them for recommendations for important studies on the research question. This also includes looking at the experts' websites and publication lists and including relevant studies. Finally, we will be looking for further relevant studies in the bibliographies of the experts' studies and recommended studies. 

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

3.	 **Websites searches**: Searching previously agreed on websites (see below) for relevant studies 
using similar search terms as for the bibliographic databases. This also includes a google search for other grey literature.
Studies will be screened and assessed using the EPPI Reviewer software. After an initial broad screening process that considers overall study design, as well as other broader inclusion/ exclusion criteria, a second round of screening will be conducted. The second stage assessment will depend on the type of study. In the case of impact evaluation studies, the same assessment tool used for those studies retrieved in research question one will be applied. In the case of qualitative and descriptive studies and institutional analysis, an assessment of methodological rigour based on the literature around evaluating qualitative studies will be applied.

The relevant studies that make it through both stages of screening will be summarised in an annotated bibliography. The annotated bibliography lists the relevant studies in table format (see below) and briefly summarises each study in terms of relevant information on methodology, intervention and findings. More specifically, the relevant studies will also be summarised and classified in a table summarising the following information: i) publication details, (ii) description of the intervention and context, (iii) methods, data and sampling, (iv) population, v) findings of relevance to the research question including findings of statistically significant and non-significant impacts and disaggregation (e.g. by gender, age and other characteristics), and vi) contextual factors of importance. A narrative synthesis approach will be applied to synthesise the findings.

Contents

## 3.	Bibliographic Database Search The Research Question

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

The research question is 'What is known about the effect of core cash transfer design parameters on programme outcomes?' Here we want to know whether transfer amount, transfer duration, transfer frequency, and transfer recipient mediates programme impacts.

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

In order to understand it better, the research question can be decomposed into population, intervention and design/ implementation factor:

| Population                                         | Intervention                         |
|----------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|
| Conditional or unconditional cash transfers        | Core cash transfer design parameters |
| Annex 3                                            |                                      |
| Summary table                                      |                                      |
| of searches                                        |                                      |
| and reasons for                                    |                                      |
| exclusion and flow                                 |                                      |
| diagrams                                           |                                      |
| People living in low or middle income countries    |                                      |
| and who either receive the intervention or are the |                                      |
| comparison group                                   |                                      |
| Annex 4                                            |                                      |
| Summary of the                                     |                                      |
| evidence base                                      |                                      |
| Transfer level / Transfer amount / Transfer size   |                                      |
| Payment size/ payment level / payment amount       |                                      |
| Maximum duration                                   |                                      |
| Time limit                                         |                                      |
| Eligibility                                        |                                      |
| Payment frequency                                  |                                      |
| Recipient                                          |                                      |
| Beneficiary                                        |                                      |
| Target group                                       |                                      |
| Graduation                                         |                                      |
| Cash transfer                                      |                                      |
| Social transfer                                    |                                      |
| Financial transfer                                 |                                      |
| Monetary transfer                                  |                                      |
| Child grant/ disability grant/ old-age grant/      |                                      |
| social grant                                       |                                      |
| Social assistance                                  |                                      |
| Social pension                                     |                                      |
| Non-contributory pension                           |                                      |
| Old age pension                                    |                                      |
| Child benefit/ disability benefit/ old-age benefit |                                      |
| Basic income/ minimum income                       |                                      |
| UCT/ CCT                                           |                                      |
| Income support                                     |                                      |
| Annex 5                                            |                                      |
| Evidence:                                          |                                      |
| results tables for                                 |                                      |
| overall effects                                    |                                      |
| disaggregated by                                   |                                      |
| gender, and cash                                   |                                      |
| transfer design and                                |                                      |
| implementation                                     |                                      |
| effects                                            |                                      |

The population has been restricted to people living in low and middle income countries. This includes both beneficiary and control households. The aim of the research question is to analyse the effect of cash transfer design on programme outcomes. The design/ implementation factors for this sub-question are transfer amount, transfer duration, transfer frequency, and transfer recipient. The table above also includes all synonyms that will be used in the searches.

## Search Strings

The search string will be composed of intervention (part 1), design and implementation factor (part 2) and country filter (example below given for SCOPUS filter). In order to capture all possible cash transfers, search strings should include all synonyms listed above. In terms of design/ implementation factors, we will use transfer amount, transfer duration, transfer frequency, and transfer recipient in the search strings. The following search strings and will be used (they have been tested in the pilot phase):

1.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "Cash transfer*"  OR  "social transfer*"  OR  "financial transfer*"  OR  
"monetary transfer*"  OR  "child grant*"  OR  "disability grant*"  OR  "old age grant*"  OR "social grant*"  OR  "basic grant*"  OR  "minimum income grant*"  OR  "social assistance" OR  welfare  OR  "social pension*"  OR  "non-contributory pension*"  OR  "old age pension*" 
 
OR  "child benefit*"  OR  "disability benefit*"  OR  "old age benefit*"  OR  cct  OR  uct  OR "income support"  )  
2.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( transfer* W/1 (level* OR amount* OR size OR frequenc*) payment* W/1 
level* OR amount* OR size OR frequenc*) OR "maximum duration" OR "time limit*" OR eligib* OR graduat* OR OR recipient* OR  beneficiar* OR target group*)
3.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( afghanistan  OR  albania  OR  algeria  OR  angola  OR  argentina  OR  
armenia  OR  armenian  OR  aruba  OR  azerbaijan  OR  bangladesh  OR  benin  OR  byelarus 
 
OR  byelorussian  OR  belarus  OR  belorussian  OR  belorussia  OR  belize  OR  bhutan  OR bolivia  OR  bosnia  OR  herzegovina  OR  hercegovina  OR  botswana  OR  brasil  OR  brazil OR  bulgaria  OR  "Burkina Faso"  OR  "Burkina Fasso"  OR  "Upper Volta"  OR  burundi OR  urundi  OR  cambodia  OR  "Khmer Republic"  OR  kampuchea  OR  cameroon  OR  

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

cameroons  OR  cameron  OR  camerons  OR  "Cape Verde"  OR  "Central African Republic" OR  chad  OR  china  OR  colombia  OR  comoros  OR  "Comoro Islands"  OR  comores  OR mayotte  OR  congo  OR  zaire  OR  "Costa Rica*"  OR  "Cote d'Ivoire"  OR  "Ivory Coast" OR  cuba  OR  djibouti  OR  "French Somaliland"  OR  dominica  OR  "Dominican Republic" OR  "East Timor"  OR  "East Timur"  OR  "Timor Leste"  OR  ecuador  OR  egypt  OR "United Arab Republic"  OR  "El Salvador"  OR  eritrea  OR  ethiopia  OR  fiji  OR  gabon OR  "Gabonese Republic"  OR  gambia  OR  gaza  OR  "Georgia Republic"  OR  "Georgian Republic"  OR  ghana  OR  grenada  OR  guatemala  OR  guinea  OR  guiana  OR  guyana OR  haiti  OR  hungary  OR  honduras  OR  india  OR  maldives  OR  indonesia  OR  iran  OR 
 
iraq  OR  jamaica  OR  jordan  OR  kazakhstan  OR  kazakh  OR  kenya  OR  kiribati  OR korea  OR  kosovo  OR  kyrgyzstan  OR  kirghizia  OR  "Kyrgyz Republic"  OR  kirghiz  OR kirgizstan  OR  "Lao PDR"  OR  laos  OR  lebanon  OR  lesotho  OR  basutoland  OR  liberia OR  libya  OR  macedonia  OR  madagascar  OR  "Malagasy Republic"  OR  malaysia  OR malaya  OR  malay  OR  sabah  OR  sarawak  OR  malawi  OR  mali  OR  "Marshall Islands" OR  mauritania  OR  mauritius  OR  "Agalega Islands"  OR  mexico  OR  micronesia  OR "Middle East"  OR  moldova  OR  moldovia  OR  moldovian  OR  mongolia  OR  montenegro OR  morocco  OR  ifni  OR  mozambique  OR  myanmar  OR  myanma  OR  burma  OR namibia  OR  nepal  OR  "Netherlands Antilles"  OR  "New Caledonia"  OR  nicaragua  OR niger  OR  nigeria  OR  pakistan  OR  palau  OR  palestine  OR  panama  OR  paraguay  OR peru  OR  philippines  OR  philipines  OR  phillipines  OR  phillippines  OR  "Puerto Ric*" OR  romania  OR  rumania  OR  roumania  OR  rwanda  OR  ruanda  OR  "Saint Lucia" OR  "St Lucia"  OR  "Saint Vincent"  OR  "St Vincent"  OR  grenadines  OR  samoa  OR "Samoan Islands"  OR  "Navigator Island"  OR  "Navigator Islands"  OR  "Sao Tome"  OR senegal  OR  serbia  OR  montenegro  OR  seychelles  OR  "Sierra Leone"  OR  "Sri Lanka" OR  "Solomon Islands"  OR  somalia  OR  "South Africa"  OR  sudan  OR  suriname  OR surinam  OR  swaziland  OR  syria  OR  tajikistan  OR  tadzhikistan  OR  tadjikistan  OR tadzhik  OR  tanzania  OR  thailand  OR  togo  OR  togolese  republic  OR  tonga  OR  tunisia OR  turkey  OR  turkmenistan  OR  turkmen  OR  uganda  OR  ukraine  OR  uzbekistan  OR uzbek  OR  vanuatu  OR  "New Hebrides"  OR  venezuela  OR  vietnam  OR  "Viet Nam" OR  "West Bank"  OR  yemen  OR  yugoslavia  OR  zambia  OR  zimbabwe )  OR  TITLE- ABS-KEY ( "Developing Countries"  OR  africa  OR  asia  OR  caribbean  OR  "West Indies" OR  "South America"  OR  "Latin America"  OR  "Central America"  OR  developing  OR "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR  "middle income"  OR "low* income"  OR  underserved  OR  "under served"  OR  deprived)  OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (poor* W/1   countr*  OR  nation*  OR  population*  OR  world )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (( 
developing  OR  "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR  "middle income"  OR  "low* income" )  W/1  econom* ))  OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY ( low*  W/1  gdp  OR gnp  OR  "gross domestic"  OR  "gross national" )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (low  W/3  middle W/3  countr* )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (  lmic  OR  lmics  OR  "third world"  OR  "lami countr*"  OR  "transitional countr*" ) 

4.	 Search strings to run in Scopus: #1 AND #2 AND #3 (limited to 2000 onwards)

Contents

## Inclusion Criteria Stage 1 Screening:

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

Inclusion criteria help in deciding whether a study that has been found is relevant. The following inclusion criteria will be applied during the first stage of the screening process (all criteria need to be satisfied for the study to be included). They will be applied to titles, then abstracts, then full text. All studies that are included on the basis of the first stage screening process, will be included in the Stage 2 screening process. 

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

## 1.	 **Date**: From 2000

2.	 **Language**: The review is restricted to English studies
3.	 **Population**: People that have received a cash transfer, or control households

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

4.	 **Geographical locations**: Low and middle income countries

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

5.	 **Interventions**: Conditional or unconditional cash transfers. The programmes should be noncontributory, publicly mandated or NGO-provided (so not private transfers, like remittances, or religious donations).
6.	 **Study design**: The study should be a solid empirical study (i.e. based on data and or fieldwork) 
or an institutional analysis. It can be qualitative or quantitative. [Not theoretical; no literature review; not descriptive]
7.	 **Design/ implementation factor**: transfer amount, transfer duration, transfer frequency, and 
transfer recipient
8.	 **Analysis**: Design and implementation factors are explicitly linked to outcomes.

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

The second stage assessment will depend on the type of study. In the case of impact evaluation studies, the same assessment tool used for those studies retrieved in research question one will be applied. In the case of qualitative and descriptive studies and institutional analysis, an assessment of methodological rigour based on the literature around evaluating qualitative studies will be applied.

## List Of Databases Used

•	 SCOPUS (Elsevier). This database includes 5,682 journals, conference proceedings, trade 
publications and book series in the Social Sciences category. 
•	 IDEAS-Repec

## 4.	Snowball Technique

The following three people should be contacted and asked for the five most relevant studies on the research question. We will also look at their websites for relevant publications. 

1.	 Rachel Slater, ODI
2.	 Mike Samson, EPRI 3.	 Margaret Grosh, World Bank
Studies shared by experts will be assessed against Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria. We will also check the reference lists of the studies obtained for any further studies that fit the inclusion criteria. 

## 5.	Websites Searches

The following websites/ search engines should be consulted, if possible using the same search strings as for the academic databases. Any studies found on these websites will be assessed against the same Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria.

•	 Google (the first five pages)
•	 World Bank •	 R4D DFID •	 International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (IPC-IG) •	 International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) •	 GSDRC •	 OPM website •	 Transfer Project (UNC Chapel Hill) •	 ECLAC/ CEPAL •	 IADB website •	 ADB website •	 IDS website •	 BLDS website •	 Social Science Research Network •	 3iE website

## 6.	Classification Of Studies

Studies that have passed both screening stages will be classified and described in an annotated bibliography. The classification tables will include the following information:

•	 authors and year of study
•	 geographical coverage •	 detailed description of intervention and context •	 population •	 methods, sampling and data •	 summary findings on design and implementation factor

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Contents

## Sub-Question 2B: What Is The Effect Of Conditionality On Cash Transfer Programme Outcomes?

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

## 1.	The Review Research Questions

The systematic literature reviews should assess the state of knowledge on the following question: 
What is known about the effect of conditionality on cash transfer programme outcomes?

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

## 2.	Methodology

The systematic literature reviews should combine three tracks. These tracks are briefly explained here and further instructions are given below.

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

1.	 **Bibliographic database search:** Searching a previously agreed upon list of academic databases, 
using consistent search strings (see below) that have been tested beforehand and applying inclusion/ exclusion criteria.

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

2.	 **Snowball technique**: Contacting approximately four key experts in the field and asking them 
for recommendations for important studies on the research question. This also includes looking at the experts' websites and publication lists and including relevant studies. Finally, we will be looking for further relevant studies in the bibliographies of the experts' studies and recommended studies. 

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

3.	 **Websites searches**: Searching previously agreed on websites (see below) for relevant studies 
using similar search terms as for the bibliographic databases. This also includes a google search for other grey literature.
Studies will be screened and assessed using the EPPI Reviewer software. After an initial broad screening process that considers overall study design, as well as other broader inclusion/ exclusion criteria, a second round of screening will be conducted. The second stage assessment will depend on the type of study. In the case of impact evaluation studies, the same assessment tool used for those studies retrieved in research question one will be applied. In the case of qualitative and descriptive studies and institutional analysis, an assessment of methodological rigour based on the literature around evaluating qualitative studies will be applied.

The relevant studies that make it through both stages of screening will be summarised in an annotated bibliography. The annotated bibliography lists the relevant studies in table format (see below) and briefly summarises each study in terms of relevant information on methodology, intervention and findings. More specifically, the relevant studies will also be summarised and classified in a table summarising the following information: i) publication details, (ii) description of the intervention and context, (iii) methods, data and sampling, (iv) population, v) findings of relevance to the research question including findings of statistically significant and non-significant impacts and disaggregation (e.g. by gender, age and other characteristics), and vi) contextual factors of importance. A narrative synthesis approach will be applied to synthesise the findings.

## 3.	Bibliographic Database Search The Research Question

The research question is 'What is known about the effect of conditionality on programme outcomes?' Here we want to know whether conditionality and type of conditionality mediates programme impacts. In order to understand it better, the research question can be decomposed into population, intervention and design/ implementation factor:

| Population                                           | Intervention                              | Design/ implementation factor                   |
|------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------|
| Conditional or unconditional cash transfers          | Conditionality and type of conditionality | People living in low or middle income countries |
| and who either receive the intervention or are the   |                                           |                                                 |
| comparison group                                     |                                           |                                                 |
| Cash transfer                                        |                                           |                                                 |
| Social transfer                                      |                                           |                                                 |
| Financial transfer                                   |                                           |                                                 |
| Monetary transfer                                    |                                           |                                                 |
| Child grant/ disability grant/ old-age grant/ social |                                           |                                                 |
| grant                                                |                                           |                                                 |
| Social assistance                                    |                                           |                                                 |
| Social pension                                       |                                           |                                                 |
| Non-contributory pension                             |                                           |                                                 |
| Old age pension                                      |                                           |                                                 |
| Child benefit/ disability benefit/ old-age benefit   |                                           |                                                 |
| Basic income/ minimum income                         |                                           |                                                 |
| UCT/ CCT                                             |                                           |                                                 |
| Income support                                       |                                           |                                                 |

The population has been restricted to people living in low and middle income countries. This includes both beneficiary and control households. The aim of the research question is to analyse the effect of conditionality on cash transfers outcomes. The design/ implementation factors for this sub-question are conditionality and type of conditionality. The table above also includes all synonyms that will be used in the searches.

## Search Strings

The search string will be composed of intervention (part 1), design and implementation factor (part 2) and country filter (example below given for SCOPUS filter). In order to capture all possible cash transfers, search strings should include all synonyms listed above. In terms of design/ implementation factors, we will use conditionality and type of conditionality in the search strings. The following search strings and will be used (they have been tested in the pilot phase):

1.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "Cash transfer*"  OR  "social transfer*"  OR  "financial transfer*"  OR  
"monetary transfer*"  OR  "child grant*"  OR  "disability grant*"  OR  "old age grant*"  OR "social grant*"  OR  "basic grant*"  OR  "minimum income grant*"  OR  "social assistance" OR  welfare  OR  "social pension*"  OR  "non-contributory pension*"  OR  "old age pension*" 
 
OR  "child benefit*"  OR  "disability benefit*"  OR  "old age benefit*"  OR  cct  OR  uct  OR "income support"  )  
2.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ("condition* OR unconditional OR comply OR compliance OR noncompliance OR enforce* OR sanction* OR punitive OR facilitative OR soft OR co-responsibi* OR label* OR contract* OR "family improvement plan* )
3.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( afghanistan  OR  albania  OR  algeria  OR  angola  OR  argentina  
OR  armenia  OR  armenian  OR  aruba  OR  azerbaijan  OR  bangladesh  OR  benin  OR byelarus  OR  byelorussian  OR  belarus  OR  belorussian  OR  belorussia  OR  belize  OR bhutan  OR  bolivia  OR  bosnia  OR  herzegovina  OR  hercegovina  OR  botswana  OR brasil  OR  brazil  OR  bulgaria  OR  "Burkina Faso"  OR  "Burkina Fasso"  OR  "Upper Volta"  OR  burundi  OR  urundi  OR  cambodia  OR  "Khmer Republic"  OR  kampuchea OR  cameroon  OR  cameroons  OR  cameron  OR  camerons  OR  "Cape Verde"  OR  

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base
Conditional
Unconditional Condition* Compliance Non-compliance Enforc* Sanction* Punitive Facilitative Soft Co-responsibilit* Label* Contract Family improvement plan
Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

"Central African Republic"  OR  chad  OR  china  OR  colombia  OR  comoros  OR "Comoro Islands"  OR  comores  OR  mayotte  OR  congo  OR  zaire  OR  "Costa Rica*" OR  "Cote d'Ivoire"  OR  "Ivory Coast"  OR  cuba  OR  djibouti  OR  "French Somaliland" OR  dominica  OR  "Dominican Republic"  OR  "East Timor"  OR  "East Timur"  OR "Timor Leste"  OR  ecuador  OR  egypt  OR  "United Arab Republic"  OR  "El Salvador" OR  eritrea  OR  ethiopia  OR  fiji  OR  gabon  OR  "Gabonese Republic"  OR  gambia  OR gaza  OR  "Georgia Republic"  OR  "Georgian Republic"  OR  ghana  OR  grenada  OR guatemala  OR  guinea  OR  guiana  OR  guyana  OR  haiti  OR  hungary  OR  honduras OR  india  OR  maldives  OR  indonesia  OR  iran  OR  iraq  OR  jamaica  OR  jordan  OR kazakhstan  OR  kazakh  OR  kenya  OR  kiribati  OR  korea  OR  kosovo  OR  kyrgyzstan OR  kirghizia  OR  "Kyrgyz Republic"  OR  kirghiz  OR  kirgizstan  OR  "Lao PDR"  OR laos  OR  lebanon  OR  lesotho  OR  basutoland  OR  liberia  OR  libya  OR  macedonia  OR madagascar  OR  "Malagasy Republic"  OR  malaysia  OR  malaya  OR  malay  OR  sabah OR  sarawak  OR  malawi  OR  mali  OR  "Marshall Islands"  OR  mauritania  OR  mauritius 
 
OR  "Agalega Islands"  OR  mexico  OR  micronesia  OR  "Middle East"  OR  moldova OR  moldovia  OR  moldovian  OR  mongolia  OR  montenegro  OR  morocco  OR  ifni OR  mozambique  OR  myanmar  OR  myanma  OR  burma  OR  namibia  OR  nepal  OR "Netherlands Antilles"  OR  "New Caledonia"  OR  nicaragua  OR  niger  OR  nigeria  OR pakistan  OR  palau  OR  palestine  OR  panama  OR  paraguay  OR  peru  OR  philippines OR  philipines  OR  phillipines  OR  phillippines  OR  "Puerto Ric*"  OR  romania  OR rumania  OR  roumania  OR  rwanda  OR  ruanda  OR  "Saint Lucia"  OR  "St Lucia"  OR "Saint Vincent"  OR  "St Vincent"  OR  grenadines  OR  samoa  OR  "Samoan Islands"  OR "Navigator Island"  OR  "Navigator Islands"  OR  "Sao Tome"  OR  senegal  OR  serbia OR  montenegro  OR  seychelles  OR  "Sierra Leone"  OR  "Sri Lanka"  OR  "Solomon Islands"  OR  somalia  OR  "South Africa"  OR  sudan  OR  suriname  OR  surinam  OR swaziland  OR  syria  OR  tajikistan  OR  tadzhikistan  OR  tadjikistan  OR  tadzhik  OR tanzania  OR  thailand  OR  togo  OR  togolese  republic  OR  tonga  OR  tunisia  OR  turkey OR  turkmenistan  OR  turkmen  OR  uganda  OR  ukraine  OR  uzbekistan  OR  uzbek OR  vanuatu  OR  "New Hebrides"  OR  venezuela  OR  vietnam  OR  "Viet Nam"  OR "West Bank"  OR  yemen  OR  yugoslavia  OR  zambia  OR  zimbabwe )  OR  TITLE-ABS- KEY ( "Developing Countries"  OR  africa  OR  asia  OR  caribbean  OR  "West Indies" OR  "South America"  OR  "Latin America"  OR  "Central America"  OR  developing  OR "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR  "middle income"  OR "low* income"  OR  underserved  OR  "under served"  OR  deprived)  OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (poor* W/1   countr*  OR  nation*  OR  population*  OR  world )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY 
(( developing  OR  "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR "middle income"  OR  "low* income" )  W/1  econom* ))  OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY ( low*  W/1 gdp  OR  gnp  OR  "gross domestic"  OR  "gross national" )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (low W/3  middle  W/3  countr* )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (  lmic  OR  lmics  OR  "third world" OR  "lami countr*"  OR  "transitional countr*" )

4.	 Search strings to run in Scopus: #1 AND #2 AND #3 (limited to 2000 onwards)

Contents

## Inclusion Criteria Stage 1 Screening:

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

Inclusion criteria help in deciding whether a study that has been found is relevant. The following inclusion criteria will be applied during the first stage of the screening process (all criteria need to be satisfied for the study to be included). They will be applied to titles, then abstracts, then full text. All studies that are included on the basis of the first stage screening process, will be included in the Stage 2 screening process. 

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

1.	 **Date**: From 2000
2.	 **Language**: The review is restricted to English studies
3.	 **Population**: People that have received a cash transfer, or control households

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

4.	 **Geographical locations**: Low and middle income countries

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

5.	 **Interventions**: Conditional or unconditional cash transfers. The programmes should be noncontributory, publicly mandated or NGO-provided (so not private transfers, like remittances, or religious donations).
6.	 **Study design**: The study should be an empirical study (i.e. based on data and or fieldwork) or 
an institutional analysis. It can be qualitative or quantitative. [Not theoretical; no literature review; not descriptive] 
7.	 **Design/ implementation factor**: conditionality and type of conditionality
8.	 **Analysis**: Design and implementation factors are explicitly linked to outcomes.

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

The second stage assessment will depend on the type of study. In the case of impact evaluation studies, the same assessment tool used for those studies retrieved in research question one will be applied. In the case of qualitative and descriptive studies and institutional analysis, an assessment of methodological rigour based on the literature around evaluating qualitative studies will be applied.

## List Of Databases Used

•	 SCOPUS (Elsevier). This database includes 5,682 journals, conference proceedings, trade 
publications and book series in the Social Sciences category. 
•	 IDEAS Repec

## 4.	Snowball Technique

The following four people should be contacted and asked for the five most relevant studies on the research question. We will also look at their websites for relevant publications. 

1.	 Berk Ozler, World Bank
2.	 Ariel Fiszbein, World Bank 3.	 Norbert Schady, IDB
4.	 Orazio Attanasio, UCL
Studies shared by experts will be assessed against Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria. We will also check the reference lists of the studies obtained for any further studies that fit the inclusion criteria. 

## 5.	Websites Searches

The following websites/ search engines should be consulted, if possible using the same search strings as for the academic databases. Any studies found on these websites will be assessed against the same Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria.

•	 Google (the first five pages)
•	 World Bank •	 R4D DFID •	 International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (IPC-IG) •	 International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) •	 GSDRC •	 OPM website •	 Transfer Project (UNC Chapel Hill) •	 ECLAC/ CEPAL •	 IADB website •	 ADB website •	 IDS website •	 BLDS website •	 Social Science Research Network •	 3iE website

## 6.	Classification Of Studies

Studies that have passed both screening stages will be classified and described in an annotated bibliography. The classification tables will include the following information:

•	 authors and year of study
•	 geographical coverage •	 detailed description of intervention and context •	 population •	 methods, sampling and data •	 findings on design and implementation factor •	 contextual factors of importance

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Contents

## Sub-Question 2C: What Is The Effect Of Targeting On Programme Outcomes?

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

## 1.	The Review Research Questions

The systematic literature reviews should assess the state of knowledge on the following question: 
What is known about the effect of targeting on cash transfer programme outcomes?

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

## 2.	Methodology

The systematic literature reviews should combine three tracks. These tracks are briefly explained here and further instructions are given below.

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

1.	 **Bibliographic database search:** Searching a previously agreed upon list of academic databases, 
using consistent search strings (see below) that have been tested beforehand and applying inclusion/ exclusion criteria.

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

2.	 **Snowball technique**: Contacting approximately three key experts in the field and asking 
them for recommendations for important studies on the research question. This also includes looking at the experts' websites and publication lists and including relevant studies. Finally, we will be looking for further relevant studies in the bibliographies of the experts' studies and recommended studies. 

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

3.	 **Websites searches**: Searching previously agreed on websites (see below) for relevant studies 
using similar search terms as for the bibliographic databases. This also includes a google search for other grey literature.
Studies will be screened and assessed using the EPPI Reviewer software. After an initial broad screening process that considers overall study design, as well as other broader inclusion/ exclusion criteria, a second round of screening will be conducted. The second stage assessment will depend on the type of study. In the case of impact evaluation studies, the same assessment tool used for those studies retrieved in research question one will be applied. In the case of qualitative and descriptive studies and institutional analysis, an assessment of methodological rigour based on the literature around evaluating qualitative studies will be applied.

The relevant studies that make it through both stages of screening will be summarised in an annotated bibliography. The annotated bibliography lists the relevant studies in table format (see below) and briefly summarises each study in terms of relevant information on methodology, intervention and findings. More specifically, the relevant studies will also be summarised and classified in a table summarising the following information: i) publication details, (ii) description of the intervention and context, (iii) methods, data and sampling, (iv) population, v) findings of relevance to the research question including findings of statistically significant and non-significant impacts and disaggregation (e.g. by gender, age and other characteristics), and vi) contextual factors of importance. A narrative synthesis approach will be applied to synthesise the findings.

## 3.	Bibliographic Database Search The Research Question

The research question is 'What is known about the effect of targeting on cash transfer programme outcomes?' Here we want to know how targeting mediates programme impacts. In order to understand it better, the research question can be decomposed into population, intervention and design/ implementation factor:

| Population                                           | Intervention   | Design/ implementation factor                   |
|------------------------------------------------------|----------------|-------------------------------------------------|
| Conditional or unconditional cash transfers          | Targeting      | People living in low or middle income countries |
| and who either receive the intervention or are the   |                |                                                 |
| comparison group                                     |                |                                                 |
| Cash transfer                                        |                |                                                 |
| Social transfer                                      |                |                                                 |
| Financial transfer                                   |                |                                                 |
| Monetary transfer                                    |                |                                                 |
| Child grant/ disability grant/ old-age grant/ social |                |                                                 |
| grant                                                |                |                                                 |
| Social assistance                                    |                |                                                 |
| Social pension                                       |                |                                                 |
| Non-contributory pension                             |                |                                                 |
| Old age pension                                      |                |                                                 |
| Child benefit/ disability benefit/ old-age benefit   |                |                                                 |
| Basic income/ minimum income                         |                |                                                 |
| UCT/ CCT                                             |                |                                                 |
| Income support                                       |                |                                                 |

The population has been restricted to people living in low and middle income countries. This includes both beneficiary and control households. The aim of the research question is to analyse the effect of targeting on cash transfers outcomes. The design/ implementation factor for this subquestion is targeting. The table above also includes all synonyms that will be used in the searches.

## Search Strings

The search string will be composed of intervention (part 1), design and implementation factor (part 2) and country filter (example below given for SCOPUS filter). In order to capture all possible cash transfers, search strings should include all synonyms listed above. In terms of design/ implementation factors, we will use targeting in the search strings. The following search strings and will be used (they have been tested in the pilot phase):

1.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "Cash transfer*"  OR  "social transfer*"  OR  "financial transfer*"  OR  
"monetary transfer*"  OR  "child grant*"  OR  "disability grant*"  OR  "old age grant*"  OR "social grant*"  OR  "basic grant*"  OR  "minimum income grant*"  OR  "social assistance" OR  welfare  OR  "social pension*"  OR  "non-contributory pension*"  OR  "old age pension*" 
 
OR  "child benefit*"  OR  "disability benefit*"  OR  "old age benefit*"  OR  cct  OR  uct  OR "income support"  )  
2.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY (targeted  OR "geographical target*" OR "categorical target*" OR "poverty 
target*" OR universal OR "community-based target*" OR "CBT" OR "targeting error*" OR "proxy means test*" OR PMT OR "means-test*" OR "beneficiary identification" OR beneficiary W/1 (identification OR selection) OR recertification OR targeting W/1 frequency OR "inclusion error*" OR "exclusion error*" OR "undercoverage" OR "leakage*" OR "over selection" OR "under selection" OR incidence OR "take-up")

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Target* Geographical target*
Categorical target*
Poverty target* Universal Community-based target* Targeting errors Proxy-means test/ PMT Means-test* Beneficiary identification Beneficiary selection Recertification Target* frequency Inclusion error Exclusion error Undercoverage Over selection Under selection Leakage Incidence Take-up
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

3.	 ( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( ( afghanistan  OR  albania  OR  algeria  OR  angola  OR  argentina  OR  
armenia  OR  armenian  OR  aruba  OR  azerbaijan  OR  bangladesh  OR  benin  OR  byelarus OR  byelorussian  OR  belarus  OR  belorussian  OR  belorussia  OR  belize  OR  bhutan  OR bolivia  OR  bosnia  OR  herzegovina  OR  hercegovina  OR  botswana  OR  brasil  OR  brazil OR  bulgaria  OR  "Burkina Faso"  OR  "Burkina Fasso"  OR  "Upper Volta"  OR  burundi OR  urundi  OR  cambodia  OR  "Khmer Republic"  OR  kampuchea  OR  cameroon  OR cameroons  OR  cameron  OR  camerons  OR  "Cape Verde"  OR  "Central African Republic" OR  chad  OR  china  OR  colombia  OR  comoros  OR  "Comoro Islands"  OR  comores  OR mayotte  OR  congo  OR  zaire  OR  "Costa Rica*"  OR  "Cote d'Ivoire"  OR  "Ivory Coast" OR  cuba  OR  djibouti  OR  "French Somaliland"  OR  dominica  OR  "Dominican Republic" OR  "East Timor"  OR  "East Timur"  OR  "Timor Leste"  OR  ecuador  OR  egypt  OR "United Arab Republic"  OR  "El Salvador"  OR  eritrea  OR  ethiopia  OR  fiji  OR  gabon OR  "Gabonese Republic"  OR  gambia  OR  gaza  OR  "Georgia Republic"  OR  "Georgian Republic"  OR  ghana  OR  grenada  OR  guatemala  OR  guinea  OR  guiana  OR  guyana  OR haiti  OR  hungary  OR  honduras  OR  india  OR  maldives  OR  indonesia  OR  iran  OR  iraq OR  jamaica  OR  jordan  OR  kazakhstan  OR  kazakh  OR  kenya  OR  kiribati  OR  korea  OR 
 
kosovo  OR  kyrgyzstan  OR  kirghizia  OR  "Kyrgyz Republic"  OR  kirghiz  OR  kirgizstan  OR 
 
"Lao PDR"  OR  laos  OR  lebanon  OR  lesotho  OR  basutoland  OR  liberia  OR  libya  OR macedonia  OR  madagascar  OR  "Malagasy Republic"  OR  malaysia  OR  malaya  OR  malay OR  sabah  OR  sarawak  OR  malawi  OR  mali  OR  "Marshall Islands"  OR  mauritania OR  mauritius  OR  "Agalega Islands"  OR  mexico  OR  micronesia  OR  "Middle East"  OR moldova  OR  moldovia  OR  moldovian  OR  mongolia  OR  montenegro  OR  morocco  OR ifni  OR  mozambique  OR  myanmar  OR  myanma  OR  burma  OR  namibia  OR  nepal  OR "Netherlands Antilles"  OR  "New Caledonia"  OR  nicaragua  OR  niger  OR  nigeria  OR pakistan  OR  palau  OR  palestine  OR  panama  OR  paraguay  OR  peru  OR  philippines  OR philipines  OR  phillipines  OR  phillippines  OR  "Puerto Ric*"  OR  romania  OR  rumania  OR 
 
roumania  OR  rwanda  OR  ruanda  OR  "Saint Lucia"  OR  "St Lucia"  OR  "Saint Vincent" OR  "St Vincent"  OR  grenadines  OR  samoa  OR  "Samoan Islands"  OR  "Navigator Island"  OR  "Navigator Islands"  OR  "Sao Tome"  OR  senegal  OR  serbia  OR  montenegro OR  seychelles  OR  "Sierra Leone"  OR  "Sri Lanka"  OR  "Solomon Islands"  OR  somalia OR  "South Africa"  OR  sudan  OR  suriname  OR  surinam  OR  swaziland  OR  syria  OR tajikistan  OR  tadzhikistan  OR  tadjikistan  OR  tadzhik  OR  tanzania  OR  thailand  OR  togo 
 
OR  togolese  republic  OR  tonga  OR  tunisia  OR  turkey  OR  turkmenistan  OR  turkmen OR  uganda  OR  ukraine  OR  uzbekistan  OR  uzbek  OR  vanuatu  OR  "New Hebrides" OR  venezuela  OR  vietnam  OR  "Viet Nam"  OR  "West Bank"  OR  yemen  OR  yugoslavia  
OR  zambia  OR  zimbabwe ) ) )  OR  ( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "Developing Countries"  OR  africa OR  asia  OR  caribbean  OR  "West Indies"  OR  "South America"  OR  "Latin America"  OR "Central America"  OR  ( ( developing  OR  "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR underdeveloped  OR  "middle income"  OR  "low* income"  OR  underserved  OR  "under served"  OR  deprived  OR  poor* )  W/1  ( countr*  OR  nation*  OR  population*  OR  world ) ) ) )  OR  ( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( ( ( developing  OR  "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR underdeveloped  OR  "middle income"  OR  "low* income" )  W/1  ( economy  OR  economies ) )  OR  ( low*  W/1  ( gdp  OR  gnp  OR  "gross domestic"  OR  "gross national" ) )  OR  ( low  W/3  middle  W/3  countr* ) ) )  OR  ( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( ( ( lmic  OR  lmics  OR  "third world"  OR  "lami countr*" ) )  OR  "transitional countr*" ) )  TITLE-ABS-KEY ( afghanistan OR  albania  OR  algeria  OR  angola  OR  argentina  OR  armenia  OR  armenian  OR  aruba OR  azerbaijan  OR  bangladesh  OR  benin  OR  byelarus  OR  byelorussian  OR  belarus  OR belorussian  OR  belorussia  OR  belize  OR  bhutan  OR  bolivia  OR  bosnia  OR  herzegovina OR  hercegovina  OR  botswana  OR  brasil  OR  brazil  OR  bulgaria  OR  "Burkina Faso"  OR "Burkina Fasso"  OR  "Upper Volta"  OR  burundi  OR  urundi  OR  cambodia  OR  "Khmer Republic"  OR  kampuchea  OR  cameroon  OR  cameroons  OR  cameron  OR  camerons OR  "Cape Verde"  OR  "Central African Republic"  OR  chad  OR  china  OR  colombia OR  comoros  OR  "Comoro Islands"  OR  comores  OR  mayotte  OR  congo  OR  zaire  OR "Costa Rica*"  OR  "Cote d'Ivoire"  OR  "Ivory Coast"  OR  cuba  OR  djibouti  OR  "French Somaliland"  OR  dominica  OR  "Dominican Republic"  OR  "East Timor"  OR  "East Timur" OR  "Timor Leste"  OR  ecuador  OR  egypt  OR  "United Arab Republic"  OR  "El Salvador" OR  eritrea  OR  ethiopia  OR  fiji  OR  gabon  OR  "Gabonese Republic"  OR  gambia  OR  gaza 
 
OR  "Georgia Republic"  OR  "Georgian Republic"  OR  ghana  OR  grenada  OR  guatemala OR  guinea  OR  guiana  OR  guyana  OR  haiti  OR  hungary  OR  honduras  OR  india  OR  

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

maldives  OR  indonesia  OR  iran  OR  iraq  OR  jamaica  OR  jordan  OR  kazakhstan  OR  
kazakh  OR  kenya  OR  kiribati  OR  korea  OR  kosovo  OR  kyrgyzstan  OR  kirghizia  OR  
"Kyrgyz Republic"  OR  kirghiz  OR  kirgizstan  OR  "Lao PDR"  OR  laos  OR  lebanon  
OR  lesotho  OR  basutoland  OR  liberia  OR  libya  OR  macedonia  OR  madagascar  OR  
"Malagasy Republic"  OR  malaysia  OR  malaya  OR  malay  OR  sabah  OR  sarawak  OR  
malawi  OR  mali  OR  "Marshall Islands"  OR  mauritania  OR  mauritius  OR  "Agalega 
Islands"  OR  mexico  OR  micronesia  OR  "Middle East"  OR  moldova  OR  moldovia  OR  
moldovian  OR  mongolia  OR  montenegro  OR  morocco  OR  ifni  OR  mozambique  OR  
myanmar  OR  myanma  OR  burma  OR  namibia  OR  nepal  OR  "Netherlands Antilles"  
OR  "New Caledonia"  OR  nicaragua  OR  niger  OR  nigeria  OR  pakistan  OR  palau  OR  
palestine  OR  panama  OR  paraguay  OR  peru  OR  philippines  OR  philipines  OR  phillipines 
                                                                                              
OR  phillippines  OR  "Puerto Ric*"  OR  romania  OR  rumania  OR  roumania  OR  rwanda  
OR  ruanda  OR  "Saint Lucia"  OR  "St Lucia"  OR  "Saint Vincent"  OR  "St Vincent"  OR  
grenadines  OR  samoa  OR  "Samoan Islands"  OR  "Navigator Island"  OR  "Navigator 
Islands"  OR  "Sao Tome"  OR  senegal  OR  serbia  OR  montenegro  OR  seychelles  OR  
"Sierra Leone"  OR  "Sri Lanka"  OR  "Solomon Islands"  OR  somalia  OR  "South Africa"  OR 
sudan  OR  suriname  OR  surinam  OR  swaziland  OR  syria  OR  tajikistan  OR  tadzhikistan  
OR  tadjikistan  OR  tadzhik  OR  tanzania  OR  thailand  OR  togo  OR  togolese  republic  OR  
tonga  OR  tunisia  OR  turkey  OR  turkmenistan  OR  turkmen  OR  uganda  OR  ukraine  OR  
uzbekistan  OR  uzbek  OR  vanuatu  OR  "New Hebrides"  OR  venezuela  OR  vietnam  OR  
"Viet Nam"  OR  "West Bank"  OR  yemen  OR  yugoslavia  OR  zambia  OR  zimbabwe )  OR  
TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "Developing Countries"  OR  africa  OR  asia  OR  caribbean  OR  "West 
Indies"  OR  "South America"  OR  "Latin America"  OR  "Central America"  OR  developing  
OR  "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR  "middle income"  OR  
"low* income"  OR  underserved  OR  "under served"  OR  deprived)  OR TITLE-ABS-KEY 
(poor* W/1   countr*  OR  nation*  OR  population*  OR  world )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (( 
developing  OR  "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR  "middle 
income"  OR  "low* income" )  W/1  econom* ))  OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY ( low*  W/1  gdp  OR  
gnp  OR  "gross domestic"  OR  "gross national" )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (low  W/3  middle  
W/3  countr* )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (  lmic  OR  lmics  OR  "third world"  OR  "lami 
countr*"  OR  "transitional countr*" )

4.	 Search strings to run in Scopus: #1 AND #2 AND #3 (limited to 2000 onwards)

## Inclusion Criteria Stage 1 Screening:

Inclusion criteria help in deciding whether a study that has been found is relevant. The following inclusion criteria will be applied during the first stage of the screening process (all criteria need to be satisfied for the study to be included). They will be applied to titles, then abstracts, then full text. All studies that are included on the basis of the first stage screening process, will be included in the Stage 2 screening process. 

1.	 **Date**: From 2000
2.	 **Language**: The review is restricted to English studies
3.	 **Population**: People that have received a cash transfer, or control households
4.	 **Geographical locations**: Low and middle income countries 5.	 **Interventions**: Conditional or unconditional cash transfers. The programmes should be noncontributory, publicly mandated or NGO-provided (so not private transfers, like remittances, or religious donations).
6.	 **Study design**: The study should be an empirical study (i.e. based on data and or fieldwork) or 
an institutional analysis. It can be qualitative or quantitative. [Not theoretical; no literature review; not descriptive] 
7.	 **Design/ implementation factor**: targeting
8.	 **Analysis**: Design and implementation factors are explicitly linked to outcomes.

Contents

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

The second stage assessment will depend on the type of study. In the case of impact evaluation studies, the same assessment tool used for those studies retrieved in research question one will be applied. In the case of qualitative and descriptive studies and institutional analysis, an assessment of methodological rigour based on the literature around evaluating qualitative studies will be applied.

## List Of Databases Used

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

•	 SCOPUS (Elsevier). This database includes 5,682 journals, conference proceedings, trade 
publications and book series in the Social Sciences category. 
•	 IDEAS-Repec

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

## 4.	Snowball Technique

The following three people should be contacted and asked for the five most relevant studies on the research question. We will also look at their websites for relevant publications. 

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

1.	 Emmanuel Skoufias, World Bank
2.	 David Coady, IMF 3.	 Franziska Gassmann, Maastricht University
Studies shared by experts will be assessed against Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria. We will also check the reference lists of the studies obtained for any further studies that fit the inclusion criteria. 

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## 5.	Websites Searches

The following websites/ search engines should be consulted, if possible using the same search strings as for the academic databases. Any studies found on these websites will be assessed against the same Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria.

•	 Google Scholar (the first five pages)
•	 World Bank •	 R4D DFID
•	 International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (IPC-IG) •	 International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) •	 GSDRC •	 Transfer Project (UNC Chapel Hill) •	 ECLAC/ CEPAL •	 IADB website •	 ADB website •	 IDS website •	 BLDS website •	 Social Science Research Network •	 3iE website

## 6.	Classification Of Studies

Studies that have passed both screening stages will be classified and described in an annotated bibliography. The classification tables will include the following information:

•	 authors and year of study
•	 geographical coverage •	 detailed description of intervention and context •	 population •	 methods, sampling and data •	 summary findings on design and implementation factor

Contents

## Sub-Question 2D: What Is The Effect Of Payment Systems On Cash Transfer Programme Outcomes?

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

## 1.	The Review Research Questions

The systematic literature reviews should assess the state of knowledge on the following question: 
What is known about the effect of payment systems on cash transfer programme outcomes?

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

## 2.	Methodology

The systematic literature reviews should combine three tracks. These tracks are briefly explained here and further instructions are given below.

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

1.	 **Bibliographic database search:** Searching a previously agreed upon list of academic databases, 
using consistent search strings (see below) that have been tested beforehand and applying inclusion/ exclusion criteria.

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

2.	 **Snowball technique**: Contacting approximately four key experts in the field and asking them 
for recommendations for important studies on the research question. This also includes looking at the experts' websites and publication lists and including relevant studies. Finally, we will be looking for further relevant studies in the bibliographies of the experts' studies and recommended studies. 

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

3.	 **Websites searches**: Searching previously agreed on websites (see below) for relevant studies 
using similar search terms as for the bibliographic databases. This also includes a google search for other grey literature.
Studies will be screened and assessed using the EPPI Reviewer software. After an initial broad screening process that considers overall study design, as well as other broader inclusion/ exclusion criteria, a second round of screening will be conducted. The second stage assessment will depend on the type of study. In the case of impact evaluation studies, the same assessment tool used for those studies retrieved in research question one will be applied. In the case of qualitative and descriptive studies and institutional analysis, an assessment of methodological rigour based on the literature around evaluating qualitative studies will be applied.

The relevant studies that make it through both stages of screening will be summarised in an annotated bibliography. The annotated bibliography lists the relevant studies in table format (see below) and briefly summarises each study in terms of relevant information on methodology, intervention and findings. More specifically, the relevant studies will also be summarised and classified in a table summarising the following information: i) publication details, (ii) description of the intervention and context, (iii) methods, data and sampling, (iv) population, v) findings of relevance to the research question including findings of statistically significant and non-significant impacts and disaggregation (e.g. by gender, age and other characteristics), and vi) contextual factors of importance. A narrative synthesis approach will be applied to synthesise the findings.

## 3.	Bibliographic Database Search The Research Question

The research question is 'What is known about the effect of payment systems on programme outcomes?' Here we want to know how payment frequency in practice, mode of payment and any irregularities in the payment process mediate programme impacts. In order to understand it better, the research question can be decomposed into population, intervention and design/ implementation factor:

| Population                                         | Intervention    | Design/ implementation factor                   |
|----------------------------------------------------|-----------------|-------------------------------------------------|
| Conditional or unconditional cash transfers        | Payment systems | People living in low or middle income countries |
| and who either receive the intervention or are the |                 |                                                 |
| comparison group                                   |                 |                                                 |
| Cash transfer                                      |                 |                                                 |
| Social transfer                                    |                 |                                                 |
| Financial transfer                                 |                 |                                                 |
| Monetary transfer                                  |                 |                                                 |
| Child grant/ disability grant/ old-age grant/      |                 |                                                 |
| social grant                                       |                 |                                                 |
| Social assistance                                  |                 |                                                 |
| Social pension                                     |                 |                                                 |
| Non-contributory pension                           |                 |                                                 |
| Old age pension                                    |                 |                                                 |
| Child benefit/ disability benefit/ old-age benefit |                 |                                                 |
| Basic income/ minimum income                       |                 |                                                 |
| UCT/ CCT                                           |                 |                                                 |
| Income support                                     |                 |                                                 |

The population has been restricted to people living in low and middle income countries. This includes both beneficiary and control households. The aim of the research question is to analyse the effect of the payment system on cash transfers outcomes. The design/ implementation factors for this sub-question are payment frequency in practice, mode of payment and any irregularities in the payment process. The table above also includes all synonyms that will be used in the searches.

## Search Strings

The search string will be composed of intervention (part 1), design and implementation factor (part 2) and country filter (example below given for SCOPUS filter). In order to capture all possible cash transfers, search strings should include all synonyms listed above. In terms of design/ implementation factors, we will use payment frequency in practice, mode of payment and any irregularities in the payment process and synonyms in the search strings. The following search strings and will be used (they have been tested in the pilot phase):

1.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "Cash transfer*"  OR  "social transfer*"  OR  "financial transfer*"  OR  
"monetary transfer*"  OR  "child grant*"  OR  "disability grant*"  OR  "old age grant*"  OR "social grant*"  OR  "basic grant*"  OR  "minimum income grant*"  OR  "social assistance" OR  welfare  OR  "social pension*"  OR  "non-contributory pension*"  OR  "old age pension*" 
 
OR  "child benefit*"  OR  "disability benefit*"  OR  "old age benefit*"  OR  cct  OR  uct  OR "income support"  )  

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Payment
Regular Irregular Predictab* Reliab* Frequency Delivery One-off Delay* Lump Late Bank Mobile transfer MTO Post office ATM Smart card Electronic card* Biometric card* Bribe Rent Corruption Fraud Cash Savings and Credit Cooperative (SACCO) Microfinance institution
Contents
2.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY (delivery OR payment* OR regular* OR irregular* OR lump* OR 
frequency OR one-off OR delay* OR predict* OR reliab* OR ATM OR late OR bank OR "mobile transfer*" OR MTO OR "post office*" OR "smart card*" OR "electronic card*" OR "biometric card*"  OR bribe* OR rent OR corruption)
Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

3.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( afghanistan  OR  albania  OR  algeria  OR  angola  OR  argentina  
OR  armenia  OR  armenian  OR  aruba  OR  azerbaijan  OR  bangladesh  OR  benin  OR byelarus  OR  byelorussian  OR  belarus  OR  belorussian  OR  belorussia  OR  belize  OR bhutan  OR  bolivia  OR  bosnia  OR  herzegovina  OR  hercegovina  OR  botswana  OR brasil  OR  brazil  OR  bulgaria  OR  "Burkina Faso"  OR  "Burkina Fasso"  OR  "Upper Volta"  OR  burundi  OR  urundi  OR  cambodia  OR  "Khmer Republic"  OR  kampuchea OR  cameroon  OR  cameroons  OR  cameron  OR  camerons  OR  "Cape Verde"  OR "Central African Republic"  OR  chad  OR  china  OR  colombia  OR  comoros  OR "Comoro Islands"  OR  comores  OR  mayotte  OR  congo  OR  zaire  OR  "Costa Rica*" OR  "Cote d'Ivoire"  OR  "Ivory Coast"  OR  cuba  OR  djibouti  OR  "French Somaliland" OR  dominica  OR  "Dominican Republic"  OR  "East Timor"  OR  "East Timur"  OR "Timor Leste"  OR  ecuador  OR  egypt  OR  "United Arab Republic"  OR  "El Salvador" OR  eritrea  OR  ethiopia  OR  fiji  OR  gabon  OR  "Gabonese Republic"  OR  gambia  OR gaza  OR  "Georgia Republic"  OR  "Georgian Republic"  OR  ghana  OR  grenada  OR guatemala  OR  guinea  OR  guiana  OR  guyana  OR  haiti  OR  hungary  OR  honduras OR  india  OR  maldives  OR  indonesia  OR  iran  OR  iraq  OR  jamaica  OR  jordan  OR kazakhstan  OR  kazakh  OR  kenya  OR  kiribati  OR  korea  OR  kosovo  OR  kyrgyzstan OR  kirghizia  OR  "Kyrgyz Republic"  OR  kirghiz  OR  kirgizstan  OR  "Lao PDR"  OR laos  OR  lebanon  OR  lesotho  OR  basutoland  OR  liberia  OR  libya  OR  macedonia  OR madagascar  OR  "Malagasy Republic"  OR  malaysia  OR  malaya  OR  malay  OR  sabah OR  sarawak  OR  malawi  OR  mali  OR  "Marshall Islands"  OR  mauritania  OR  mauritius 
 
OR  "Agalega Islands"  OR  mexico  OR  micronesia  OR  "Middle East"  OR  moldova OR  moldovia  OR  moldovian  OR  mongolia  OR  montenegro  OR  morocco  OR  ifni OR  mozambique  OR  myanmar  OR  myanma  OR  burma  OR  namibia  OR  nepal  OR "Netherlands Antilles"  OR  "New Caledonia"  OR  nicaragua  OR  niger  OR  nigeria  OR pakistan  OR  palau  OR  palestine  OR  panama  OR  paraguay  OR  peru  OR  philippines OR  philipines  OR  phillipines  OR  phillippines  OR  "Puerto Ric*"  OR  romania  OR rumania  OR  roumania  OR  rwanda  OR  ruanda  OR  "Saint Lucia"  OR  "St Lucia"  OR "Saint Vincent"  OR  "St Vincent"  OR  grenadines  OR  samoa  OR  "Samoan Islands"  OR "Navigator Island"  OR  "Navigator Islands"  OR  "Sao Tome"  OR  senegal  OR  serbia OR  montenegro  OR  seychelles  OR  "Sierra Leone"  OR  "Sri Lanka"  OR  "Solomon Islands"  OR  somalia  OR  "South Africa"  OR  sudan  OR  suriname  OR  surinam  OR swaziland  OR  syria  OR  tajikistan  OR  tadzhikistan  OR  tadjikistan  OR  tadzhik  OR tanzania  OR  thailand  OR  togo  OR  togolese  republic  OR  tonga  OR  tunisia  OR  turkey OR  turkmenistan  OR  turkmen  OR  uganda  OR  ukraine  OR  uzbekistan  OR  uzbek OR  vanuatu  OR  "New Hebrides"  OR  venezuela  OR  vietnam  OR  "Viet Nam"  OR "West Bank"  OR  yemen  OR  yugoslavia  OR  zambia  OR  zimbabwe )  OR  TITLE-ABS- KEY ( "Developing Countries"  OR  africa  OR  asia  OR  caribbean  OR  "West Indies" OR  "South America"  OR  "Latin America"  OR  "Central America"  OR  developing  OR "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR  "middle income"  OR "low* income"  OR  underserved  OR  "under served"  OR  deprived)  OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (poor* W/1   countr*  OR  nation*  OR  population*  OR  world )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (( developing  OR  "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR "middle income"  OR  "low* income" )  W/1  econom* ))  OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY ( low*  W/1 gdp  OR  gnp  OR  "gross domestic"  OR  "gross national" )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (low W/3  middle  W/3  countr* )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (  lmic  OR  lmics  OR  "third world" OR  "lami countr*"  OR  "transitional countr*" )

4.	 Search strings to run in Scopus: #1 AND #2 AND #3 (limited to 2000 onwards)

Contents

## Inclusion Criteria Stage 1 Screening:

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

Inclusion criteria help in deciding whether a study that has been found is relevant. The following inclusion criteria will be applied during the first stage of the screening process (all criteria need to be satisfied for the study to be included). They will be applied to titles, then abstracts, then full text. All studies that are included on the basis of the first stage screening process, will be included in the Stage 2 screening process. 

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

## 1.	 **Date**: From 2000

2.	 **Language**: The review is restricted to English studies
3.	 **Population**: People that have received a cash transfer, or control households

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

4.	 **Geographical locations**: Low and middle income countries

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

5.	 **Interventions**: Conditional or unconditional cash transfers. The programmes should be noncontributory, publicly mandated or NGO-provided (so not private transfers, like remittances, or religious donations)
6.	 **Study design**: The study should be an empirical study (i.e. based on data and or fieldwork) or 
an institutional analysis. It can be qualitative or quantitative. [Not theoretical; no literature review; not descriptive]
7.	 **Design/ implementation factor**: payment frequency in practice, mode of payment and any 
irregularities in the payment process
8.	 **Analysis**: Design and implementation factors are explicitly linked to outcomes

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

The second stage assessment will depend on the type of study. In the case of impact evaluation studies, the same assessment tool used for those studies retrieved in research question one will be applied. In the case of qualitative and descriptive studies and institutional analysis, an assessment of methodological rigour based on the literature around evaluating qualitative studies will be applied.

## List Of Databases Used

•	 SCOPUS (Elsevier). This database includes 5,682 journals, conference proceedings, trade 
publications and book series in the Social Sciences category. 
•	 IDEAS-Repec

## 4.	Snowball Technique

The following four people should be contacted and asked for the five most relevant studies on the research question. We will also look at their websites for relevant publications. 

1.	 Clare O'Brien, OPM
2.	 Alan Gelb, Centre for Global Development 3.	 Stephen Devereux, IDS
4.	 Gabriele Smith, Development Pathways 
Studies shared by experts will be assessed against Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria. We will also check the reference lists of the studies obtained for any further studies that fit the inclusion criteria. 

## 5.	Websites Searches

The following websites/ search engines should be consulted, if possible using the same search strings as for the academic databases. Any studies found on these websites will be assessed against the same Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria.

•	 Google (the first five pages)
•	 World Bank •	 R4D DFID •	 International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (IPC-IG) •	 International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) •	 GSDRC •	 OPM website •	 Transfer Project (UNC Chapel Hill) •	 ECLAC/ CEPAL •	 IADB website •	 ADB website •	 IDS website •	 BLDS website •	 Social Science Research Network

## 6.	Classification Of Studies

Studies that have passed both screening stages will be classified and described in an annotated bibliography. The classification tables will include the following information:

•	 authors and year of study
•	 geographical coverage •	 detailed description of intervention and context •	 population •	 methods, sampling and data •	 summary findings on design and implementation factor

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Contents

## Sub-Question 2E: What Is The Effect Of Grievance Mechanisms And Programme Governance On Programme Outcomes?

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

## 1.	The Review Research Questions

The systematic literature reviews should assess the state of knowledge on the following question: 
What is known about the effect of grievance mechanisms on programme outcomes?

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

## 2.	Methodology

The systematic literature reviews should combine three tracks. These tracks are briefly explained here and further instructions are given below.

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

1.	 **Bibliographic database search:** Searching a previously agreed upon list of academic databases, 
using consistent search strings (see below) that have been tested beforehand and applying inclusion/ exclusion criteria.

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

2.	 **Snowball technique**: Contacting approximately three key experts in the field and asking 
them for recommendations for important studies on the research question. This also includes looking at the experts' websites and publication lists and including relevant studies. Finally, we will be looking for further relevant studies in the bibliographies of the experts' studies and recommended studies. 

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

3.	 **Websites searches**: Searching previously agreed on websites (see below) for relevant studies 
using similar search terms as for the bibliographic databases. This also includes a google search for other grey literature.
Studies will be screened and assessed using the EPPI Reviewer software. After an initial broad screening process that considers overall study design, as well as other broader inclusion/ exclusion criteria, a second round of screening will be conducted. The second stage assessment will depend on the type of study. In the case of impact evaluation studies, the same assessment tool used for those studies retrieved in research question one will be applied. In the case of qualitative and descriptive studies and institutional analysis, an assessment of methodological rigour based on the literature around evaluating qualitative studies will be applied.

The relevant studies that make it through both stages of screening will be summarised in an annotated bibliography. The annotated bibliography lists the relevant studies in table format (see below) and briefly summarises each study in terms of relevant information on methodology, intervention and findings. More specifically, the relevant studies will also be summarised and classified in a table summarising the following information: i) publication details, (ii) description of the intervention and context, (iii) methods, data and sampling, (iv) population, v) findings of relevance to the research question including findings of statistically significant and non-significant impacts and disaggregation (e.g. by gender, age and other characteristics), and vi) contextual factors of importance. A narrative synthesis approach will be applied to synthesise the findings.

Contents

## 3.	Bibliographic Database Search The Research Question

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

The research question is 'What is known about the effect of grievance mechanisms on programme outcomes?' Here we want to know how design of grievance mechanisms mediate programme impacts.

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

In order to understand it better, the research question can be decomposed into population, intervention and design/ implementation factor:

| Population                                           | Intervention         | Design/ implementation factor                   |
|------------------------------------------------------|----------------------|-------------------------------------------------|
| Conditional or unconditional cash transfers          | Grievance mechanisms | People living in low or middle income countries |
| and who either receive the intervention or are the   |                      |                                                 |
| comparison group                                     |                      |                                                 |
| Annex 3                                              |                      |                                                 |
| Summary table                                        |                      |                                                 |
| of searches                                          |                      |                                                 |
| and reasons for                                      |                      |                                                 |
| exclusion and flow                                   |                      |                                                 |
| diagrams                                             |                      |                                                 |
| Annex 4                                              |                      |                                                 |
| Summary of the                                       |                      |                                                 |
| evidence base                                        |                      |                                                 |
| Grievance                                            |                      |                                                 |
| Complaint                                            |                      |                                                 |
| Appeal                                               |                      |                                                 |
| Committee                                            |                      |                                                 |
| Resolution                                           |                      |                                                 |
| Redressal                                            |                      |                                                 |
| Social audit                                         |                      |                                                 |
| Community meeting                                    |                      |                                                 |
| Community monitoring                                 |                      |                                                 |
| Appeal                                               |                      |                                                 |
| Spot checks                                          |                      |                                                 |
| Feedback                                             |                      |                                                 |
| Cash transfer                                        |                      |                                                 |
| Social transfer                                      |                      |                                                 |
| Financial transfer                                   |                      |                                                 |
| Monetary transfer                                    |                      |                                                 |
| Child grant/ disability grant/ old-age grant/ social |                      |                                                 |
| grant                                                |                      |                                                 |
| Social assistance                                    |                      |                                                 |
| Social pension                                       |                      |                                                 |
| Non-contributory pension                             |                      |                                                 |
| Old age pension                                      |                      |                                                 |
| Child benefit/ disability benefit/ old-age benefit   |                      |                                                 |
| Basic income/ minimum income                         |                      |                                                 |
| UCT / CCT                                            |                      |                                                 |
| Income support                                       |                      |                                                 |
| Annex 5                                              |                      |                                                 |
| Evidence:                                            |                      |                                                 |
| results tables for                                   |                      |                                                 |
| overall effects                                      |                      |                                                 |
| disaggregated by                                     |                      |                                                 |
| gender, and cash                                     |                      |                                                 |
| transfer design and                                  |                      |                                                 |
| implementation                                       |                      |                                                 |
| effects                                              |                      |                                                 |

The population has been restricted to people living in low and middle income countries. This includes both beneficiary and control households. The aim of the research question is to analyse the effect of the grievance mechanisms on cash transfers outcomes. The design/ implementation factor for this sub-question is grievance mechanisms. The table above also includes all synonyms that will be used in the searches.

## Search Strings

The search string will be composed of intervention (part 1), design and implementation factor (part 2) and country filter (example below given for SCOPUS filter). In order to capture all possible cash transfers, search strings should include all synonyms listed above. In terms of design/ implementation factors, we will use grievance mechanisms and synonyms in the search strings. The following search strings and will be used (they have been tested in the pilot phase):

1.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "Cash transfer*"  OR  "social transfer*"  OR  "financial transfer*"  OR  
"monetary transfer*"  OR  "child grant*"  OR  "disability grant*"  OR  "old age grant*"  OR "social grant*"  OR  "basic grant*"  OR  "minimum income grant*"  OR  "social assistance" OR  welfare  OR  "social pension*"  OR  "non-contributory pension*"  OR  "old age pension*" 
 
OR  "child benefit*"  OR  "disability benefit*"  OR  "old age benefit*"  OR  cct  OR  uct  OR "income support"  )  
2.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY (Grievance* OR Complaint* OR Appeal* OR Committee* OR Resol* OR 
Redress* OR "Social audit*" OR "Community meeting*" OR "Community monitoring" OR "Spot check*" OR "Feedback")
3.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( afghanistan  OR  albania  OR  algeria  OR  angola  OR  argentina  OR  
armenia  OR  armenian  OR  aruba  OR  azerbaijan  OR  bangladesh  OR  benin  OR  byelarus 
 
OR  byelorussian  OR  belarus  OR  belorussian  OR  belorussia  OR  belize  OR  bhutan  OR bolivia  OR  bosnia  OR  herzegovina  OR  hercegovina  OR  botswana  OR  brasil  OR  brazil OR  bulgaria  OR  "Burkina Faso"  OR  "Burkina Fasso"  OR  "Upper Volta"  OR  burundi OR  urundi  OR  cambodia  OR  "Khmer Republic"  OR  kampuchea  OR  cameroon  OR cameroons  OR  cameron  OR  camerons  OR  "Cape Verde"  OR  "Central African Republic" OR  chad  OR  china  OR  colombia  OR  comoros  OR  "Comoro Islands"  OR  comores  OR  

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

mayotte  OR  congo  OR  zaire  OR  "Costa Rica*"  OR  "Cote d'Ivoire"  OR  "Ivory Coast"  
OR  cuba  OR  djibouti  OR  "French Somaliland"  OR  dominica  OR  "Dominican Republic"  
OR  "East Timor"  OR  "East Timur"  OR  "Timor Leste"  OR  ecuador  OR  egypt  OR  
"United Arab Republic"  OR  "El Salvador"  OR  eritrea  OR  ethiopia  OR  fiji  OR  gabon  
OR  "Gabonese Republic"  OR  gambia  OR  gaza  OR  "Georgia Republic"  OR  "Georgian 
Republic"  OR  ghana  OR  grenada  OR  guatemala  OR  guinea  OR  guiana  OR  guyana  
OR  haiti  OR  hungary  OR  honduras  OR  india  OR  maldives  OR  indonesia  OR  iran  OR 
                                                                                            
iraq  OR  jamaica  OR  jordan  OR  kazakhstan  OR  kazakh  OR  kenya  OR  kiribati  OR  
korea  OR  kosovo  OR  kyrgyzstan  OR  kirghizia  OR  "Kyrgyz Republic"  OR  kirghiz  OR  
kirgizstan  OR  "Lao PDR"  OR  laos  OR  lebanon  OR  lesotho  OR  basutoland  OR  liberia  
OR  libya  OR  macedonia  OR  madagascar  OR  "Malagasy Republic"  OR  malaysia  OR  
malaya  OR  malay  OR  sabah  OR  sarawak  OR  malawi  OR  mali  OR  "Marshall Islands"  
OR  mauritania  OR  mauritius  OR  "Agalega Islands"  OR  mexico  OR  micronesia  OR  
"Middle East"  OR  moldova  OR  moldovia  OR  moldovian  OR  mongolia  OR  montenegro  
OR  morocco  OR  ifni  OR  mozambique  OR  myanmar  OR  myanma  OR  burma  OR  
namibia  OR  nepal  OR  "Netherlands Antilles"  OR  "New Caledonia"  OR  nicaragua  OR  
niger  OR  nigeria  OR  pakistan  OR  palau  OR  palestine  OR  panama  OR  paraguay  OR  
peru  OR  philippines  OR  philipines  OR  phillipines  OR  phillippines  OR  "Puerto Ric*"  
OR  romania  OR  rumania  OR  roumania  OR  rwanda  OR  ruanda  OR  "Saint Lucia"  
OR  "St Lucia"  OR  "Saint Vincent"  OR  "St Vincent"  OR  grenadines  OR  samoa  OR  
"Samoan Islands"  OR  "Navigator Island"  OR  "Navigator Islands"  OR  "Sao Tome"  OR  
senegal  OR  serbia  OR  montenegro  OR  seychelles  OR  "Sierra Leone"  OR  "Sri Lanka"  
OR  "Solomon Islands"  OR  somalia  OR  "South Africa"  OR  sudan  OR  suriname  OR  
surinam  OR  swaziland  OR  syria  OR  tajikistan  OR  tadzhikistan  OR  tadjikistan  OR  
tadzhik  OR  tanzania  OR  thailand  OR  togo  OR  togolese  republic  OR  tonga  OR  tunisia  
OR  turkey  OR  turkmenistan  OR  turkmen  OR  uganda  OR  ukraine  OR  uzbekistan  OR  
uzbek  OR  vanuatu  OR  "New Hebrides"  OR  venezuela  OR  vietnam  OR  "Viet Nam"  
OR  "West Bank"  OR  yemen  OR  yugoslavia  OR  zambia  OR  zimbabwe )  OR  TITLE-
ABS-KEY ( "Developing Countries"  OR  africa  OR  asia  OR  caribbean  OR  "West Indies"  
OR  "South America"  OR  "Latin America"  OR  "Central America"  OR  developing  OR  
"less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR  "middle income"  OR  
"low* income"  OR  underserved  OR  "under served"  OR  deprived)  OR TITLE-ABS-KEY 
(poor* W/1   countr*  OR  nation*  OR  population*  OR  world )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (( 
developing  OR  "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR  "middle 
income"  OR  "low* income" )  W/1  econom* ))  OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY ( low*  W/1  gdp  OR  
gnp  OR  "gross domestic"  OR  "gross national" )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (low  W/3  middle  
W/3  countr* )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (  lmic  OR  lmics  OR  "third world"  OR  "lami 
countr*"  OR  "transitional countr*" )

4.	 Search strings to run in Scopus: #1 AND #2 AND #3 (limited to 2000 onwards)

## Inclusion Criteria Stage 1 Screening:

Inclusion criteria help in deciding whether a study that has been found is relevant. The following inclusion criteria will be applied during the first stage of the screening process (all criteria need to be satisfied for the study to be included). They will be applied to titles, then abstracts, then full text. All studies that are included on the basis of the first stage screening process, will be included in the Stage 2 screening process. 

1.	 **Date**: From 2000
2.	 **Language**: The review is restricted to English studies
3.	 **Population**: People that have received a cash transfer, or control households
4.	 **Geographical locations**: Low and middle income countries 5.	 **Interventions**: Conditional or unconditional cash transfers. The programmes should be noncontributory, publicly mandated or NGO-provided (so not private transfers, like remittances, or religious donations).

Contents

6.	 **Study design**: The study should be an empirical study (i.e. based on data and or fieldwork) or 
an institutional analysis. It can be qualitative or quantitative. [Not theoretical; no literature review; not descriptive] 

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

7.	 **Design/ implementation factor**: grievance mechanisms
8.	 **Analysis**: Design and implementation factors are explicitly linked to outcomes.

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

The second stage assessment will depend on the type of study. In the case of impact evaluation studies, the same assessment tool used for those studies retrieved in research question one will be applied. In the case of qualitative and descriptive studies and institutional analysis, an assessment of methodological rigour based on the literature around evaluating qualitative studies will be applied.

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

## List Of Databases Used

•	 SCOPUS (Elsevier). This database includes 5,682 journals, conference proceedings, trade 
publications and book series in the Social Sciences category. 

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

•	 IDEAS-Repec

## 4.	Snowball Technique

The following four people should be contacted and asked for the five most relevant studies on the research question. We will also look at their websites for relevant publications. 

1.	 Valentina Barca, OPM

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

2.	 Nicola Jones, ODI 3.	 Francisco Ayala, Ayala Consulting
4.	 Sam Hickey, University of Manchester
Studies shared by experts will be assessed against Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria. We will also check the reference lists of the studies obtained for any further studies that fit the inclusion criteria. 

## 5.	Websites Searches

The following websites/ search engines should be consulted, if possible using the same search strings as for the academic databases. Any studies found on these websites will be assessed against the same Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria.

•	 Google (the first five pages)
•	 World Bank •	 R4D DFID •	 International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (IPC-IG) •	 International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) •	 GSDRC •	 OPM website •	 Transfer Project (UNC Chapel Hill) •	 ECLAC/ CEPAL •	 IADB website •	 ADB website •	 IDS website •	 BLDS website •	 Social Science Research Network

## 6.	Classification Of Studies

Studies that have passed both screening stages will be classified and described in an annotated bibliography. The classification tables will include the following information:

•	 authors and year of study
•	 geographical coverage •	 detailed description of intervention and context •	 population •	 methods, sampling and data •	 summary findings on design and implementation factor

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Contents

## Sub-Question 2F: What Is The Effect Of Complementary And Supplyside Services On Programme Outcomes?

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

## 1.	The Review Research Questions

The systematic literature reviews should assess the state of knowledge on the following question: 
What is known about the effect of complementary services on programme outcomes?

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

## 2.	Methodology

The systematic literature reviews should combine three tracks. These tracks are briefly explained here and further instructions are given below.

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

1.	 **Bibliographic database search:** Searching a previously agreed upon list of academic databases, 
using consistent search strings (see below) that have been tested beforehand and applying inclusion/ exclusion criteria.

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

2.	 **Snowball technique**: Contacting approximately five key experts in the field and asking them 
for recommendations for important studies on the research question. This also includes looking at the experts' websites and publication lists and including relevant studies. Finally, we will be looking for further relevant studies in the bibliographies of the experts' studies and recommended studies. 

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

3.	 **Websites searches**: Searching previously agreed on websites (see below) for relevant studies 
using similar search terms as for the bibliographic databases. This also includes a google search for other grey literature.
Studies will be screened and assessed using the EPPI Reviewer software. After an initial broad screening process that considers overall study design, as well as other broader inclusion/ exclusion criteria, a second round of screening will be conducted. The second stage assessment will depend on the type of study. In the case of impact evaluation studies, the same assessment tool used for those studies retrieved in research question one will be applied. In the case of qualitative and descriptive studies and institutional analysis, an assessment of methodological rigour based on the literature around evaluating qualitative studies will be applied.

The relevant studies that make it through both stages of screening will be summarised in an annotated bibliography. The annotated bibliography lists the relevant studies in table format (see below) and briefly summarises each study in terms of relevant information on methodology, intervention and findings. More specifically, the relevant studies will also be summarised and classified in a table summarising the following information: i) publication details, (ii) description of the intervention and context, (iii) methods, data and sampling, (iv) population, v) findings of relevance to the research question including findings of statistically significant and non-significant impacts and disaggregation (e.g. by gender, age and other characteristics), and vi) contextual factors of importance. A narrative synthesis approach will be applied to synthesise the findings.

## 3.	Bibliographic Database Search The Research Question

The research question is 'What is known about the effect of complementary services on programme outcomes?' Here we want to know how complementary services mediate programme impacts. In order to understand it better, the research question can be decomposed into population, intervention and design/ implementation factor:

| Population                                           | Intervention           | Design/ implementation factor                   |
|------------------------------------------------------|------------------------|-------------------------------------------------|
| Conditional or unconditional cash transfers          | Complementary services | People living in low or middle income countries |
| and who either receive the intervention or are the   |                        |                                                 |
| comparison group                                     |                        |                                                 |
| Cash transfer                                        |                        |                                                 |
| Social transfer                                      |                        |                                                 |
| Financial transfer                                   |                        |                                                 |
| Monetary transfer                                    |                        |                                                 |
| Child grant/ disability grant/ old-age grant/ social |                        |                                                 |
| grant                                                |                        |                                                 |
| Social assistance                                    |                        |                                                 |
| Social pension                                       |                        |                                                 |
| Non-contributory pension                             |                        |                                                 |
| Old age pension                                      |                        |                                                 |
| Child benefit/ disability benefit/ old-age benefit   |                        |                                                 |
| Basic income/ minimum income                         |                        |                                                 |
| UCT/ CCT                                             |                        |                                                 |

The population has been restricted to people living in low and middle income countries. This includes both beneficiary and control households. The aim of the research question is to analyse the effect of complementary services on cash transfers outcomes. The design/ implementation factor for this sub-question is complementary services. The table above also includes all synonyms that will be used in the searches.

## Search Strings

The search string will be composed of intervention (part 1), design and implementation factor (part 2) and country filter (example below given for SCOPUS filter). In order to capture all possible cash transfers, search strings should include all synonyms listed above. In terms of design/ implementation factors, we will complementary services and synonyms in the search strings. The following search strings and will be used (they have been tested in the pilot phase):

1.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "Cash transfer*"  OR  "social transfer*"  OR  "financial transfer*"  OR  
"monetary transfer*"  OR  "child grant*"  OR  "disability grant*"  OR  "old age grant*"  OR "social grant*"  OR  "basic grant*"  OR  "minimum income grant*"  OR  "social assistance" OR  welfare  OR  "social pension*"  OR  "non-contributory pension*"  OR  "old age pension*" 
 
OR  "child benefit*"  OR  "disability benefit*"  OR  "old age benefit*"  OR  cct  OR  uct  OR "income support"  )  

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Complementary services Accompanying services
Training
Campaign Supply-side Job search Job matching Income-generating opportunit* Livelihoods support Financial services Financial literacy Microcredit Skills training Social work Social care Nutrition services Sensitisation Information campaign Information meeting Linkage* Case management Social service Social support Child care Parenting class Legal aid One stop shop
Coaching 
Housing
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

2.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ("complementary service*" OR training* OR "accompanying service*" 
OR campaign* OR supply-side OR "job search*" OR "job match*" OR "income-generating opportunit*" OR "livelihood* W/1 support" OR "financial service*" OR "financial literacy" OR "microcredit" OR microfinance OR "skill* training*" OR "social work" OR "social care" OR "social service*" OR "social support" OR "nutrition service*" OR "sensitisation" OR sensitization OR "information campaign*" OR "information meeting*" OR "case management" OR linkage* OR housing OR "child care" OR "parenting class*" OR "legal aid" OR "one stop shop" OR coach*)

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

3.	 TITLE-ABS-KEY ( afghanistan  OR  albania  OR  algeria  OR  angola  OR  argentina  
OR  armenia  OR  armenian  OR  aruba  OR  azerbaijan  OR  bangladesh  OR  benin  OR byelarus  OR  byelorussian  OR  belarus  OR  belorussian  OR  belorussia  OR  belize  OR bhutan  OR  bolivia  OR  bosnia  OR  herzegovina  OR  hercegovina  OR  botswana  OR brasil  OR  brazil  OR  bulgaria  OR  "Burkina Faso"  OR  "Burkina Fasso"  OR  "Upper Volta"  OR  burundi  OR  urundi  OR  cambodia  OR  "Khmer Republic"  OR  kampuchea OR  cameroon  OR  cameroons  OR  cameron  OR  camerons  OR  "Cape Verde"  OR "Central African Republic"  OR  chad  OR  china  OR  colombia  OR  comoros  OR "Comoro Islands"  OR  comores  OR  mayotte  OR  congo  OR  zaire  OR  "Costa Rica*" OR  "Cote d'Ivoire"  OR  "Ivory Coast"  OR  cuba  OR  djibouti  OR  "French Somaliland" OR  dominica  OR  "Dominican Republic"  OR  "East Timor"  OR  "East Timur"  OR "Timor Leste"  OR  ecuador  OR  egypt  OR  "United Arab Republic"  OR  "El Salvador" OR  eritrea  OR  ethiopia  OR  fiji  OR  gabon  OR  "Gabonese Republic"  OR  gambia  OR gaza  OR  "Georgia Republic"  OR  "Georgian Republic"  OR  ghana  OR  grenada  OR guatemala  OR  guinea  OR  guiana  OR  guyana  OR  haiti  OR  hungary  OR  honduras OR  india  OR  maldives  OR  indonesia  OR  iran  OR  iraq  OR  jamaica  OR  jordan  OR kazakhstan  OR  kazakh  OR  kenya  OR  kiribati  OR  korea  OR  kosovo  OR  kyrgyzstan OR  kirghizia  OR  "Kyrgyz Republic"  OR  kirghiz  OR  kirgizstan  OR  "Lao PDR"  OR laos  OR  lebanon  OR  lesotho  OR  basutoland  OR  liberia  OR  libya  OR  macedonia  OR madagascar  OR  "Malagasy Republic"  OR  malaysia  OR  malaya  OR  malay  OR  sabah OR  sarawak  OR  malawi  OR  mali  OR  "Marshall Islands"  OR  mauritania  OR  mauritius OR  "Agalega Islands"  OR  mexico  OR  micronesia  OR  "Middle East"  OR  moldova OR  moldovia  OR  moldovian  OR  mongolia  OR  montenegro  OR  morocco  OR  ifni OR  mozambique  OR  myanmar  OR  myanma  OR  burma  OR  namibia  OR  nepal  OR "Netherlands Antilles"  OR  "New Caledonia"  OR  nicaragua  OR  niger  OR  nigeria  OR pakistan  OR  palau  OR  palestine  OR  panama  OR  paraguay  OR  peru  OR  philippines OR  philipines  OR  phillipines  OR  phillippines  OR  "Puerto Ric*"  OR  romania  OR  
rumania  OR  roumania  OR  rwanda  OR  ruanda  OR  "Saint Lucia"  OR  "St Lucia"  OR "Saint Vincent"  OR  "St Vincent"  OR  grenadines  OR  samoa  OR  "Samoan Islands"  OR "Navigator Island"  OR  "Navigator Islands"  OR  "Sao Tome"  OR  senegal  OR  serbia OR  montenegro  OR  seychelles  OR  "Sierra Leone"  OR  "Sri Lanka"  OR  "Solomon Islands"  OR  somalia  OR  "South Africa"  OR  sudan  OR  suriname  OR  surinam  OR swaziland  OR  syria  OR  tajikistan  OR  tadzhikistan  OR  tadjikistan  OR  tadzhik  OR tanzania  OR  thailand  OR  togo  OR  togolese  republic  OR  tonga  OR  tunisia  OR  turkey OR  turkmenistan  OR  turkmen  OR  uganda  OR  ukraine  OR  uzbekistan  OR  uzbek OR  vanuatu  OR  "New Hebrides"  OR  venezuela  OR  vietnam  OR  "Viet Nam"  OR "West Bank"  OR  yemen  OR  yugoslavia  OR  zambia  OR  zimbabwe )  OR  TITLE-ABS- KEY ( "Developing Countries"  OR  africa  OR  asia  OR  caribbean  OR  "West Indies" OR  "South America"  OR  "Latin America"  OR  "Central America"  OR  developing  OR "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR  "middle income"  OR "low* income"  OR  underserved  OR  "under served"  OR  deprived)  OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (poor* W/1   countr*  OR  nation*  OR  population*  OR  world )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (( developing  OR  "less* developed"  OR  "under developed"  OR  underdeveloped  OR "middle income"  OR  "low* income" )  W/1  econom* ))  OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY ( low*  W/1 gdp  OR  gnp  OR  "gross domestic"  OR  "gross national" )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (low W/3  middle  W/3  countr* )   OR  TITLE-ABS-KEY (  lmic  OR  lmics  OR  "third world" OR  "lami countr*"  OR  "transitional countr*" )

4.	 Search strings to run in Scopus: #1 AND #2 AND #3 (limited to 2000 onwards)

Contents

## Inclusion Criteria Stage 1 Screening:

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews

Inclusion criteria help in deciding whether a study that has been found is relevant. The following inclusion criteria will be applied during the first stage of the screening process (all criteria need to be satisfied for the study to be included). They will be applied to titles, then abstracts, then full text. All studies that are included on the basis of the first stage screening process, will be included in the Stage 2 screening process. 

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

1.	 **Date**: From 2000
2.	 **Language**: The review is restricted to English studies
3.	 **Population**: People that have received a cash transfer, or control households

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams

4.	 **Geographical locations**: Low and middle income countries

Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

5.	 **Interventions**: Conditional or unconditional cash transfers. The programmes should be noncontributory, publicly mandated or NGO-provided (so not private transfers, like remittances, or religious donations).
6.	 **Study design**: The study should be an empirical study (i.e. based on data and or fieldwork) or 
an institutional analysis. It can be qualitative or quantitative. [Not theoretical; no literature review; not descriptive] 
7.	 **Design/ implementation factor**: Complementary services
8.	 **Analysis**: Design and implementation factors are explicitly linked to outcomes.

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

The second stage assessment will depend on the type of study. In the case of impact evaluation studies, the same assessment tool used for those studies retrieved in research question one will be applied. In the case of qualitative and descriptive studies and institutional analysis, an assessment of methodological rigour based on the literature around evaluating qualitative studies will be applied.

## List Of Databases Used

•	 SCOPUS (Elsevier). This database includes 5,682 journals, conference proceedings, trade 
publications and book series in the Social Sciences category. 
•	 IDEAS-Repec

## 4. Snowball Technique

The following people should be contacted and asked for the five most relevant studies on the research question. We will also look at their websites for relevant publications. 

1.	 Jenn Yablonksi, UNICEF
2.	 Elena Gaia, UNICEF 3.	 Fabio Veras Soares, IPC
4.	 Norbert Schady, IADB 5.	 Orazio Attansio, UCL 6.	 Carine Clert, World Bank
Studies shared by experts will be assessed against Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria. We will also check the reference lists of the studies obtained for any further studies that fit the inclusion criteria. 

## 5.	Websites Searches

The following websites/ search engines should be consulted, if possible using the same search strings as for the academic databases. Any studies found on these websites will be assessed against the same Stage 1 and Stage 2 screening criteria.

•	 Google (the first five pages)
•	 World Bank •	 R4D DFID •	 International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (IPC-IG) •	 International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) •	 GSDRC •	 OPM website •	 Transfer Project (UNC Chapel Hill) •	 ECLAC/ CEPAL •	 IADB website •	 ADB website •	 IDS website •	 BLDS website •	 Social Science Research Network

## 6.	Classification Of Studies

Studies that have passed both screening stages will be classified and described in an annotated bibliography. The classification tables will include the following information:

•	 authors and year of study
•	 geographical coverage •	 detailed description of intervention and context •	 population •	 methods, sampling and data •	 summary findings on design and implementation factor

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Part 2. Study Assessment Tools

As described in detail in Chapter 4, in the second stage of screening of the studies retrieved, separate tools were used to assess studies for risk of bias (for counterfactual impact analysis studies) and quality (for qualitative papers, considered under the searches for studies on the links between policy design and implementation factors and outcomes). Both tools are reported below.

| Domain                                                                                      | Key questions to consider   |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------|
| Selection                                                                                   |                             |
| bias and                                                                                    |                             |
| confounding                                                                                 |                             |
| Random assignment to treatment and comparison, differences not greater than                 |                             |
| expected by chance and units of random assignment match units of analysis.                  |                             |
| Extensive information on equivalence of treatment and control groups, only minor            |                             |
| differences exist and adequate attempts to deal with differences in observables and         |                             |
| unobservables.                                                                              |                             |
| - Does the comparison                                                                       |                             |
| group provide a reliable                                                                    |                             |
| counterfactual?                                                                             |                             |
| - Are all relevant observable                                                               |                             |
| and unobservable differences                                                                |                             |
| between groups accounted                                                                    |                             |
| for?                                                                                        |                             |
| Information on equivalence of groups but obvious differences exist for important            |                             |
| variables and no / inadequate attempt to correct for selection bias.                        |                             |
| No information on group equivalence.                                                        |                             |
| Attrition bias                                                                              |                             |
| Is any non-random attrition                                                                 |                             |
| in the sample a threat to                                                                   |                             |
| validity?                                                                                   |                             |
| Careful statistical controls used for effects of attrition, or attrition is minimal so that |                             |
| danger of differential attrition is addressed.                                              |                             |
| Possible differential attrition between intervention and control is identified and          |                             |
| discussed and is not likely to lead to significant bias.                                    |                             |
| High                                                                                        |                             |
| Attrition from treatment or comparison group is moderate or high (~30% or more) and         |                             |
| no attempt to determine effects of attrition on outcomes.                                   |                             |
| Statistical                                                                                 |                             |
| significance                                                                                |                             |
| Are there biases leading to                                                                 |                             |
| Type I or Type II errors?                                                                   |                             |
| No unit of analysis errors (e.g. account is taken for cluster survey design),               |                             |
| heterogeneity between groups considered, sample size sufficiently large and                 |                             |
| regression addresses heteroscedasticity (e.g. robust standard errors).                      |                             |
| High                                                                                        |                             |
| Unit of analysis errors, no account for heterogeneity, insignificant results could be due   |                             |
| to insufficient sample size and / or no account for heteroscedasticity.                     |                             |
| Other bias                                                                                  |                             |
| Are results subject to other                                                                |                             |
| forms of bias?                                                                              |                             |
| Study appears to be largely free of other sources of bias.                                  | Low                         |
| There is at least one significant risk of bias in the study (e.g. performance bias,         |                             |
| detection bias, outcome reporting bias, courtesy bias etc.)                                 |                             |

Source: Authors' elaboration based on The Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool (2011), Yoong et al. (2012) and Hombrados and Wadddington (2012). 

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools
Low
Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
High
Low
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base
Low
Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
High

## Table A2.2 Framework For Assessing Rigour Of Qualitative, Institutional Analysis And Descriptive Studies Considering Design And Implementation Features 1

| Domain                                       | Questions to guide assessment                |
|----------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|
| (no concerns, some concerns, or              |                                              |
| major concerns)                              |                                              |
| Clarity and                                  |                                              |
| transparency of                              |                                              |
| approach                                     |                                              |
| Are there clear research questions or        |                                              |
| objectives set out either explicitly or      |                                              |
| implicitly?                                  |                                              |
| Are the data/information sources and         |                                              |
| collection processes made clear?             |                                              |
| Is there an analytical/ conceptual           |                                              |
| framework?                                   |                                              |
| Are the approaches or methods of analysis    |                                              |
| discussed?                                   |                                              |
| Is there a discussion of limitations of the  |                                              |
| evidence and what remains unknown or         |                                              |
| unclear?                                     |                                              |
| Credibility of findings                      | Do the conclusions logically follow from the |
| data/information and analysis presented?     |                                              |
| Is there a clear discussion of how           |                                              |
| assessments or judgements have been          |                                              |
| reached?                                     |                                              |
| Is corroborating evidence used to support or |                                              |
| refine findings?                             |                                              |
| Acknowledgement of                           |                                              |
| potential internal bias                      |                                              |
| or limitations                               |                                              |
| Are all risks of bias among any subjects     |                                              |
| involved acknowledged (e.g. due to           |                                              |
| exaggeration, anecdotal reports, Hawthorne   |                                              |
| effects, sensitivity of issues discussed)?   |                                              |
| Is potential bias among the researchers      |                                              |
| considered?                                  |                                              |
| External validity                            |                                              |
| 1                                            |                                              |
| Is the methodological approach, including    |                                              |
| sample size and composition, appropriate to  |                                              |
| the level of claims made?                    |                                              |
| Is evidence given to support any claims of   |                                              |
| wider inference?                             |                                              |
| Is there a discussion of limitations of      |                                              |
| drawing wider inference?                     |                                              |

Source: Authors' elaboration drawing on DFID (2014) and Spencer et al. (2003)

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Annex 3 Summary Table Of Searches And Reasons For Exclusion And Flow Diagrams

Table A3.1 below provides an overview of the number of studies at different stages of the review for each sub-question. The table shows studies retrieved from each of the sources as set out in the search protocols. Most studies were retrieved from bibliographic databases, ranging from 305 studies (question 2e) to 10,623 studies (question 1d). However, many of these were subsequently found to not be relevant and were excluded at Stage 1 screening. From the database searches, between 7 (2e) and 68 (2b) were included in the Stage 2 screening. The table also shows the number of studies retrieved from other sources, including website searches, review studies and snowballing, and expert suggestions. Studies identified as relevant from other sub-questions were also included. A comparatively high number of studies were retrieved from websites, where the emphasis was placed on retrieving the grey literature, with as many as 79 (1a) studies retrieved. With regards to responses from experts, when asked to suggest seminal studies on the subject, we received up to 9 (1a, 1b, 1c and 1e) relevant references, and for some of the subquestions we did not receive any relevant suggestions (2a, 2e and 2f). The final column in Table A3.1 indicates the total number of studies that underwent risk of bias / quality assessment. The flow diagrams that follow Table A3.1 provide a detailed summary of the number of studies that passed through the different stages for each sub-question, from retrieval to assessment. These are then followed by an accompanying set of tables that summarise the specific reasons for exclusion of studies from bibliographic databases during Stage 1 screening (Tables A3.2a, A3.2b, A3.3a, A3.3b). As can be seen, the main reasons for exclusion during the title and abstract screening relate to the intervention (64% of those excluded for studies under 1a to 1f and 86% for 2a to 2f). During full text screening, the study design was one of the main reasons for exclusion, along with studies being relevant instead for other sub-questions (for studies identified under 2d and 2f). As highlighted in the flow diagrams, a number of studies were also excluded during stage Two screening on account of them not meeting all of the original inclusion criteria. The main reason for studies being excluded at this stage was linked to the study design not meeting the basic inclusion criteria (around three quarters of all cases). After that, 8% were excluded for not reporting on the outcome or design and implementation feature being considered. In order of importance, other reasons for exclusion included no access (6%), the intervention (5%), geographical location (4%), being a remaining duplicate (2%) and language (1%). For sub-questions 1c to 1f, a Text Mining tool in the EPPI software was used in order to assist in screening studies. In brief, the approach involves carrying out the first stage of screening to a random sample of at least 1,000 studies. The text mining tool then uses information from these 

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

studies and, based on the screening decisions made, identifies relevant studies for further screening, upon which manual screening is carried out. Further details of how this process was implemented is provided in Chapter 4. As regards to the flow diagrams, details are therefore given in the diagrams for questions 1c to 1f of the number of studies excluded through the Text Mining process.

Studies retrieved from other sources

| Database retrieval   | Database studies: Stage 1    |
|----------------------|------------------------------|
| Screening            |                              |
| Papers               |                              |
| retrieved:           |                              |
| Websites             |                              |
| Additional           |                              |
| duplicates           |                              |
| Total                |                              |
| screened             |                              |
| at Title &           |                              |
| Abstract             |                              |
| Studies              |                              |
| excluded             |                              |
| at Title &           |                              |
| Abstract             |                              |
| Studies              |                              |
| excluded             |                              |
| at Full              |                              |
| Text                 |                              |
| Database             |                              |
| studies              |                              |
| entering             |                              |
| Stage 2              |                              |
| Screening            |                              |
| Question             | Studies                      |
| retrieved            |                              |
| after                |                              |
| initial de-          |                              |
| duplication          |                              |
| Q1a                  | 4,956                        |
| Q1b                  | 950                          |
| Q1c                  | 4,197                        |
| Q1d                  | 10,623                       |
| Q1e                  | 5,865                        |
| Q1f                  | 4,060                        |
| Q2a                  | 561                          |
| Q2b                  | 1,671                        |
| Q2c                  | 742                          |
| Q2d                  | 1,906                        |
| Q2e                  | 305                          |
| Q2f                  | 1,533                        |

Key for sub-questions: 1a = monetary poverty and inequality; 1b = education; 1c = health and nutrition; 1d = savings, investment and production; 1e = employment; 1f = empowerment; 2a = core design features; 2b = conditionalities; 2c = targeting features; 2d = payment systems; 2e = grievance mechanisms and programme governance; 2f = complementary interventions and supply-side services.

## Contents

Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools
Studies 
undergoing 
Risk of Bias 
assessment
Papers 
retrieved: 
Expert 
suggestions
Papers 
retrieved: 
From other 
subquestions
Papers 
retrieved: 
Review 
studies & 
snow 
balling
Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Figure A3.1 Flow Diagram For Question 1A On Monetary Poverty

Studies retrieved from database search following 
initial de-duplication (n = 4,956)
Further duplicates removed (n = 106)
Studies from database search screened by title and abstract (n = 4,850)
Studies excluded (n = 4,615)
Studies from database search screened at full text (n = 235)
Studies excluded (n = 183)
Studies from database search entering stage two screening (n = 52)
Studies excluded (n = 102)
Studies retrieved from other sources (n = 125), including: •	 Websites (n = 79) •	 Snowballing (n = 10) •	 Expert suggestions (n = 9) •	 From other sub-questions (n = 27)
Studies undergoing Risk of Bias / Quality Assessment (n = 75) Studies passing (n = 34) Final studies reporting on selected indicators (n = 44) Additional 'passed' studies identified as relevant from other sub-questions (n = 27)
Total number of studies considered for extraction under this outcome (n = 61)
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Figure A3.2 Flow Diagram For Question 1B On Education

Studies retrieved from database search following 
initial de-duplication (n = 950)
Further duplicates removed (n = 4)
Studies from database search screened by title and abstract (n = 946)
Studies excluded (n = 829)
Studies from database search screened at full text (n = 117)
Studies excluded (n = 52)
Studies from database search entering stage two screening (n = 65)
Studies excluded (n = 163)
Studies retrieved from other sources (n = 218), including: •	 Websites (n = 57) •	 Snowballing (n = 16) •	 Expert suggestions (n = 9) •	 From other sub-questions (n = 136)
Studies undergoing Risk of Bias / Quality Assessment (n=120) Studies passing (n = 74) Final studies reporting on selected indicators (n = 42) Additional 'passed' studies identified as relevant from other sub-questions (n = 25)
Total number of studies considered for extraction 
under this outcome (n = 99)
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Figure A3.3 Flow Diagram For Question 1C On Health And Nutrition

Studies retrieved from database search following 
initial de-duplication (n = 4,197)
Further duplicates removed (n = 60)
Studies from database search screened by title and abstract using Text Mining (n = 4,137)
Excluded through initial screening (n = 1,773) Excluded through Text Mining (n = 2,295)
Total excluded (n = 4,068)
Studies from database search screened at full text (n = 69)
Studies excluded at full text (n = 10)
Studies from database search entering stage two screening (n = 59)
Studies excluded (n = 42)
Studies retrieved from other sources (n = 108), including: •	 Websites (n = 59) •	 Snowballing (n = 10) •	 Expert suggestions (n = 9) •	 From other sub-questions (n = 30)
Studies undergoing Risk of Bias / Quality Assessment (n=125) Studies passing (n = 64) Final studies reporting on selected indicators (n = 41) Additional 'passed' studies identified as relevant from other sub-questions (n = 25)
Total number of studies considered for extraction 
under this outcome (n = 89)
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Figure A3.4 Flow Diagram For Question 1D On Investment, Savings And Production

Studies retrieved from database search following
initial de-duplication (n = 10,623)
Further duplicates removed (n = 64)
Studies from database search screened by title and abstract using Text Mining (n = 10,559)
Excluded through initial screening (n = 1,527) Excluded through Text Mining (n = 8,982)
Total excluded (n = 10,509)
Studies from database search screened at full text (n = 50)
Studies excluded at full text (n = 32)
Studies from database search entering stage two screening (n = 18)
Studies excluded (n = 25)
Studies retrieved from other sources (n = 49), including: •	 Websites (n = 34) •	 Snowballing (n = 2) •	 Expert suggestions (n = 7) •	 From other sub-questions (n = 6)
Studies undergoing Risk of Bias / Quality Assessment (n=42) Studies passing (n = 32) Final studies reporting on selected indicators (n = 27) Additional 'passed' studies identified as relevant from other sub-questions (n = 5)
Total number of studies considered for extraction under this outcome (n = 37)
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Figure A3.5 Flow Diagram For Question 1E On Employment

Studies retrieved from database search following
initial de-duplication (n = 5,865)
Further duplicates removed (n = 6)
Studies from database search screened by title and abstract using Text Mining (n = 5,859)
Excluded through initial screening (n = 1,122) Excluded through Text Mining (n = 4,643)
Total excluded (n = 5,765)
Studies from database search screened at full text (n = 94)
Studies excluded at full text (n = 46)
Studies from database search entering stage two screening (n = 48)
Studies excluded (n = 60)
Studies retrieved from other sources (n = 106), including: •	 Websites (n = 39) •	 Snowballing (n = 4) •	 Expert suggestions (n = 9) •	 From other sub-questions (n = 54)
Studies undergoing Risk of Bias / Quality Assessment (n=93) Studies passing (n = 61) Final studies reporting on selected indicators (n = 74) Additional 'passed' studies identified as relevant from other sub-questions (n = 19)
Total number of studies considered for extraction under this outcome (n = 80)
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Figure A3.6 Flow Diagram For Question 1F On Empowerment

Studies retrieved from database search following
initial de-duplication (n = 4,060)
Further duplicates removed (n = 9)
Studies from database search screened by title and abstract using Text Mining (n = 4,051)
Excluded through initial screening (n = 1,204) Excluded through Text Mining (n = 2,773)
Total excluded (n = 3,977)
Studies from database search screened at full text (n = 74)
Studies excluded at full text (n = 20)
Studies from database search entering stage two screening (n = 54)
Studies excluded (n = 153)
Studies retrieved from other sources (n = 155), including: •	 Websites (n = 24) •	 Snowballing (n = 3) •	 Expert suggestions (n = 8) •	 From other sub-questions (n = 120)
Studies undergoing Risk of Bias / Quality Assessment (n=56) Studies passing (n = 36) Final studies reporting on selected indicators (n = 31) Additional 'passed' studies identified as relevant from other sub-questions (n = 18)
Total number of studies considered for extraction under this outcome (n = 54)
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Figure A3.7 Flow Diagram For Question 2A On Core Design Parameters

Studies retrieved from database search following
initial de-duplication (n = 561)
Further duplicates removed (n = 2)
Studies from database search screened by title and abstract (n = 559)
Studies excluded (n = 476)
Studies from database search screened at full text (n = 83)
Studies excluded (n = 30)
Studies from database search entering stage two screening (n = 53)
Studies excluded (n = 86)
Studies retrieved from other sources (n = 75), including: •	 Websites (n = 23) •	 Snowballing (n = 1) •	 Expert suggestions (n = 0) •	 From other sub-questions (n = 51)
Studies undergoing Risk of Bias / Quality Assessment (n = 42) Studies passing (n = 25) Final studies from which evidence extracted (across all outcome areas) (n = 40) Additional 'passed' studies identified as relevant from other sub-questions (n = 16)
Total number of studies considered for extraction under this outcome (n = 41)
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Figure A3.8 Flow Diagram For Question 2B On Conditionality

Studies retrieved from database search following
initial de-duplication (n = 1,671)
Further duplicates removed (n = 7)
Studies from database search screened by title and abstract (n = 1,664)
Studies excluded (n = 1,559)
Studies from database search screened at full text (n = 105)
Studies excluded (n = 37)
Studies from database search entering stage two screening (n = 68)
Studies excluded (n = 60)
Studies retrieved from other sources (n = 17), including: •	 Websites (n = 8) •	 Snowballing (n = 0) •	 Expert suggestions (n = 2) •	 From other sub-questions (n = 7)
Studies undergoing Risk of Bias / Quality Assessment (n = 25) Studies passing (n = 19) Final studies from which evidence extracted (across all outcome areas) (n = 11) Additional 'passed' studies identified as relevant from other sub-questions (n = 2)
Total number of studies considered for extraction under this outcome (n = 21)
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Figure A3.9 Flow Diagram For Question 2C On Targeting

Studies retrieved from database search following
initial de-duplication (n = 742)
Further duplicates removed (n = 4)
Studies from database search screened by title and abstract (n = 738)
Studies excluded (n = 652)
Studies from database search screened at full text (n = 86)
Studies excluded (n = 32)
Studies from database search entering stage two screening (n = 54)
Studies excluded (n = 76)
Studies retrieved from other sources (n = 32), including: •	 Websites (n = 21) •	 Snowballing (n = 0) •	 Expert suggestions (n = 1) •	 From other sub-questions (n = 10)
Studies undergoing Risk of Bias / Quality Assessment (n = 10) Studies passing (n = 6) Final studies from which evidence extracted (across all outcome areas) (n = 1) Additional 'passed' studies identified as relevant from other sub-questions (n = 1)
Total number of studies considered for extraction under this outcome (n = 7)
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Figure A3.10 Flow Diagram For Question 2D On Payment Systems

Studies retrieved from database search following 
initial de-duplication (n = 1,906)
Further duplicates removed (n = 3)
Studies from database search screened by title andabstract (n = 1,903)
Studies excluded (n = 1,800)
Studies from database search screened at full text (n = 103)
Studies excluded (n = 81)
Studies from database search entering stage two screening (n = 22)
Studies excluded (n = 26)
Studies retrieved from other sources (n = 18), including: •	 Websites (n = 13) •	 Snowballing (n = 0) •	 Expert suggestions (n = 1) •	 From other sub-questions (n = 4)
Studies undergoing Risk of Bias / Quality Assessment (n = 14) Studies passing (n = 4) Final studies from which evidence extracted (across all outcome areas) (n = 2) Additional 'passed' studies identified as relevant from other sub-questions (n = 0)
Total number of studies considered for extraction under this outcome (n = 4)
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Studies retrieved from database search following
initial de-duplication (n = 305)
Further duplicates removed (n = 0)
Studies from database search screened by title and abstract (n = 305)
Studies excluded (n = 297)
Studies from database search screened at full text (n = 8)
Studies excluded (n = 1)
Studies from database search entering stage two screening (n = 7)
Studies excluded (n = 13)
Studies retrieved from other sources (n = 8), including: •	 Websites (n = 5) •	 Snowballing (n = 0) •	 Expert suggestions (n = 0) •	 From other sub-questions (n = 3)
Studies undergoing Risk of Bias / Quality Assessment (n = 2) Studies passing (n = 0) Final studies from which evidence extracted (across all outcome areas) (n = 0) Additional 'passed' studies identified as relevant from other sub-questions (n = 0)
Total number of studies considered for extraction under this outcome (n = 0)
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Studies retrieved from database search following
initial de-duplication (n = 1,533)
Further duplicates removed (n = 3)
Studies from database search screened by title and abstract (n = 1,530)
Studies excluded (n = 1466)
Studies from database search screened at full text (n = 64)
Studies excluded (n = 35)
Studies from database search entering stage two screening (n = 29)
Studies excluded (n = 59)
Studies retrieved from other sources (n = 51), including: •	 Websites (n = 7) •	 Snowballing (n = 1) •	 Expert suggestions (n = 0) •	 From other sub-questions (n = 43)
Studies undergoing Risk of Bias / Quality Assessment (n = 21) Studies passing (n = 11) Final studies from which evidence extracted (across all outcome areas) (n = 8) Additional 'passed' studies identified as relevant from other sub-questions (n = 3)
Total number of studies considered for extraction under this outcome (n = 14)
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Tables Summarising Reasons For Exclusion (Studies Retrieved From Bibliographic Database Searches)

Total 
screened 
at Title & 
Abstract
Date
Language Population
Geographical 
location
Intervention
Study 
design
Outcome
Relevant 
for 
different 
subquestion
Q1a
4,850
0
1
0
170
3894
75
78
394
3
4615
NA
4615
235
Q1b
946
0
0
1
21
726
20
17
42
2
829
NA
829
117
Q1c
4,137
2
0
312
103
395
181
731
0
49
1773
2295
4068
69
Q1d
10,559
0
0
2
22
1095
73
39
293
3
1527
8982
10509
50
Q1e
5,859
0
0
0
40
892
35
34
121
0
1122
4643
5765
94
Q1f
4,051
0
0
39
66
106
107
845
27
14
1204
2773
3977
74
Totals
30,402
2
1
354
422
7108
491
1744
877
71
11070
18693
29763
639
% of subtotal excluded
0%
0%
3%
4%
64%
4%
16%
8%
1%
| Date                | Language Population   | Geographical    |
|---------------------|-----------------------|-----------------|
| location            |                       |                 |
| Intervention        | Study design          | Design /        |
| implementation      |                       |                 |
| feature             |                       |                 |
| Total               |                       |                 |
| screened            |                       |                 |
| at Title &          |                       |                 |
| Abstract            |                       |                 |
| Q2a                 |                       |                 |
| 559                 | 0                     | 0               |
| Q2b                 |                       |                 |
| 1664                | 0                     | 4               |
| Q2c                 |                       |                 |
| 738                 | 0                     | 1               |
| Q2d                 |                       |                 |
| 1,903               | 0                     | 0               |
| Q2e                 |                       |                 |
| 305                 | 0                     | 0               |
| Q2f                 |                       |                 |
| 1,530               | 0                     | 2               |
| Totals              | 6699                  | 0               |
| % of subtotal       |                       |                 |
| excluded            |                       |                 |
| 0%                  | 0%                    | 0%              |
| Contents            |                       |                 |
| Annex 1             |                       |                 |
| Overview of         |                       |                 |
| existing cash       |                       |                 |
| transfers reviews   |                       |                 |
| Review              |                       |                 |
| study               |                       |                 |
| Sub total           | Exclude               |                 |
| on text             |                       |                 |
| mining              |                       |                 |
| Total               |                       |                 |
| excluded            |                       |                 |
| Total               |                       |                 |
| screened            |                       |                 |
| at full             |                       |                 |
| text                |                       |                 |
| Annex 2             |                       |                 |
| Detailed search     |                       |                 |
| protocols and study |                       |                 |
| assessment tools    |                       |                 |
| Annex 3             |                       |                 |
| Summary table       |                       |                 |
| of searches         |                       |                 |
| and reasons for     |                       |                 |
| exclusion and flow  |                       |                 |
| diagrams            |                       |                 |
| Annex 4             |                       |                 |
| Summary of the      |                       |                 |
| evidence base       |                       |                 |
| Review              |                       |                 |
| study               |                       |                 |
| Analysis            | Total                 |                 |
| excluded            |                       |                 |
| Total               |                       |                 |
| screened            |                       |                 |
| at full             |                       |                 |
| text                |                       |                 |
| Relevant            |                       |                 |
| for                 |                       |                 |
| different           |                       |                 |
| sub-                |                       |                 |
| question            |                       |                 |
| Annex 5             |                       |                 |
| Evidence:           |                       |                 |
| results tables for  |                       |                 |
| overall effects     |                       |                 |
| disaggregated by    |                       |                 |
| gender, and cash    |                       |                 |
| transfer design and |                       |                 |
| implementation      |                       |                 |
| effects             |                       |                 |

## Table A3.3A. Reasons For Exclusion: Stage 1 Screening Full Text (Sub-Questions 1A-1F)

Total 
screened 
at Full 
Text
Date
Language Population
Geographical 
location
Intervention
Study 
design
Outcome
Relevant 
for 
different 
subquestion
Q1a
235
0
0
0
3
7
107
13
0
0
53
0
183
52
Q1b
117
0
3
0
0
3
22
5
0
2
8
9
52
65
Q1c
69
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
10
59
Q1d
50
0
0
0
0
0
17
9
0
1
5
0
32
18
Q1e
94
0
1
0
1
4
27
4
0
2
0
7
46
48
Q1f
74
0
0
0
0
0
18
2
0
0
0
0
20
54
Totals
639
0
4
0
4
14
201
33
0
5
66
16
343
296
% of total excluded
0%
1%
0%
1%
4%
59%
10%
0%
1%
19%
5%
| Date                | Language Population   | Geographical    |
|---------------------|-----------------------|-----------------|
| location            |                       |                 |
| Intervention        | Study                 |                 |
| design              |                       |                 |
| Design /            |                       |                 |
| implementation      |                       |                 |
| factor              |                       |                 |
| Total               |                       |                 |
| screened            |                       |                 |
| at Full             |                       |                 |
| Text                |                       |                 |
| Relevant            |                       |                 |
| for                 |                       |                 |
| different           |                       |                 |
| sub-                |                       |                 |
| question            |                       |                 |
| Q2a                 |                       |                 |
| 83                  | 0                     | 0               |
| Q2b                 |                       |                 |
| 105                 | 0                     | 0               |
| Q2c                 |                       |                 |
| 86                  | 0                     | 0               |
| Q2d                 |                       |                 |
| 103                 | 0                     | 0               |
| Q2e                 |                       |                 |
| 8                   | 0                     | 0               |
| Q2f                 |                       |                 |
| 64                  | 0                     | 0               |
| Totals              | 449                   | 0               |
| % of total          |                       |                 |
| excluded            |                       |                 |
| 0%                  | 0%                    | 0%              |
| Contents            |                       |                 |
| Additional          |                       |                 |
| duplicate           |                       |                 |
| Review              |                       |                 |
| study               |                       |                 |
| No access           | Total                 |                 |
| excluded            |                       |                 |
| Total               |                       |                 |
| entering            |                       |                 |
| Stage 2             |                       |                 |
| screening           |                       |                 |
| Annex 1             |                       |                 |
| Overview of         |                       |                 |
| existing cash       |                       |                 |
| transfers reviews   |                       |                 |
| Annex 2             |                       |                 |
| Detailed search     |                       |                 |
| protocols and study |                       |                 |
| assessment tools    |                       |                 |
| Annex 3             |                       |                 |
| Summary table       |                       |                 |
| of searches         |                       |                 |
| and reasons for     |                       |                 |
| exclusion and flow  |                       |                 |
| diagrams            |                       |                 |
| Annex 4             |                       |                 |
| Summary of the      |                       |                 |
| evidence base       |                       |                 |
| Additional          |                       |                 |
| duplicate           |                       |                 |
| Analysis            | No                    |                 |
| access              |                       |                 |
| Total               |                       |                 |
| excluded            |                       |                 |
| Total               |                       |                 |
| entering            |                       |                 |
| Stage 2             |                       |                 |
| screening           |                       |                 |
| Annex 5             |                       |                 |
| Evidence:           |                       |                 |
| results tables for  |                       |                 |
| overall effects     |                       |                 |
| disaggregated by    |                       |                 |
| gender, and cash    |                       |                 |
| transfer design and |                       |                 |
| implementation      |                       |                 |
| effects             |                       |                 |
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools

## Annex 4 Summary Of The Evidence Base

Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

This annex summarises the evidence base, both in terms of the full list of studies that passed the inclusion criteria and the screening for risk of bias and quality assessment therefore making it to the annotated bibliography and, within those, those studies from which evidence was extracted on the selected indicators that were reviewed. The tables below summarise the evidence base across the following dimensions:

•	 Source of retrieval (Table A4.1)
•	 Type of study (Table A4.2) •	 Geographical coverage for the full list of studies (Table A4.3)

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

•	 Geographical and programme coverage for the studies included at the data extraction stage 
(Tables A4.4-A4.9)

## Table A4.1 Full List Of Studies By Source Of Retrieval

Bibliographic 
databases
Websites
Review studies
Expert 
recommendations
Other  
sub-questions
Total
Outcome areas
Poverty
16
3
4
6
32
61
Education
6
13
10
8
62
99
Health and nutrition
30
12
6
4
37
89
Savings, investment and production
14
9
2
6
6
37
Employment
16
16
2
7
39
80
Empowerment
3
5
2
7
37
54
Design and implementation features
Core design features
7
2
1
0
31
41
Conditionality
17
1
0
0
3
21
Targeting
5
0
0
1
1
7
Payment mechanisms
1
1
0
1
0
3
Grievance mechanisms and programme governance
0
0
0
0
0
0
Complementary interventions and supply-side services
1
1
0
0
12
14

Note: studies retrieved from 'other sub-questions' were studies that met the inclusion criteria and passed the risk of bias or quality assessment screening but were retrieved under a different sub-question. In some cases they were relevant for that other sub-question and in other cases they were not.

## Table A4.2 Full List Of Studies By Type Of Paper

Unpublished 
papers
PhD theses
Book 
chapters
Total
Working 
papers
Reports 
and formal 
evaluations
Peer 
reviewed 
journal 
articles
Outcome areas
Poverty
17
16
10
8
10
0
61
Education
39
25
11
12
11
1
99
Health and nutrition
44
13
10
11
11
0
89
Savings, investment and production
10
9
4
7
7
0
37
Employment
29
22
9
7
12
1
80
Empowerment
26
11
4
5
7
1
54
Design and implementation features
Core design features
20
9
6
3
3
0
41
Conditionality
12
9
0
0
0
0
21
Targeting
2
3
0
1
1
0
7
Payment mechanisms
1
1
0
0
1
0
3
Grievance mechanisms and programme governance
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Complementary interventions and supply-side services
8
5
0
0
1
0
14

Note: Unpublished papers is a residual category for unpublished studies that were not written as working papers, reports or evaluations (e.g. unpublished studies produced by an academic department of a university).

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Table A4.3 Geographical Coverage (Among Full List Of Studies)

Sub-Saharan 
Africa
East Asia & 
Pacific
Europe & 
Central Asia
Latin 
America & 
Caribbean
Outcome areas
Poverty
23
3
2
33
0
2
63
Education
23
7
2
65
2
3
102
Health and nutrition
28
1
1
62
0
3
95
Savings, investment and production
21
0
1
14
0
1
37
Employment
23
4
2
52
1
2
84
Empowerment
21
1
1
35
0
2
60
Design and implementation features
Core design features
12
5
0
24
1
1
43
Conditionality
7
1
0
11
1
0
20
Targeting
3
1
0
2
1
0
7
Payment mechanisms
2
0
0
0
0
1
3
Grievance mechanisms and programme governance
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Complementary interventions and supply-side services
4
0
0
10
0
0
14

Note: Figures based on countries covered by studies and so will not exactly match with other tables as some studies report on multiple interventions and/or countries.

Contents
South Asia
Total
Middle East 
& North 
Africa
Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Table A4.4 Geographical And Programme Coverage Among Studies From Which Evidence Extracted - Latin America And Caribbean

Region / country
Programme
Poverty
Education
Health and 
nutrition
Savings, 
investment 
and 
production
Latin America & Caribbean
Bolivia
Bonosol pension
1
1
Bolivia
Bolivida
1
Brazil
Bolsa Alimentação
1
Brazil
Bolsa Escola
1
Brazil
Bolsa Familia
3
1
Brazil
Benefício de Prestação Continuada (BPC)
1
1
Colombia
Famílias en Acción
2
5
2
4
Colombia
Subsidios Condicionados a la Asistencia Escolar (SCAE)
2
2
Dominican Republic
Solidarity Programme
1
Ecuador
Bono de Desarollo Humano (BDH)
2
7
3
3
1
Ecuador
WFP Colombian refugee RCT (WFP CT)
1
2
2
El Salvador
Comunidades Solidarias Rurales (CSR)
1
1
Honduras
Programa de Asignación Familiar (PRAF)
2
1
5
2
Honduas
Bono 10,000
1
1
Jamaica
Programme of Advancement Through Health and Education (PATH)
Mexico
PROGRESA / Oportunidades
6
19
12
5
13
8
Mexico
PROCAMPO
1
2
1
1
Mexico
Programa Apoyo Alimentario 
(PAL)
2
1
Mexico
Programa de Atención a Adultos Mayores en Zonas Rurales
Nicaragua
Red de Protección Social (RPS)
4
7
4
1
8
3
Nicaragua
Atención a Crisis
2
3
1
1
5
Paraguay
Tekoporã
1
Peru
Juntos
1
1
1
1
2
TOTALS
24
51
30
9
49
19

Note: Totals do not always exactly correspond to number of unique studies from which evidence extracted as some studies report on more than one intervention.

Contents
Employment
Empowerment
Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
1

## Table A4.5 Geographical And Programme Coverage Among Studies From Which Evidence Extracted - Sub-Saharan Africa

Region / country
Programme
Poverty
Education
Health and 
nutrition
Savings, 
investment 
and 
production
Sub-Saharan Africa
Burkina Faso Nahouri Cash Transfers Pilot 
Project
1
1
Ghana
Innovation for poverty randomised trial
1
1
1
Ghana
Livelihood empowerment against poverty (LEAP)
1
2
1
2
Kenya
Give Directly experiment
1
1
1
Kenya
Hunger Safety Net Programme (HSNP)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Kenya
Orphan and Vulnerable Children Cash Transfer (OVC- CT)
Lesotho
Child Grant Programme
1
1
1
2
2
Malawi
Social Cash Transfer Programme (SCTP)
1
2
1
1
2
Malawi
The Zomba Cash Transfer Programme
5
3
Malawi
Sexual health incentive study
1
1
Niger
Prospective study with Forum Santé Niger and Médecins Sans Frontières
2
2
Niger
Concern Worldwide droughtresponse unconditional transfer
South Africa
Old Age Pension
1
3
1
South Africa
Child Support Grant and Foster Grant
1
Tanzania
Tanzania Social Action Fund (TSAF)
1
1
Uganda
WFP Karamoja cash transfer
1
1
1
Uganda
Youth Opportunities Programme (YOP)
1
2
2
Uganda
Social Assistance Grants for Empowerment (SAGE)
1
1
1
1
1
Uganda
Women's Income Generating Support (WINGS)
1
1
2
Zambia
Monze Cash Transfer Pilot
1
1
1
1
Zambia
Child Grant Programme
1
1
1
2
2
TOTALS
12
19
11
15
18
14
Contents
Employment
Empowerment
Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Table A4.6 Geographical And Programme Coverage Among Studies From Which Evidence Extracted - Middle East And North Africa

Region / country
Programme
Poverty
Education
Health and 
nutrition
Savings, 
investment and 
production
Middle East & North Africa Morocco
Tayssir
 
1

1
 
TOTALS
0
1
0
0
1
0

## Table A4.7 Geographical And Programme Coverage Among Studies From Which Evidence Extracted - Europe And Central Asia

Region / country
Programme
Poverty
Education
Health and 
nutrition
Savings, 
investment and 
production
Europe & Central Asia
Albania
Ndhima Ekonomike  
1
1
Kazakhstan
Bota programme
1
1
1
1
Turkey
Social Risk Mitigation Project
1
1
TOTALS
2
2
0
1
2
1

## Table A4.8 Geographical And Programme Coverage Among Studies From Which Evidence Extracted - South Asia

Region / country
Programme
Poverty
Education
Health and 
nutrition
Savings, 
investment and 
production
South Asia 
Bangladesh
Shombob
1
1
1
Pakistan
The Punjab Female School Stipend Program
1
1
Pakistan
The Benazir Income Support Programme
1
1
1
1
1
1
TOTALS
2
3
2
1
2
1

## Table A4.9 Geographical And Programme Coverage Among Studies From Which Evidence Extracted - East Asia And Pacific

Region / country
Programme
Poverty
Education
Health and 
nutrition
Savings, 
investment and 
production
East Asia and Pacific
Cambodia
CESSP Scholarship Program (CSP)
 
1

1
 
 
1


Cambodia
Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction (JFPR) scholarship program
 
1


China
Junior High School Randomised Controlled Trial
Indonesia
Program Keluarga Harapan (PKH)
1
1
1
 
 1
 
Indonesia
Temporary UCT
1

1
 
Indonesia
Indonesia Bantuan Siswa Miskin (BSM) cash transfer for poor students
TOTALS
2
4
1
0
4
0
Contents
Employment
Empowerment
Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools
Employment
Empowerment
Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Employment
Empowerment
Employment
Empowerment
1
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

# Annex 5 Evidence: Results Tables For Overall Effects Disaggregated By Gender, And Cash Transfer Design And Implementation Effects

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

This annex provides detailed tables of the results disaggregated by gender and design and implementation effects. These are reported for each of the six outcome areas under review.

## A5.1 Poverty

A5.1.1 Summary of results for cash transfer effects disaggregated by gender for monetary poverty indicators A5.1.2 Summary of results for the role of cash transfer design and implementation parameters on monetary poverty 

## A5.2 Education

A5.2.1 Summary of results for cash transfer effects disaggregated by gender for education indicators A5.2.2 Summary of results for the role of cash transfer design and implementation parameters on education 

## A5.3 Health And Nutrition

A5.3.1 Summary of results for cash transfer effects disaggregated by gender for health and nutrition indicators A5.3.2 Summary of results for the role of cash transfer design and implementation parameters on health and nutrition

Contents

## A5.4 Savings, Investment And Production

A5.4.1 Summary of results for cash transfer effects disaggregated by gender for savings, investment and production indicators
Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews
A5.4.2 Summary of results for the role of cash transfer design and implementation parameters on savings, investment and production

## A5.5 Employment

Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools
A5.5.1 Summary of results for overall cash transfer effect on adult labour participation - by gender A5.5.2 Summary of results for overall cash transfer effect on intensity of adult work - by gender
Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
A5.5.3 Summary of results for overall cash transfer effect on adult labour force participation - by sector and gender
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base
A5.5.4 Summary of results for overall cash transfer effect on adult work intensity - by sector and gender A5.5.5 Summary of results for overall cash transfer effect on child labour participation - by gender A5.5.6 Summary of results for overall cash transfer effect on intensity of child labour - by gender
Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
A5.5.7 Summary of results for cash transfer effect on child labour participation - by sector and gender A5.5.8 Summary of results for cash transfer effect on child labour intensity - by sector and gender A5.5.9 Summary of results for overall cash transfer effect on migration - by gender A5.5.10 Effect of design and implementation features on adult employment outcomes A5.5.11 Effect of design and implementation features on child labour outcomes

## A5.6 Empowerment

A5.6.1 Summary of results for the role of cash transfer design and implementation parameters on empowerment 

## Summary Tables For Results For Monetary Poverty A5.1.1 Summary Of Results For Cash Transfer Effects Disaggregated By Gender For Monetary Poverty Indicators

| #                                  | Study                               | Programme                 | Indicator   |
|------------------------------------|-------------------------------------|---------------------------|-------------|
| change                             |                                     |                           |             |
| Significance                       | Details                             |                           |             |
| 1                                  | Blattman et al.                     |                           |             |
| (2013)                             |                                     |                           |             |
| YOP (Uganda)                       | Individual short-term expenditure   |                           |             |
| 6.943                              |                                     |                           |             |
| Change in                          |                                     |                           |             |
| UGX                                |                                     |                           |             |
| 1%                                 | For male beneficiaries, compared    |                           |             |
| to non-beneficiaries               |                                     |                           |             |
| YOP (Uganda)                       | Individual short-term expenditure   |                           |             |
| 7.923                              |                                     |                           |             |
| Change in                          |                                     |                           |             |
| UGX                                |                                     |                           |             |
| 5%                                 | For female beneficiaries            |                           |             |
| 2                                  | Edmonds and                         |                           |             |
| Schady (2012)                      |                                     |                           |             |
| BDH (Ecuador)                      | Total annual household expenditure  | –277.0                    | Change in   |
| USD                                |                                     |                           |             |
| NS                                 | For households with girl            |                           |             |
| beneficiaries, compared to non-    |                                     |                           |             |
| beneficiaries                      |                                     |                           |             |
| BDH (Ecuador)                      | Total annual household expenditure  | 13.89                     | Change in   |
| USD                                |                                     |                           |             |
| NS                                 | For households with boy             |                           |             |
| beneficiaries, compared to non-    |                                     |                           |             |
| beneficiaries                      |                                     |                           |             |
| 3                                  | Green et al.                        |                           |             |
| (2015)                             |                                     |                           |             |
| WINGS                              |                                     |                           |             |
| (Uganda)                           |                                     |                           |             |
| Individual monthly non-durable     |                                     |                           |             |
| consumption                        |                                     |                           |             |
| 0.41                               |                                     |                           |             |
| Z-score                            | 1%                                  | For female beneficiaries, |             |
| compared to non-beneficiaries      |                                     |                           |             |
| 4                                  | Handa et al.                        |                           |             |
| (2014)                             |                                     |                           |             |
| LEAP (Ghana)                       | Total monthly total expenditure per |                           |             |
| equivalent adult                   |                                     |                           |             |
| -1.27                              | Change in                           |                           |             |
| Ghc                                |                                     |                           |             |
| NS                                 | For female-headed households,       |                           |             |
| compared to non-beneficiaries      |                                     |                           |             |
| LEAP (Ghana)                       | Total monthly food expenditure per  |                           |             |
| equivalent adult                   |                                     |                           |             |
| 1.87                               | Change in                           |                           |             |
| Ghc                                |                                     |                           |             |
| NS                                 | For female-headed households,       |                           |             |
| compared to non-beneficiaries      |                                     |                           |             |
| LEAP (Ghana)                       | Total monthly food expenditure per  |                           |             |
| equivalent adult                   |                                     |                           |             |
| -7.51                              | Change in                           |                           |             |
| Ghc                                |                                     |                           |             |
| NS                                 | For male-headed households,         |                           |             |
| compared to non-beneficiaries      |                                     |                           |             |
| LEAP (Ghana)                       | Total monthly total expenditure per |                           |             |
| equivalent adult                   |                                     |                           |             |
| -8.96                              | Change in                           |                           |             |
| Ghc                                |                                     |                           |             |
| NS                                 | For male-headed households,         |                           |             |
| compared to non-beneficiaries      |                                     |                           |             |
| 5                                  | Haushofer &                         |                           |             |
| Shapiro. (2013)                    |                                     |                           |             |
| Give Directly                      |                                     |                           |             |
| CT (Kenya)                         |                                     |                           |             |
| Monthly non-durable household      |                                     |                           |             |
| expenditure                        |                                     |                           |             |
| -2.74                              | Change in                           |                           |             |
| USD                                |                                     |                           |             |
| NS                                 | For female beneficiaries,           |                           |             |
| compared to male beneficiaries     |                                     |                           |             |
| 6                                  | Martinez                            |                           |             |
| (2004)                             |                                     |                           |             |
| Bonosol                            |                                     |                           |             |
| (Bolivia)                          |                                     |                           |             |
| Monthly household food consumption | -14.327                             | Change in                 |             |
| Bolivianos                         |                                     |                           |             |
| NS                                 | For beneficiary households where    |                           |             |
| the oldest member is female,       |                                     |                           |             |
| compared to those where the        |                                     |                           |             |
| oldest member is male              |                                     |                           |             |

Notes: Figures in bold indicate statistically significant coefficient. NS = not significant at 10% significance level or below

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## A5.1.2 Summary Of Results For The Role Of Cash Transfer Design And Implementation Parameters On Monetary Poverty

| #                                   | Study                                | Programme                    | Indicator                             | Effect   | Measure of                |
|-------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|------------------------------|---------------------------------------|----------|---------------------------|
| change                              |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Significance                        | Additional details                   |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Main recipient                      |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 1                                   | Haushofer &                          |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Shapiro (2013)                      |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Give directly                       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| experiment (Kenya)                  |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Total monthly non-durable           |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| expenditure                         |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| -2.74                               | Change in USD                        | NS                           | Being a female beneficiary            |          |                           |
| Transfer levels                     |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 1                                   | Blattmann et al.                     |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| (2013)                              |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| YOP (Uganda)                        | Log of real value of short term      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| expenditures                        |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 0.043                               | Change in UGX                        | NS                           | Measures effect of log grant          |          |                           |
| size per person for beneficiaries   |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 2                                   | Davis et al.                         |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| (2002)                              |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| PROGRESA                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| (Mexico)                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Total monthly consumption           |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| expenditure per capita              |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 0.406                               |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Change in                           |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| pesos                               |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 1%                                  | Measures effect of transfer          |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| levels for total sample             |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| PROCAMPO                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| (Mexico)                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Total monthly consumption           |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| expenditure per capita              |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 0.702                               |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Change in                           |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| pesos                               |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 1%                                  | Measures effect of transfer          |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| levels for total sample             |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| PROGRESA                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| (Mexico)                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Total food consumption expenditure  |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| per capita                          |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 0.355                               |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Change in                           |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| pesos                               |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 1%                                  | Measures effect of transfer          |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| levels for total sample             |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| PROCAMPO                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| (Mexico)                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Total food consumption expenditure  |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| per capita                          |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 0.386                               |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Change in                           |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| pesos                               |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 1%                                  | Measures effect of transfer          |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| levels for total sample             |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 3                                   | Handa et al.                         |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| (2009)                              |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| PROGRESA                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| (Mexico)                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Log total monthly household         |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| expenditure                         |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 0.034                               |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Change in log                       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| points                              |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 1%                                  | Measures effect of transfer          |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| levels for total sample             |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| PROGRESA                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| (Mexico)                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Log food monthly household          |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| expenditure                         |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 0.035                               |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Change in log                       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| points                              |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 1%                                  | Measures effect of transfer          |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| levels for total sample             |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 4                                   | Haushofer &                          |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Shapiro (2013)                      |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Give directly                       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| experiment (Kenya)                  |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Monthly non-durable household       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| expenditure                         |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 20.37                               |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Change in USD                       | 10%                                  | Measures effect of receiving |                                       |          |                           |
| large transfer (instead of small)   |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Transfer frequency                  |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 1                                   | Bazzi (2013)                         | Temporary UCT                |                                       |          |                           |
| (Indonesia)                         |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Growth in log total household       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| expenditures per capita 2005-2006   |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| -0.091                              |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Growth in log                       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| points                              |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 1%                                  | Received transfer only once          |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Temporary UCT                       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| (Indonesia                          |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Growth in log total household       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| expenditures per capita 2005-2006   |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 0.074                               |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Growth in log                       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| points                              |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 5%                                  | Receive transfer twice already       |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 2                                   | Haushofer &                          |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Shapiro (2013)                      |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Give directly                       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| experiment (Kenya)                  |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Monthly non-durable household       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| expenditure                         |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| -4.4                                | Change in USD                        | NS                           | Receiving monthly instead of          |          |                           |
| lump sum                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Duration of exposure                |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 1                                   | AIR (2014)                           | ZCGP (Zambia)                | Per capital monthly total expenditure | -4       | Change in Zk              |
| after 24 months and impact          |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| after 36 months                     |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| ZCGP (Zambia)                       | Per capital monthly food expenditure | -3.59                        | Change in Zk                          | NS       | Difference between impact |
| after 24 months and impact          |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| after 36 months                     |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 2                                   | Angelucci et al.                     |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| (2012)                              |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Oportunidades                       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| (Mexico)                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Total monthly household expenditure |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 5.82                                |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Change in                           |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| pesos                               |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 1%                                  | After 1 year                         |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Oportunidades                       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| (Mexico)                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Total monthly household expenditure |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 5.49                                |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Change in                           |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| pesos                               |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 5%                                  | After 2 years                        |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Oportunidades                       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| (Mexico)                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Total monthly food expenditure      |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 168.54                              |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Change in                           |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| pesos                               |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 10%                                 | After 1 year                         |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Oportunidades                       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| (Mexico)                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Total monhtly food expenditure      |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 282.85                              |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Change in                           |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| pesos                               |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 1%                                  | After 2 years                        |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 3                                   | Buser et al.                         |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| (2014)                              |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| BDH (Ecuador)                       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Monthly food expenditure            | 16.383                               | Change in USD                | NS                                    |          |                           |
| Stopped receiving the transfer      |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| two years ago                       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 4                                   | Gertler et al.                       |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| (2012)                              |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Oportunidades                       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| (Mexico)                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Household per capita consumption    |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 10.836                              |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Change in                           |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| pesos                               |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 5%                                  | Compared to households that          |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| joined 4 years later                |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 5                                   | Maluccio &                           |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Flores (2005)                       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                     | Nominal annual total per capita      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| expenditure                         |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 986                                 |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Change in                           |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Cordobas                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 1%                                  | After 1 year                         |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                     | Nominal annual total per capita      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| expenditure                         |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 686                                 |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Change in                           |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Cordobas                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 1%                                  | After 2 years                        |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                     | Nominal annual food per capita       |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| expenditure                         |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 871                                 |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Change in                           |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Cordobas                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 1%                                  | After 1 year                         |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                     | Nominal annual food per capita       |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| expenditure                         |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 640                                 |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Change in                           |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Cordobas                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| 1%                                  | After 2 years                        |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Contents                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Annex 1                             |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Overview of                         |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| existing cash                       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| transfers reviews                   |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Annex 2                             |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Detailed search                     |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| protocols and study                 |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| assessment tools                    |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Annex 3                             |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Summary table                       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| of searches                         |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| and reasons for                     |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| exclusion and flow                  |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| diagrams                            |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Annex 4                             |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Summary of the                      |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| evidence base                       |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Annex 5                             |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| Evidence:                           |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| results tables for                  |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| overall effects                     |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| disaggregated by                    |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| gender, and cash                    |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| transfer design and                 |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| implementation                      |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
| effects                             |                                      |                              |                                       |          |                           |
A5.1.2 Summary of results for the role of cash transfer design and implementation parameters on 
monetary poverty continued
#
Study
Programme
Indicator 
Effect
Measure of 
change
Significance
Additional details
6
Maluccio (2010)
RPS (Nicaragua)
Per capital annual total expenditure
905
Change in 
Cordobas
1%
After 1 year
RPS (Nicaragua)
Per capital annual total expenditure
676
Change in 
Cordobas
5%
After 2 years
RPS (Nicaragua)
Per capital annual food expenditure
789
Change in 
Cordobas
1%
After 1 year
RPS (Nicaragua)
Per capital annual food expenditure
621
Change in 
Cordobas
1%
After 2 years
7
Miller et al. (2011)
SCTP (Malawi)
Weekly per capita total expenditures
254
Change in MK
1%
After 6 months
SCTP (Malawi)
Weekly per capita total expenditures
274
Change in MK
1%
After 1 year
SCTP (Malawi)
Weekly per capita food expenditures
198
Change in MK
1%
After 6 months
SCTP (Malawi)
Weekly per capita food expenditures
203
Change in MK
1%
After 1 year
8
Perova & Vakis (2012)
Juntos (Peru)
Overall consumption (in log?)
0.09
Percentage 
point change
1%
12 to 23 months in Juntos
Juntos (Peru)
Overall consumption (in log?)
0.11
Percentage 
point change
1%
24 to 36 months in Juntos
Juntos (Peru)
Overall consumption (in log?)
0.15
Percentage 
point change
5%
Over 36 months in Juntos
Juntos (Peru)
Overall food consumption (in log?)
0.09
Percentage 
point change
1%
12 to 23 months in Juntos
Juntos (Peru)
Overall food consumption (in log?)
0.1
Percentage 
point change
5%
24 to 36 months in Juntos
Juntos (Peru)
Overall food consumption (in log?)
0.13
Percentage 
point change
10%
Over 36 months in Juntos
Juntos (Peru)
Poverty head count
-0.08
Percentage 
point change
1%
12 to 23 months in Juntos
Juntos (Peru)
Poverty head count
-0.1
Percentage 
point change
10%
24 to 36 months in Juntos
Juntos (Peru)
Poverty head count
-0.1
Percentage 
point change
10%
Over 36 months in Juntos
Juntos (Peru)
Poverty gap
-4.8
Percentage 
point change
10%
12 to 23 months in Juntos
Juntos (Peru)
Poverty gap
-3.8
Percentage 
point change
NS
24 to 36 months in Juntos
Juntos (Peru)
Poverty gap
-0.61
Percentage 
point change
NS
Over 36 months in Juntos
9
Skoufias & Di Maro (2008)
PROGRESA (Mexico)
Poverty head count
0.0007
Percentage 
point change
NS
After 6 months
PROGRESA (Mexico)
Poverty head count
-0.06
Percentage 
point change
NS
After 1 year
PROGRESA (Mexico)
Poverty head count
-0.0207
Percentage 
point change
5%
After 1.5 years
PROGRESA (Mexico)
Poverty gap (not clear how measured)
-0.0284
?
1%
After 6 months
PROGRESA (Mexico)
Poverty gap (not clear how measured)
-0.0445
?
1%
After 1 year
PROGRESA (Mexico)
Poverty gap (not clear how measured)
-0.0794
?
1%
After 1.5 years
Targeting mechanism
1
Merttens et al. (2015)
SAGE (Uganda)
Monthly total expenditure per equivalent adult
10,000
Change in UGX
10%
SGC
SAGE (Uganda)
Monthly total expenditure per equivalent adult
11,000
Change in UGX
10%
VFSG
SAGE (Uganda)
Monthly food expenditure per equivalent adult
1500
Change in UGX
NS
SGC
SAGE (Uganda)
Monthly food expenditure per equivalent adult
8500
Change in UGX
5%
VFSG
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## A5.1.2 Summary Of Results For The Role Of Cash Transfer Design And Implementation Parameters On Monetary Poverty Continued

| #                                                    | Study                              | Programme                | Indicator                | Effect   | Measure of                       |
|------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------|--------------------------|--------------------------|----------|----------------------------------|
| change                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Significance                                         | Additional details                 |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Complementary interventions and supply-side services |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 1                                                    | Blattman et al.                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| (2015)                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| WINGS (Uganda)                                       | Household monthly non-durable      |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| expenditure                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 31.031                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Change in                                            |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 1000s of UGX                                         |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 1%                                                   | Effect of those that received      |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| no training compared to non-                         |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| beneficiaries                                        |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| WINGS (Uganda)                                       | Household monthly non-durable      |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| expenditure                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 33.439                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Change in                                            |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 1000s of UGX                                         |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 1%                                                   | Effect of those that received      |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| training compared to non-                            |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| beneficiaries                                        |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| WINGS (Uganda)                                       | Household monthly non-durable      |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| expenditure                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| -1.008                                               | Change in                          |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 1000s of UGX                                         |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| NS                                                   | Effect of those that had 2         |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| supervision visits compared to                       |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| no supervision                                       |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| WINGS (Uganda)                                       | Household monthly non-durable      |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| expenditure                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| -3.022                                               | Change in                          |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 1000s of UGX                                         |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| NS                                                   | Effect of those that had 5         |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| supervision visits compared to                       |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| no supervision                                       |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 2                                                    | Green et al.                       |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| (2015)                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| WINGS (Uganda)                                       | Individual monthly non-durable     |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| consumption                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| -0.06                                                | Z-score                            | NS                       | For female beneficiaries |          |                                  |
| who attended training                                |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| alone, compared to Phase 1                           |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| beneficiaries                                        |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| WINGS (Uganda)                                       | Individual monthly non-durable     |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| consumption                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| -0.28                                                |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Z-score                                              | 1%                                 | For female beneficiaries |                          |          |                                  |
| who attended training                                |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| alone, compared to Phase 1                           |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| beneficiaries                                        |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 3                                                    | Karlan et al.                      |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| (2014)                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| IPA RCT (Ghana)                                      | Total expenditure in 12 months     | 2.44                     | Change in USD            | NS       | For beneficiaries receiving both |
| cash and insurance                                   |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 4                                                    | Macours and                        |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Vakis (2012)                                         |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Log total per capita expenditure                     |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 0.281                                                |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Change in log                                        |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| points                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 1%                                                   | For the basic transfer (after less |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| than 1 year)                                         |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Log total per capita expenditure                     |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 0.285                                                |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Change in log                                        |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| points                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 1%                                                   | The basic CCT plus a               |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| scholarship for a vocational                         |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| training (after less than 1 year)                    |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Log total per capita expenditure                     |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 0.331                                                |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Change in log                                        |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| points                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 1%                                                   | The basic CCT plus a               |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| productive investment grant                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| (after less than 1 year)                             |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Log total per capita expenditure                     | 0.022                              | Change in log            |                          |          |                                  |
| points                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| NS                                                   | For the basic transfer (after      |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 2 years)                                             |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Log total per capita expenditure                     | 0.048                              | Change in log            |                          |          |                                  |
| points                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| NS                                                   | The basic CCT plus a               |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| scholarship for a vocational                         |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| training (after 2 years)                             |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Log total per capita expenditure                     |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 0.088                                                |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Change in log                                        |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| points                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 1%                                                   | The basic CCT plus a               |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| productive investment grant                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| (after 2 years)                                      |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Log total household per capita                       | 0.0221                             | Percentage               |                          |          |                                  |
| change                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| NS                                                   | For the basic transfer             |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 5                                                    | Macours,                           |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Premand and                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Vakis (2012)                                         |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Log total household per capita                       | 0.0277                             | Percentage               |                          |          |                                  |
| change                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| NS                                                   | The basic CCT plus a               |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| scholarship for a vocational                         |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| training                                             |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Log total household per capita                       |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 0.0837                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Percentage                                           |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| change                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 1%                                                   | The basic CCT plus a               |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| productive investment grant                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Log food household per capita                        |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 0.0449                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Percentage                                           |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| change                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 1%                                                   | For the basic transfer             |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Log food household per capita                        |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 0.0488                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Percentage                                           |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| change                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 5%                                                   | The basic CCT plus a               |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| scholarship for a vocational                         |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| training                                             |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Log food household per capita                        |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 0.102                                                |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Percentage                                           |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| change                                               |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| 1%                                                   | The basic CCT plus a               |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| productive investment grant                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Contents                                             |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Annex 1                                              |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Overview of                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| existing cash                                        |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| transfers reviews                                    |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Annex 2                                              |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Detailed search                                      |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| protocols and study                                  |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| assessment tools                                     |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Annex 3                                              |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Summary table                                        |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| of searches                                          |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| and reasons for                                      |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| exclusion and flow                                   |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| diagrams                                             |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Annex 4                                              |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Summary of the                                       |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| evidence base                                        |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Annex 5                                              |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| Evidence:                                            |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| results tables for                                   |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| overall effects                                      |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| disaggregated by                                     |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| gender, and cash                                     |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| transfer design and                                  |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| implementation                                       |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |
| effects                                              |                                    |                          |                          |          |                                  |

## Summary Tables Results For Education Table A5.2.1 Summary Of Results For Cash Transfer Effects Disaggregated By Gender For Education Indicators

| #                                       | Study                                  | Programme                         | Variable and treatment population    |
|-----------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------|--------------------------------------|
| (e.g. age of child)                     |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Effect                                  | Measure of                             |                                   |                                      |
| change                                  |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Significance                            | Details/explanation                    |                                   |                                      |
| Attendance (Beneficiary)                |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 0.135                                   |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Percentage                              | 1%                                     | CCT, aged 7-15, Male              |                                      |
| 1                                       | Akresh et al.                          |                                   |                                      |
| (2013)                                  |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| NCTPP                                   |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (Burkina Faso)                          |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Percentage of school days the child     |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| attended during the entire academic     |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| year (school roster)                    |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 0.137                                   |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Percentage                              | 1%                                     | CCT, aged 7-15, Female            |                                      |
| NCTPP                                   |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (Burkina Faso)                          |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Percentage of school days the child     |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| attended during the entire academic     |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| year (school roster)                    |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 0.108                                   |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Percentage                              | 5%                                     | UCT, aged 7-15, Male              |                                      |
| NCTPP                                   |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (Burkina Faso)                          |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Percentage of school days the child     |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| attended during the entire academic     |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| year (school roster)                    |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 0.032                                   | Percentage                             | NS                                | UCT, aged 7-15, Female               |
| NCTPP                                   |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (Burkina Faso)                          |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Percentage of school days the child     |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| attended during the entire academic     |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| year (school roster)                    |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 0.08                                    |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Fraction of days                        | 5%                                     | CCT, Overall effect (all terms in |                                      |
| 2009) girls only                        |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 2                                       | Baird et al.                           |                                   |                                      |
| (2011)                                  |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| ZCTP (Malawi)                           | Percentage of days respondent enrolled |                                   |                                      |
| in school was recorded present during   |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| the days the school was in session      |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (school ledger)                         |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 0.058                                   | Fraction of days                       | NS                                | UCT, Overall effect (all terms in    |
| 2009) girls only                        |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| ZCTP (Malawi)                           | Percentage of days respondent enrolled |                                   |                                      |
| in school was recorded present during   |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| the days the school was in session      |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (school ledger)                         |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 3                                       | Benhassine et                          |                                   |                                      |
| al. (2013)                              |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Tayssir                                 |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (Morocco)                               |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Attendance rate during surprise school  |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| visits among those enrolled (School     |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| visits)                                 |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 0.069                                   |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Percentage                              | 1%                                     | Labelled CT, after 2 years,       |                                      |
| administered to one child per           |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| household aged 6-12, Male               |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Tayssir                                 |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (Morocco)                               |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Attendance rate during surprise school  |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| visits among those enrolled (School     |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| visits)                                 |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 0.082                                   |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Percentage                              | 1%                                     | Labelled CT, after 2 years,       |                                      |
| administered to one child per           |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| household aged 6-12, Female             |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Tayssir                                 |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (Morocco)                               |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Attending School by end of year         |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 2, among those 6- 15 at baseline        |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (Household survey)                      |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 0.007                                   | Percentage                             | NS                                | Labelled CT, after 2 years,          |
| administered to one child per           |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| household aged 6-12, Male               |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Tayssir                                 |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (Morocco)                               |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Attending School by end of year         |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 2, among those 6- 15 at baseline        |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (Household survey)                      |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 0.006                                   | Percentage                             | NS                                | Labelled CT, after 2 years,          |
| administered to one child per           |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| household aged 6-12, Female             |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 4                                       | Dammert et al.                         |                                   |                                      |
| (2009)                                  |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| RPS                                     |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (Nicaragua)                             |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| School attendance                       |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 0.110                                   |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Percentage                              | 5%                                     | CCT, children aged 7-13 years     |                                      |
| at baseline, after two years,           |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Girls                                   |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| RPS                                     |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (Nicaragua)                             |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| School attendance                       |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 0.173                                   |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Percentage                              | 5%                                     | CCT, children aged 7-13 years     |                                      |
| at baseline, after 2 years, Boys        |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 5 De Groot et al.                       |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (2015)                                  |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| LEAP (Ghana)                            | whether a child missed any days of     |                                   |                                      |
| school in the reference period          |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| -0.13                                   |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Percentage                              | 1%                                     | CCT, aged 5-12, Male              |                                      |
| LEAP (Ghana)                            | whether a child missed any days of     |                                   |                                      |
| school in the reference period          |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| -0.083                                  |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Percentage                              | 5%                                     | CCT, aged 5-12, Female            |                                      |
| LEAP (Ghana)                            | whether a child missed any days of     |                                   |                                      |
| school in the reference period          |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 0.004                                   | Percentage                             | NS                                | CCT, aged 13-17, Male                |
| LEAP (Ghana)                            | whether a child missed any days of     |                                   |                                      |
| school in the reference period          |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| -0.098                                  |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Percentage                              | 10%                                    | CCT, aged 13-17, Female           |                                      |
| 6                                       | Evans et al.                           |                                   |                                      |
| (2014)                                  |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| TSAF                                    |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (Tanzania)                              |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Ever attended school                    | 0                                      | Percentage                        | NS                                   |
| after 31-34 months, Male                |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| TSAF                                    |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (Tanzania)                              |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Ever attended school                    |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 0.05                                    |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Percentage                              | 10%                                    | CCT, children aged 0-18 years,    |                                      |
| after 31-34 months, Female              |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| TSAF                                    |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (Tanzania)                              |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Missed school last week if enrolled due |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| to personal reasons (Absenteeism)       |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 0.02                                    | Percentage                             | NS                                | CCT, children aged 0-18 years,       |
| after 31-34 months, Male                |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| TSAF                                    |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (Tanzania)                              |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Missed school last week if enrolled due |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| to personal reasons (Absenteeism)       |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| 0.01                                    | Percentage                             | NS                                | CCT, children aged 0-18 years,       |
| after 31-34 months, Female              |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| TSAF                                    |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (Tanzania)                              |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Took national exam-Standard IV+         | 0.01                                   | Percentage                        | NS                                   |
| after 31-34 months, Male                |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| TSAF                                    |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| (Tanzania)                              |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Took national exam-Standard IV+         | 0.04                                   | Percentage                        | NS                                   |
| after 31-34 months, Female              |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Contents                                |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Annex 1                                 |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Overview of                             |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| existing cash                           |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| transfers reviews                       |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Annex 2                                 |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Detailed search                         |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| protocols and study                     |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| assessment tools                        |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Annex 3                                 |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Summary table                           |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| of searches                             |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| and reasons for                         |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| exclusion and flow                      |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| diagrams                                |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Annex 4                                 |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Summary of the                          |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| evidence base                           |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Annex 5                                 |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| Evidence:                               |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| results tables for                      |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| overall effects                         |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| disaggregated by                        |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| gender, and cash                        |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| transfer design and                     |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| implementation                          |                                        |                                   |                                      |
| effects                                 |                                        |                                   |                                      |

## Table A5.2.1 Summary Of Results For Cash Transfer Effects Disaggregated By Gender For Education Indicators Continued

| #                                         | Study                              | Programme                     | Variable and treatment population    |
|-------------------------------------------|------------------------------------|-------------------------------|--------------------------------------|
| (e.g. age of child)                       |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Effect                                    | Measure of                         |                               |                                      |
| change                                    |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Significance                              | Details/explanation                |                               |                                      |
| 7                                         | Filmer et al.                      |                               |                                      |
| (2008)                                    |                                    |                               |                                      |
| JFPR                                      |                                    |                               |                                      |
| (Cambodia)                                |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Attendance on the day of school visit     |                                    |                               |                                      |
| 0.319                                     |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Percentage                                | 1%                                 | CCT, effect on girls only     |                                      |
| -0.11                                     |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Percentage                                | 10%                                | UCT, girls aged 13-17         |                                      |
| 8                                         | Handa et al.                       |                               |                                      |
| (2014)                                    |                                    |                               |                                      |
| LEAP (Ghana)                              | Whether a child missed any days    |                               |                                      |
| of school in the reference period         |                                    |                               |                                      |
| (Absenteeism)                             |                                    |                               |                                      |
| LEAP (Ghana)                              | whether a child did not attend any |                               |                                      |
| school in the last week (Absenteeism)     |                                    |                               |                                      |
| -0.11                                     | Percentage                         | NS                            | UCT, girls aged 13-17                |
| 9                                         | Lincove et al.                     |                               |                                      |
| (2014)                                    |                                    |                               |                                      |
| RPS                                       |                                    |                               |                                      |
| (Nicaragua)                               |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Whether child attended school (at time    |                                    |                               |                                      |
| of survey)                                |                                    |                               |                                      |
| 0.125                                     |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Percentage                                | 1%                                 | CCT, Children aged 6-11 at    |                                      |
| baseline (always eligible), Male          |                                    |                               |                                      |
| RPS                                       |                                    |                               |                                      |
| (Nicaragua)                               |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Whether child attended school (at time    |                                    |                               |                                      |
| of survey)                                |                                    |                               |                                      |
| 0.158                                     |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Percentage                                | 5%                                 | CCT, Children aged 6-11 at    |                                      |
| baseline (always eligible),               |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Female                                    |                                    |                               |                                      |
| 0.23                                      |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Percentage                                | 10%                                | CCT, after two years, Boys    |                                      |
| aged 7-13 who had not                     |                                    |                               |                                      |
| completed fourth grade                    |                                    |                               |                                      |
| 10 Maluccio and                           |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Flores (2005)                             |                                    |                               |                                      |
| RPS                                       |                                    |                               |                                      |
| (Nicaragua)                               |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Current attendance (child was defined     |                                    |                               |                                      |
| to be currently attending if he indicated |                                    |                               |                                      |
| he was still enrolled and had either      |                                    |                               |                                      |
| missed 3 or fewer days in the past        |                                    |                               |                                      |
| month ( or more because of illness)       |                                    |                               |                                      |
| 0.17                                      |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Percentage                                | 10%                                | CCT, after two years, Girls   |                                      |
| aged 7-13 who had not                     |                                    |                               |                                      |
| completed fourth grade                    |                                    |                               |                                      |
| RPS                                       |                                    |                               |                                      |
| (Nicaragua)                               |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Current attendance (child was defined     |                                    |                               |                                      |
| to be currently attending if he indicated |                                    |                               |                                      |
| he was still enrolled and had either      |                                    |                               |                                      |
| missed 3 or fewer days in the past        |                                    |                               |                                      |
| month ( or more because of illness)       |                                    |                               |                                      |
| 11 Merttens et al.                        |                                    |                               |                                      |
| (2013)                                    |                                    |                               |                                      |
| HSNP (Kenya)                              | Proportion of children currently   |                               |                                      |
| attending school                          |                                    |                               |                                      |
| -0.0661                                   | Percentage                         | NS                            | UCT, after three years, children     |
| aged 6-17, Male                           |                                    |                               |                                      |
| HSNP (Kenya)                              | Proportion of children currently   |                               |                                      |
| attending school                          |                                    |                               |                                      |
| -0.059                                    | Percentage                         | NS                            | UCT, after three years, ,            |
| children aged 6-17, Female                |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Proportion of children currently          |                                    |                               |                                      |
| attending formal education                |                                    |                               |                                      |
| -0.012                                    | Percentage Points                  | NS                            | Children aged 6-17, after one        |
| year, Male                                |                                    |                               |                                      |
| 12 Merttens et al.                        |                                    |                               |                                      |
| (2015)                                    |                                    |                               |                                      |
| SAGE Senior                               |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Citizen Grant                             |                                    |                               |                                      |
| (Uganda)                                  |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Proportion of children currently          |                                    |                               |                                      |
| attending formal education                |                                    |                               |                                      |
| 0.0037                                    | Percentage Points                  | NS                            | Children aged 6-17, after one        |
| year, Female                              |                                    |                               |                                      |
| SAGE Senior                               |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Citizen Grant                             |                                    |                               |                                      |
| (Uganda)                                  |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Proportion of children currently          |                                    |                               |                                      |
| attending formal education                |                                    |                               |                                      |
| -0.006                                    | Percentage Points                  | NS                            | Children aged 6-17, after one        |
| year, Male                                |                                    |                               |                                      |
| SAGE                                      |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Vulnerable                                |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Family Support                            |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Grant (Uganda)                            |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Proportion of children currently          |                                    |                               |                                      |
| attending formal education                |                                    |                               |                                      |
| -0.061                                    |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Percentage Points                         | 10%                                | Children aged 6-17, after one |                                      |
| year, Female                              |                                    |                               |                                      |
| SAGE                                      |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Vulnerable                                |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Family Support                            |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Grant (Uganda)                            |                                    |                               |                                      |
| SAGE Senior                               |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Citizen Grant                             |                                    |                               |                                      |
| (Uganda)                                  |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Mean number of days missed in last 30     |                                    |                               |                                      |
| scheduled school days (absenteeism)       |                                    |                               |                                      |
| -0.36                                     | Mean number of                     |                               |                                      |
| days missed in                            |                                    |                               |                                      |
| last 30 scheduled                         |                                    |                               |                                      |
| days                                      |                                    |                               |                                      |
| SAGE Senior                               |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Citizen Grant                             |                                    |                               |                                      |
| (Uganda)                                  |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Mean number of days missed in last 30     |                                    |                               |                                      |
| scheduled school days (absenteeism)       |                                    |                               |                                      |
| -13,600                                   | Mean number of                     |                               |                                      |
| days missed in                            |                                    |                               |                                      |
| last 30 scheduled                         |                                    |                               |                                      |
| days                                      |                                    |                               |                                      |
| SAGE Senior                               |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Citizen Grant                             |                                    |                               |                                      |
| (Uganda)                                  |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Mean number of days missed in last 30     |                                    |                               |                                      |
| scheduled school days (absenteeism)       |                                    |                               |                                      |
| -0.81                                     | Mean number of                     |                               |                                      |
| days missed in                            |                                    |                               |                                      |
| last 30 scheduled                         |                                    |                               |                                      |
| days                                      |                                    |                               |                                      |
| SAGE                                      |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Vulnerable                                |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Family Support                            |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Grant (Uganda)                            |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Mean number of days missed in last 30     |                                    |                               |                                      |
| scheduled school days (absenteeism)       |                                    |                               |                                      |
| 0.44                                      | Mean number of                     |                               |                                      |
| days missed in                            |                                    |                               |                                      |
| last 30 scheduled                         |                                    |                               |                                      |
| days                                      |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Contents                                  |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Annex 1                                   |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Overview of                               |                                    |                               |                                      |
| existing cash                             |                                    |                               |                                      |
| transfers reviews                         |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Annex 2                                   |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Detailed search                           |                                    |                               |                                      |
| protocols and study                       |                                    |                               |                                      |
| assessment tools                          |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Annex 3                                   |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Summary table                             |                                    |                               |                                      |
| of searches                               |                                    |                               |                                      |
| and reasons for                           |                                    |                               |                                      |
| exclusion and flow                        |                                    |                               |                                      |
| diagrams                                  |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Annex 4                                   |                                    |                               |                                      |
| Summary of the                            |                                    |                               |                                      |
| evidence base                             |                                    |                               |                                      |

Annex 5 
Evidence: 
results tables for 
overall effects 
disaggregated by 
gender, and cash 
transfer design and 
implementation 
effects

| NS           | Children aged 6-17, after one    |
|--------------|----------------------------------|
| year, Male   |                                  |
| NS           | Children aged 6-17, after one    |
| year, Female |                                  |
| NS           | Children aged 6-17, after one    |
| year, Male   |                                  |
| NS           | Children aged 6-17, after one    |
| year, Female |                                  |

continued on next page

## Table A5.2.1 Summary Of Results For Cash Transfer Effects Disaggregated By Gender For Education Indicators Continued

| #                                                   | Study                       | Programme                     | Variable and treatment population    |
|-----------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------|-------------------------------|--------------------------------------|
| (e.g. age of child)                                 |                             |                               |                                      |
| Effect                                              | Measure of                  |                               |                                      |
| change                                              |                             |                               |                                      |
| Significance                                        | Details/explanation         |                               |                                      |
| 13 Miller et al.                                    |                             |                               |                                      |
| (2011)                                              |                             |                               |                                      |
| SCTP (Malawi)                                       | No of days absent per month | -1.2                          | Days absent per                      |
| month                                               |                             |                               |                                      |
| NS                                                  | UCT, aged 6-8, Boys         |                               |                                      |
| SCTP (Malawi)                                       | No of days absent per month | 0.2                           | Days absent per                      |
| month                                               |                             |                               |                                      |
| NS                                                  | UCT, aged 9-11, Boys        |                               |                                      |
| SCTP (Malawi)                                       | No of days absent per month |                               |                                      |
| -1.9                                                |                             |                               |                                      |
| Days absent per                                     |                             |                               |                                      |
| month                                               |                             |                               |                                      |
| 5%                                                  | UCT, aged 12-15, Boys       |                               |                                      |
| SCTP (Malawi)                                       | No of days absent per month | 0.3                           | Days absent per                      |
| month                                               |                             |                               |                                      |
| NS                                                  | UCT, aged 16-18, Boys       |                               |                                      |
| SCTP (Malawi)                                       | No of days absent per month |                               |                                      |
| -1.8                                                |                             |                               |                                      |
| Days absent per                                     |                             |                               |                                      |
| month                                               |                             |                               |                                      |
| 5%                                                  | UCT, aged 6-8, Girls        |                               |                                      |
| SCTP (Malawi)                                       | No of days absent per month |                               |                                      |
| -1.2                                                |                             |                               |                                      |
| Days absent per                                     |                             |                               |                                      |
| month                                               |                             |                               |                                      |
| 10%                                                 | UCT, aged 9-11, Girls       |                               |                                      |
| SCTP (Malawi)                                       | No of days absent per month | 0.1                           | Days absent per                      |
| month                                               |                             |                               |                                      |
| NS                                                  | UCT, aged 12-15, Girls      |                               |                                      |
| SCTP (Malawi)                                       | No of days absent per month |                               |                                      |
| -2                                                  |                             |                               |                                      |
| Days absent per                                     |                             |                               |                                      |
| month                                               |                             |                               |                                      |
| 10%                                                 | UCT, aged 16-18 Girls       |                               |                                      |
| 0.01497                                             | Percentage                  | NS                            | UCT, after two years, children       |
| aged 6-19, Male                                     |                             |                               |                                      |
| 14 Pellerano et al.                                 |                             |                               |                                      |
| (2014)                                              |                             |                               |                                      |
| LCGP (Lesotho) Proportion of pupils 6-19 who missed |                             |                               |                                      |
| school in the 30 days prior to the                  |                             |                               |                                      |
| survey - self-reported (absenteeism)                |                             |                               |                                      |
| 0.00661                                             | Percentage                  | NS                            | UCT, after two years, children       |
| aged 6-19, Female                                   |                             |                               |                                      |
| LCGP (Lesotho) Proportion of pupils 6-19 who missed |                             |                               |                                      |
| school in the 30 days prior to the                  |                             |                               |                                      |
| survey - self-reported (absenteeism)                |                             |                               |                                      |
| 15 Skoufias and                                     |                             |                               |                                      |
| Parker (2001)                                       |                             |                               |                                      |
| PROGRESA                                            |                             |                               |                                      |
| (Mexico)                                            |                             |                               |                                      |
| Probability of attending school                     |                             |                               |                                      |
| 0.018                                               |                             |                               |                                      |
| Percentage                                          | 1%                          | CCT, Nov-99 FU, 8-11 years,   |                                      |
| Boys                                                |                             |                               |                                      |
| PROGRESA                                            |                             |                               |                                      |
| (Mexico)                                            |                             |                               |                                      |
| Probability of attending school                     | -0.003                      | Percentage                    | NS                                   |
| Girls                                               |                             |                               |                                      |
| PROGRESA                                            |                             |                               |                                      |
| (Mexico)                                            |                             |                               |                                      |
| Probability of attending school                     |                             |                               |                                      |
| 0.058                                               |                             |                               |                                      |
| Percentage                                          | 1%                          | CCT, Nov-99 FU , 12-17 years, |                                      |
| Boys                                                |                             |                               |                                      |
| PROGRESA                                            |                             |                               |                                      |
| (Mexico)                                            |                             |                               |                                      |
| Probability of attending school                     |                             |                               |                                      |
| 0.095                                               |                             |                               |                                      |
| Percentage                                          | 1%                          | CCT, Nov-99 FU, 12-17 years,  |                                      |
| Girls                                               |                             |                               |                                      |

## Attendance (Household Head)

| 1                                 | Dammert et al.            |
|-----------------------------------|---------------------------|
| (2009)                            |                           |
| RPS                               |                           |
| (Nicaragua)                       |                           |
| School attendance                 |                           |
| 0.172                             |                           |
| Percentage                        | 5%                        |
| at baseline, after 2 years        |                           |
| Household Head is Female          |                           |
| RPS                               |                           |
| (Nicaragua)                       |                           |
| School attendance                 |                           |
| 0.138                             |                           |
| Percentage                        | 5%                        |
| at baseline, after 2 years,       |                           |
| Household Head is Male            |                           |
| 2                                 | World Bank                |
| (2011)                            |                           |
| PKH                               |                           |
| (Indonesia)                       |                           |
| Regular primary school attendance |                           |
| (>85%)                            |                           |
| 0.01                              | Percentage point          |
| Household Head is Male            |                           |
| PKH                               |                           |
| (Indonesia)                       |                           |
| Regular primary school attendance |                           |
| (>85%)                            |                           |
| -0.02                             | Percentage point          |
| Household Head is Female          |                           |
| PKH                               |                           |
| (Indonesia)                       |                           |
| Hours in school last week         |                           |
| 0.369                             |                           |
| Hours spent in                    |                           |
| school last week                  |                           |
| 10%                               | CCT, children aged 7-12,  |
| Household Head is Male            |                           |
| PKH                               |                           |
| (Indonesia)                       |                           |
| Hours in school last week         | -0.107                    |
| school last week                  |                           |
| NS                                | CCT, children aged 7-12,  |
| Household Head is Female          |                           |
| PKH                               |                           |
| (Indonesia)                       |                           |
| Regular junior secondary school   |                           |
| attendance (>85%)                 |                           |
| 0.016                             | Percentage point          |
| Household Head is Male            |                           |
| PKH                               |                           |
| (Indonesia)                       |                           |
| Regular junior secondary school   |                           |
| attendance (>85%)                 |                           |
| -0.003                            | Percentage point          |
| Household Head is Female          |                           |
| PKH                               |                           |
| (Indonesia)                       |                           |
| Hours in school last week         |                           |
| 0.699                             |                           |
| Hours spent in                    |                           |
| school last week                  |                           |
| 5%                                | CCT, children aged 13-15, |
| Household Head is Male            |                           |
| PKH                               |                           |
| (Indonesia)                       |                           |
| Hours in school last week         | 0.393                     |
| school last week                  |                           |
| NS                                | CCT, children aged 13-15, |
| Household Head is Female          |                           |
| Contents                          |                           |
| Annex 1                           |                           |
| Overview of                       |                           |
| existing cash                     |                           |
| transfers reviews                 |                           |
| Annex 2                           |                           |
| Detailed search                   |                           |
| protocols and study               |                           |
| assessment tools                  |                           |
| Annex 3                           |                           |
| Summary table                     |                           |
| of searches                       |                           |
| and reasons for                   |                           |
| exclusion and flow                |                           |
| diagrams                          |                           |
| Annex 4                           |                           |
| Summary of the                    |                           |
| evidence base                     |                           |

Annex 5 
Evidence: 
results tables for 
overall effects 
disaggregated by 
gender, and cash 
transfer design and 
implementation 
effects

continued on next page

## Table A5.2.1 Summary Of Results For Cash Transfer Effects Disaggregated By Gender For Education Indicators Continued

| #                                     | Study                                | Programme                 | Variable and treatment population    |
|---------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|---------------------------|--------------------------------------|
| (e.g. age of child)                   |                                      |                           |                                      |
| Effect                                | Measure of                           |                           |                                      |
| change                                |                                      |                           |                                      |
| Significance                          | Details/explanation                  |                           |                                      |
| Math Test Scores                      |                                      |                           |                                      |
| Standardized math test score          |                                      |                           |                                      |
| (Icfes test)                          |                                      |                           |                                      |
| 1                                     |                                      |                           |                                      |
| ,                                     |                                      |                           |                                      |
| 2                                     |                                      |                           |                                      |
| 0.025                                 | Change in                            |                           |                                      |
| Standard deviation                    |                                      |                           |                                      |
| NS                                    | CCT, Boys                            |                           |                                      |
| 1                                     | Baez et al.                          |                           |                                      |
| (2011)                                |                                      |                           |                                      |
| Familias                              |                                      |                           |                                      |
| en Accion                             |                                      |                           |                                      |
| (Colombia)                            |                                      |                           |                                      |
| Standardized math test score          |                                      |                           |                                      |
| (Icfes test)                          |                                      |                           |                                      |
| 3                                     |                                      |                           |                                      |
| ,                                     |                                      |                           |                                      |
| 4                                     |                                      |                           |                                      |
| -0.045                                | Change in                            |                           |                                      |
| Standard deviation                    |                                      |                           |                                      |
| NS                                    | CCT, Girls                           |                           |                                      |
| Familias                              |                                      |                           |                                      |
| en Accion                             |                                      |                           |                                      |
| (Colombia)                            |                                      |                           |                                      |
| 2                                     | Baird et al.                         |                           |                                      |
| (2011)                                |                                      |                           |                                      |
| ZCTP (Malawi)                         | Standardized math test score (TIMMS) |                           |                                      |
| 5                                     |                                      |                           |                                      |
| 0.006                                 | Change in                            |                           |                                      |
| Standard deviation                    |                                      |                           |                                      |
| NS                                    | UCT, after 2 years, 13-22            |                           |                                      |
| years, Girls                          |                                      |                           |                                      |
| ZCTP (Malawi)                         | Standardized math test score (TIMMS) |                           |                                      |
| 6                                     |                                      |                           |                                      |
| 0.12                                  |                                      |                           |                                      |
| Change in                             |                                      |                           |                                      |
| Standard deviation                    |                                      |                           |                                      |
| 10%                                   | CCT, after 2 years, 13-22            |                           |                                      |
| years, Girls                          |                                      |                           |                                      |
| ZCTP (Malawi)                         | Standardized math test score         |                           |                                      |
| (Non‑TIMMS)                           |                                      |                           |                                      |
| 6                                     |                                      |                           |                                      |
| 0.063                                 | Change in                            |                           |                                      |
| Standard deviation                    |                                      |                           |                                      |
| NS                                    | UCT, after 2 years, 13-22            |                           |                                      |
| years, Girls                          |                                      |                           |                                      |
| ZCTP (Malawi)                         | Standardized math test score         |                           |                                      |
| (Non‑TIMMS)                           |                                      |                           |                                      |
| 6                                     |                                      |                           |                                      |
| 0.086                                 | Change in                            |                           |                                      |
| Standard deviation                    |                                      |                           |                                      |
| NS                                    | CCT, after 2 years, 13-22            |                           |                                      |
| years, Girls                          |                                      |                           |                                      |
| 3                                     | Baird et al.                         |                           |                                      |
| (2013)                                |                                      |                           |                                      |
| ZCTP (Malawi)                         | Standardized mathematics test score  |                           |                                      |
| 0.164                                 |                                      |                           |                                      |
| Change in Score                       | 5%                                   | CCT, after 2 years, 13-22 |                                      |
| years, Girls (baseline dropout)       |                                      |                           |                                      |
| 4                                     | Benhassine et                        |                           |                                      |
| al. (2013)                            |                                      |                           |                                      |
| Tayssir                               |                                      |                           |                                      |
| (Morocco)                             |                                      |                           |                                      |
| Basic Arithmetic test - Summary Index |                                      |                           |                                      |
| (Based on ASER test developed by      |                                      |                           |                                      |
| Pratham)                              |                                      |                           |                                      |
| 0.091                                 | Change in Score                      | NS                        | Labelled CT to fathers, after        |
| 2 years, administered to one          |                                      |                           |                                      |
| child per household aged              |                                      |                           |                                      |
| 6-12, Boys                            |                                      |                           |                                      |
| Tayssir                               |                                      |                           |                                      |
| (Morocco)                             |                                      |                           |                                      |
| Basic Arithmetic test - Summary Index |                                      |                           |                                      |
| (Based on ASER test developed by      |                                      |                           |                                      |
| Pratham)                              |                                      |                           |                                      |
| 0.082                                 | Change in Score                      | NS                        | Labelled CT to fathers, after        |
| 2 years, administered to one          |                                      |                           |                                      |
| child per household aged              |                                      |                           |                                      |
| 6-12, Girls                           |                                      |                           |                                      |

## Language Test Scores

Spanish test score (Icfes test)6
-0.057
Change in 
Standard deviation
NS
CCT Boys
1
Baez et al. (2011)
Familias en Accion (Colombia)
Spanish test score (Icfes test)7
-0.034
Change in 
Standard deviation
NS
CCT Girls
Familias en Accion (Colombia)
2
Baird et al. (2011)
ZCTP (Malawi)
English Reading Comprehension Test Score (standardized)
0.14
Change in 
Standard Deviation
1%
CCT, after 2 years, 13-22 years, Girls
ZCTP (Malawi)
English Reading Comprehension Test 
Score (standardized)
-0.030
Change in 
Standard Deviation
NS
UCT, after 2 years, 13-22 
years, Girls
3
Baird et al (2013)
ZCTP (Malawi)
English Reading Comprehension test score (standardized)
0.131
Change in 
Standard deviation
10%
CCT, after 2 years, 13-22 years, Girls, (baseline dropout)
4
Evans et al. (2014)
TSAF (Tanzania)
Literate (self-reported)
0
Change in 
Percentage
NS
CCT, children aged 0-18 years, after 31-34 months, Boys
TSAF (Tanzania)
Literate (self-reported)
0.2
Change in 
Percentage
NS
CCT, children aged 0-18 years, after 31-34 months, Girls

## Composite Test Score

Composite test score in various 
subjects (Icfes test)8 
-0.015
Change in 
Standard Deviation
NS
CCT, Boys
1
Baez et al. (2011)
Familias en Accion (Colombia)
Composite test score in various subjects (Icfes test)2
-0.028
Change in 
Standard Deviation
NS
CCT, Girls
Familias en Accion (Colombia)
Cognitive Development
0.174
Change in 
Standard Deviation
1%
CCT, after 2 years, 13-22 years, Girls
1
Baird et al. (2011)
ZCTP (Malawi)
Cognitive test score (standardized), version of Raven's Colored Progressive Matrices that was used in the Indonesia Family Life Survey (IFLS-2)
0.136
Change in 
Standard Deviation
NS
UCT, after 2 years, 13-22 years, Girls
ZCTP (Malawi)
Cognitive test score (standardized), version of Raven's Colored Progressive Matrices that was used in the Indonesia Family Life Survey (IFLS-2)
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Table A5.2.1 Summary Of Results For Cash Transfer Effects Disaggregated By Gender For Education Indicators Continued

| #                                       | Study                                | Programme       |
|-----------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|-----------------|
| (e.g. age of child)                     |                                      |                 |
| Effect                                  | Measure of                           |                 |
| change                                  |                                      |                 |
| Significance                            | Details/explanation                  |                 |
| 0.142                                   |                                      |                 |
| Change in                               |                                      |                 |
| Standard deviation                      |                                      |                 |
| 5%                                      | CCT, after 2 years, 13-22            |                 |
| years, Girls, (baseline dropout)        |                                      |                 |
| 2                                       | Baird et al.                         |                 |
| (2013)                                  |                                      |                 |
| ZCTP (Malawi)                           | Cognitive test score (standardized), |                 |
| version of Raven's Colored Progressive  |                                      |                 |
| Matrices that was used in the Indonesia |                                      |                 |
| Family Life Survey (IFLS-2)             |                                      |                 |
| Log Long Term Memory test score         | 4.87                                 | Change in score |
| over control                            |                                      |                 |
| NS                                      | CCT, 3-6 years, effect on            |                 |
| boys only                               |                                      |                 |
| 3                                       | Gertler and                          |                 |
| Fernald (2004)                          |                                      |                 |
| PROGRESA /                              |                                      |                 |
| Oportunidades                           |                                      |                 |
| (Mexico)                                |                                      |                 |
| Log Short Term Memory test score        | 3.32                                 | Change in score |
| over control                            |                                      |                 |
| NS                                      | CCT, 3-6 years, effect on            |                 |
| boys only                               |                                      |                 |
| PROGRESA /                              |                                      |                 |
| Oportunidades                           |                                      |                 |
| (Mexico)                                |                                      |                 |
| Log Visual Integration test score       | 3.76                                 | Change in score |
| over control                            |                                      |                 |
| NS                                      | CCT, 3-6 years, effect on            |                 |
| boys only                               |                                      |                 |
| PROGRESA /                              |                                      |                 |
| Oportunidades                           |                                      |                 |
| (Mexico)                                |                                      |                 |
| Log Peabody Picture Vocabulary test     |                                      |                 |
| score                                   |                                      |                 |
| 4.88                                    | Change in score                      |                 |
| over control                            |                                      |                 |
| NS                                      | CCT, 3-6 years, effect on            |                 |
| boys only                               |                                      |                 |
| PROGRESA /                              |                                      |                 |
| Oportunidades                           |                                      |                 |
| (Mexico)                                |                                      |                 |
| Communication Dev. Inventory            | 5.73                                 | Change in score |
| over control                            |                                      |                 |
| NS                                      | CCT, 3-6 years, effect on            |                 |
| boys only                               |                                      |                 |
| PROGRESA /                              |                                      |                 |
| Oportunidades                           |                                      |                 |
| (Mexico)                                |                                      |                 |
| Sentences test score                    |                                      |                 |
| 6.78                                    |                                      |                 |
| Change in score                         |                                      |                 |
| over control                            |                                      |                 |
| 5%                                      | CCT, 3-6 years, effect on            |                 |
| boys only                               |                                      |                 |
| PROGRESA /                              |                                      |                 |
| Oportunidades                           |                                      |                 |
| (Mexico)                                |                                      |                 |
| Log Long Term Memory test score         | -3.83                                | Change in score |
| over control                            |                                      |                 |
| NS                                      | CCT, 3-6 years, effect on            |                 |
| girls only                              |                                      |                 |
| PROGRESA /                              |                                      |                 |
| Oportunidades                           |                                      |                 |
| (Mexico)                                |                                      |                 |
| Log Short Term Memory test score        | 5.24                                 | Change in score |
| over control                            |                                      |                 |
| NS                                      | CCT, 3-6 years, effect on            |                 |
| girls only                              |                                      |                 |
| PROGRESA /                              |                                      |                 |
| Oportunidades                           |                                      |                 |
| (Mexico)                                |                                      |                 |
| Log Visual Integration test score       | -3.63                                | Change in score |
| over control                            |                                      |                 |
| NS                                      | CCT, 3-6 years, effect on            |                 |
| girls only                              |                                      |                 |
| PROGRESA /                              |                                      |                 |
| Oportunidades                           |                                      |                 |
| (Mexico)                                |                                      |                 |
| Log Peabody Picture Vocabulary test     |                                      |                 |
| score                                   |                                      |                 |
| -3.55                                   | Change in score                      |                 |
| over control                            |                                      |                 |
| NS                                      | CCT, 3-6 years, effect on            |                 |
| girls only                              |                                      |                 |
| PROGRESA /                              |                                      |                 |
| Oportunidades                           |                                      |                 |
| (Mexico)                                |                                      |                 |
| Communication Dev. Inventory            | 5.58                                 | Change in score |
| over control                            |                                      |                 |
| NS                                      | CCT, 3-6 years, effect on            |                 |
| girls only                              |                                      |                 |
| PROGRESA /                              |                                      |                 |
| Oportunidades                           |                                      |                 |
| (Mexico)                                |                                      |                 |
| Sentences test score                    | 8.82                                 | Change in score |
| over control                            |                                      |                 |
| NS                                      | CCT, 3-6 years, effect on            |                 |
| girls only                              |                                      |                 |
| PROGRESA /                              |                                      |                 |
| Oportunidades                           |                                      |                 |
| (Mexico)                                |                                      |                 |
| 4                                       | Paxson &                             |                 |
| Schady (2010)                           |                                      |                 |
| BDH (Ecuador)                           | Cognitive and behavioural combined   |                 |
| index (includes scores on the TVIP test |                                      |                 |
| and three tests from the Woodcock-      |                                      |                 |
| Johnson-Munoz battery assessment)       |                                      |                 |
| 0.241                                   |                                      |                 |
| Change in                               |                                      |                 |
| standard deviation                      |                                      |                 |
| 5%                                      | CCT, effects on girls only,          |                 |
| between 12 and 18 months                |                                      |                 |
| after the beginning of the              |                                      |                 |
| programme, aged 3-7 years               |                                      |                 |
| BDH (Ecuador)                           | Cognitive and behavioral combined    |                 |
| index (includes scores on the TVIP test |                                      |                 |
| and three tests from the Woodcock-      |                                      |                 |
| Johnson-Munoz battery assessment)       |                                      |                 |
| 0.115                                   | Change in                            |                 |
| standard deviation                      |                                      |                 |
| NS                                      | CCT, effects on boys only,           |                 |
| between 12 and 18 months                |                                      |                 |
| after the beginning of the              |                                      |                 |
| programme, aged 3-7 years               |                                      |                 |

1	
Unit of observation are children (enrolled or not in school) who were 18 or below when they joined the program and that, based on their school attainment at the pre-program time, could have achieved grade 11 between 2003 and 2009, and the number of years needed to complete high school was lower than the number of years of treatment. 

2	
This exam is a nationally recognized and standardized test that is administered prior to graduation from high school and mandatory for entrance to higher education (Baez et al. 2011, p. 13)
3	
Unit of observation are children (enrolled or not in school) who were 18 or below when they joined the program and that, based on their school attainment at the pre-program time, could have achieved grade 11 between 2003 and 2009, and the number of years needed to complete high school was lower than the number of years of treatment. 
4	
This exam is a nationally recognized and standardized test that is administered prior to graduation from high school and mandatory for entrance to higher education (Baez et al. 2011, p. 13)
5	
TIMMS stands for Trends in Mathematics and Science Study, which is a cycle of internationally comparative assessments in mathematics and science carried out at the fourth and eighth grades every 4 years. Authors also borrowed five mathematics questions from the 2007 TIMMS and incorporated them into an independently developed mathematics test (Non-TIMMS).

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

Annex 5 
Evidence: 
results tables for 
overall effects 
disaggregated by 
gender, and cash 
transfer design and 
implementation 
effects

6	
Unit of observation are children (enrolled or not in school) who were 18 or below when they joined the program and that, based on their school 
attainment at the pre-program time, could have achieved grade 11 between 2003 and 2009, and the number of years needed to complete high school was lower than the number of years of treatment. 
7	
Unit of observation are children (enrolled or not in school) who were 18 or below when they joined the program and that, based on their school attainment at the pre-program time, could have achieved grade 11 between 2003 and 2009, and the number of years needed to complete high school was lower than the number of years of treatment. 
8	
Overall scores of Icfes test The exam is a standardized test that assesses the academic achievement of students in various subjects such as Mathematics, Language, Biology, Chemistry, Physics, History, Geography (Baez et al. 2011, p. 14)

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Table A5.2.2 Summary Of Results For The Role Of Cash Transfer Design And Implementation Parameters On Education

| Variable                          | Effect                     | Measure of                      |
|-----------------------------------|----------------------------|---------------------------------|
| change                            |                            |                                 |
| Significance Details/ explanation |                            |                                 |
| #                                 | Study                      | Programme                       |
| and country                       |                            |                                 |
| Design /                          |                            |                                 |
| Implementation                    |                            |                                 |
| Parameter                         |                            |                                 |
| School Attendance                 |                            |                                 |
| 1                                 | Akresh et al.              |                                 |
| (2013)                            |                            |                                 |
| NCTPP (Burkina                    |                            |                                 |
| Faso)                             |                            |                                 |
| Conditionality                    | Attendance (School Roster  |                                 |
| Report), all children 7-15        |                            |                                 |
| 0.134                             |                            |                                 |
| Percentage                        | 1%                         | CCT round 3                     |
| NCTPP (Burkina                    |                            |                                 |
| Faso)                             |                            |                                 |
| Conditionality                    | Attendance (School Roster  |                                 |
| Report), all children 7-15        |                            |                                 |
| 0.067                             | Percentage                 | NS                              |
| 0.080                             |                            |                                 |
| Percentage                        | 5%                         | Term 1-3 2009, CCT              |
| 2                                 | Baird et al.               |                                 |
| (2011)                            |                            |                                 |
| ZCTP (Malawi)                     | Conditionality             | Fraction of days                |
| respondent attended school        |                            |                                 |
| (School ledgers)                  |                            |                                 |
| 0.058                             | Percentage                 | NS                              |
| ZCTP (Malawi)                     | Conditionality             | Fraction of days                |
| respondent attended school        |                            |                                 |
| (School ledgers)                  |                            |                                 |
| SCAE                              |                            |                                 |
| (Colombia)                        |                            |                                 |
| Frequency of                      |                            |                                 |
| Payment                           |                            |                                 |
| Verified attendance at            |                            |                                 |
| school                            |                            |                                 |
| 0.033                             |                            |                                 |
| Percentage                        | 1%                         | Effect of Basic CCT only, San   |
| Cristobal District                |                            |                                 |
| 3                                 | Barrera-                   |                                 |
| Osorio et al.                     |                            |                                 |
| (2008)                            |                            |                                 |
| SCAE                              |                            |                                 |
| (Colombia)                        |                            |                                 |
| Frequency of                      |                            |                                 |
| Payment                           |                            |                                 |
| Verified attendance at            |                            |                                 |
| school                            |                            |                                 |
| 0.028                             |                            |                                 |
| Percentage                        | 1%                         | Effect of a savings CCT, where  |
| 2/3 transfer given immediately    |                            |                                 |
| and 1/3 given at enrolment,       |                            |                                 |
| San Cristobal District            |                            |                                 |
| SCAE                              |                            |                                 |
| (Colombia)                        |                            |                                 |
| Conditionality                    | Verified attendance at     |                                 |
| school                            |                            |                                 |
| 0.009                             | Percentage                 | NS                              |
| District, grades 6-8              |                            |                                 |
| SCAE                              |                            |                                 |
| (Colombia)                        |                            |                                 |
| Conditionality                    | Verified attendance at     |                                 |
| school                            |                            |                                 |
| 0.05                              |                            |                                 |
| Percentage                        | 1%                         | Effect of transfers conditional |
| on graduation and tertiary        |                            |                                 |
| enrolment rather than             |                            |                                 |
| attendance, Suba, grades 9-11     |                            |                                 |
| 0.002                             | Percentage                 | NS                              |
| between LCT to mothers and        |                            |                                 |
| LCT to fathers                    |                            |                                 |
| 4                                 | Benhassine                 |                                 |
| et al. (2013)                     |                            |                                 |
| Tayssir                           |                            |                                 |
| (Morocco)                         |                            |                                 |
| Main Recipient                    | Attendance rate during     |                                 |
| surprise school visits            |                            |                                 |
| (School sample, children          |                            |                                 |
| 6-12)                             |                            |                                 |
| 0.004                             | Percentage                 | NS                              |
| between LCT to mothers and        |                            |                                 |
| LCT to fathers                    |                            |                                 |
| Tayssir                           |                            |                                 |
| (Morocco)                         |                            |                                 |
| Main Recipient                    | Attending school by end of |                                 |
| year 2, among those 6-15          |                            |                                 |
| at baseline (household            |                            |                                 |
| sample)                           |                            |                                 |
| 0.918                             | P value                    | NS                              |
| from Father                       |                            |                                 |
| Tayssir                           |                            |                                 |
| (Morocco)                         |                            |                                 |
| Main Recipient                    | Attendance rate during     |                                 |
| surprise school visits            |                            |                                 |
| (School sample, children          |                            |                                 |
| 6-12)                             |                            |                                 |
| 0.962                             | P value                    | NS                              |
| from Father                       |                            |                                 |
| Tayssir                           |                            |                                 |
| (Morocco)                         |                            |                                 |
| Main Recipient                    | Attending school by end of |                                 |
| year 2, among those 6-15          |                            |                                 |
| at baseline (household            |                            |                                 |
| sample)                           |                            |                                 |
| 0.007                             | Percentage                 | NS                              |
| between CCT to fathers and        |                            |                                 |
| LCT to fathers                    |                            |                                 |
| Tayssir                           |                            |                                 |
| (Morocco)                         |                            |                                 |
| Conditionality                    | Attendance rate during     |                                 |
| surprise school visits            |                            |                                 |
| (School sample, children          |                            |                                 |
| 6-12)                             |                            |                                 |
| Tayssir                           |                            |                                 |
| (Morocco)                         |                            |                                 |
| Conditionality                    | Attending school by end of |                                 |
| year 2, among those 6-15          |                            |                                 |
| at baseline                       |                            |                                 |
| -0.019                            | Percentage                 | NS                              |
| between CCT to fathers and        |                            |                                 |
| LCT to fathers                    |                            |                                 |
| 0.01                              |                            |                                 |
| P value                           | 1%                         | P-value for CCT different       |
| from LCT                          |                            |                                 |
| Tayssir                           |                            |                                 |
| (Morocco)                         |                            |                                 |
| Conditionality                    | Attending school by end of |                                 |
| year 2, among those 6-15          |                            |                                 |
| at baseline                       |                            |                                 |
| 0.125                             | P value                    | NS                              |
| from LCT                          |                            |                                 |
| Tayssir                           |                            |                                 |
| (Morocco)                         |                            |                                 |
| Conditionality                    | Attendance rate during     |                                 |
| surprise school visits            |                            |                                 |
| (School sample, children          |                            |                                 |
| 6-12)                             |                            |                                 |
| 5                                 | Filmer and                 |                                 |
| Schady                            |                            |                                 |
| (2011)                            |                            |                                 |
| CSP (Cambodia) Transfer Level     | child's presence at school |                                 |
| during unannounced                |                            |                                 |
| visit (Secondary School           |                            |                                 |
| students)                         |                            |                                 |
| 0.023                             | Percentage                 | NS                              |
| four visits, $60 scholarship      |                            |                                 |
| compared to those who were        |                            |                                 |
| offered a $45 scholarship         |                            |                                 |
| Contents                          |                            |                                 |
| Annex 1                           |                            |                                 |
| Overview of                       |                            |                                 |
| existing cash                     |                            |                                 |
| transfers reviews                 |                            |                                 |
| Annex 2                           |                            |                                 |
| Detailed search                   |                            |                                 |
| protocols and study               |                            |                                 |
| assessment tools                  |                            |                                 |
| Annex 3                           |                            |                                 |
| Summary table                     |                            |                                 |
| of searches                       |                            |                                 |
| and reasons for                   |                            |                                 |
| exclusion and flow                |                            |                                 |
| diagrams                          |                            |                                 |
| Annex 4                           |                            |                                 |
| Summary of the                    |                            |                                 |
| evidence base                     |                            |                                 |
| Annex 5                           |                            |                                 |
| Evidence:                         |                            |                                 |
| results tables for                |                            |                                 |
| overall effects                   |                            |                                 |
| disaggregated by                  |                            |                                 |
| gender, and cash                  |                            |                                 |
| transfer design and               |                            |                                 |
| implementation                    |                            |                                 |
| effects                           |                            |                                 |

Continued on next page

## Table A5.2.2 Summary Of Results For The Role Of Cash Transfer Design And Implementation Parameters On Education Continued

| Variable                          | Effect                    | Measure of                     |
|-----------------------------------|---------------------------|--------------------------------|
| change                            |                           |                                |
| Significance Details/ explanation |                           |                                |
| #                                 | Study                     | Programme                      |
| and country                       |                           |                                |
| Design /                          |                           |                                |
| Implementation                    |                           |                                |
| Parameter                         |                           |                                |
| 6                                 | Macours and               |                                |
| Vakis (2009)                      |                           |                                |
| Atencion a Crisis                 |                           |                                |
| (Nicaragua)                       |                           |                                |
| Complementary                     |                           |                                |
| Programme                         |                           |                                |
| Attending school (children        |                           |                                |
| aged 7-18)                        |                           |                                |
| 0.057                             |                           |                                |
| Percentage                        | 5%                        | After 9 months, Basic CCT only |
| -1.574                            |                           |                                |
| Percentage                        | 1%                        | After 9 months, Basic CCT only |
| Atencion a Crisis                 |                           |                                |
| (Nicaragua)                       |                           |                                |
| Complementary                     |                           |                                |
| Programme                         |                           |                                |
| Number of days absent             |                           |                                |
| from school (absenteeism,         |                           |                                |
| children aged 7-18)               |                           |                                |
| Atencion a Crisis                 |                           |                                |
| (Nicaragua)                       |                           |                                |
| Complementary                     |                           |                                |
| Programme                         |                           |                                |
| Attending school                  |                           |                                |
| 0.045                             |                           |                                |
| Percentage                        | 5%                        | After 9 months, Basic CCT      |
| plus grant for productive         |                           |                                |
| investments                       |                           |                                |
| Atencion a Crisis                 |                           |                                |
| (Nicaragua)                       |                           |                                |
| Complementary                     |                           |                                |
| Programme                         |                           |                                |
| Number of days absent             |                           |                                |
| from school (absenteeism)         |                           |                                |
| -1.107                            |                           |                                |
| Percentage                        | 5%                        | After 9 months, Basic CCT      |
| plus grant for productive         |                           |                                |
| investments                       |                           |                                |
| Atencion a Crisis                 |                           |                                |
| (Nicaragua)                       |                           |                                |
| Complementary                     |                           |                                |
| Programme                         |                           |                                |
| Attending school                  |                           |                                |
| 0.049                             |                           |                                |
| Percentage                        | 5%                        | After 9 months, Basic CCT plus |
| scholarship for occupational      |                           |                                |
| training                          |                           |                                |
| Atencion a Crisis                 |                           |                                |
| (Nicaragua)                       |                           |                                |
| Complementary                     |                           |                                |
| Programme                         |                           |                                |
| Number of days absent             |                           |                                |
| from school (absenteeism)         |                           |                                |
| -1.438                            |                           |                                |
| Percentage                        | 1%                        | After 9 months, Basic CCT plus |
| scholarship for occupational      |                           |                                |
| training                          |                           |                                |
| -0.0043                           | Percentage                |                                |
| point                             |                           |                                |
| NS                                | Among households targeted |                                |
| through the Senior Citizens       |                           |                                |
| Grant                             |                           |                                |
| 7                                 | Merttens et               |                                |
| al. (2015)                        |                           |                                |
| SAGE (Uganda)                     | Targeting                 | Proportion of children         |
| 6-17 currently                    |                           |                                |
| attending formal                  |                           |                                |
| education                         |                           |                                |
| -0.034                            |                           |                                |
| Percentage                        |                           |                                |
| point                             |                           |                                |
| 10%                               | Among households targeted |                                |
| through the Vulnerable Family     |                           |                                |
| Support Grant                     |                           |                                |
| SAGE (Uganda)                     | Targeting                 | Proportion of children         |
| 6-17 currently                    |                           |                                |
| attending formal                  |                           |                                |
| education                         |                           |                                |
| -0.012                            | Percentage                |                                |
| point                             |                           |                                |
| NS                                | Among households targeted |                                |
| through the Senior Citizens       |                           |                                |
| Grant                             |                           |                                |
| SAGE (Uganda)                     | Targeting                 | Proportion of boys             |
| 6-17 currently                    |                           |                                |
| attending formal                  |                           |                                |
| education                         |                           |                                |
| -0.0006                           | Percentage                |                                |
| point                             |                           |                                |
| NS                                | Among households targeted |                                |
| through the Vulnerable Family     |                           |                                |
| Support Grant                     |                           |                                |
| SAGE (Uganda)                     | Targeting                 | Proportion of boys             |
| 6-17 currently                    |                           |                                |
| attending formal                  |                           |                                |
| education                         |                           |                                |
| 0.0037                            | Percentage                |                                |
| point                             |                           |                                |
| NS                                | Among households targeted |                                |
| through the Senior Citizens       |                           |                                |
| Grant                             |                           |                                |
| SAGE (Uganda)                     | Targeting                 | Proportion of girls            |
| 6-17 currently                    |                           |                                |
| attending formal                  |                           |                                |
| education                         |                           |                                |
| -0.061                            |                           |                                |
| Percentage                        |                           |                                |
| point                             |                           |                                |
| 10%                               | Among households targeted |                                |
| through the Vulnerable Family     |                           |                                |
| Support Grant                     |                           |                                |
| SAGE (Uganda)                     | Targeting                 | Proportion of girls            |
| 6-17 currently                    |                           |                                |
| attending formal                  |                           |                                |
| education                         |                           |                                |
| 0.14                              | Percentage                |                                |
| point                             |                           |                                |
| NS                                | Among households targeted |                                |
| through the Senior Citizens       |                           |                                |
| Grant                             |                           |                                |
| SAGE (Uganda)                     | Targeting                 | Mean number of                 |
| days missed in last               |                           |                                |
| 30 scheduled school days          |                           |                                |
| (absenteeism)                     |                           |                                |
| -0.36                             | Percentage                |                                |
| point                             |                           |                                |
| NS                                | Among households targeted |                                |
| through the Vulnerable Family     |                           |                                |
| Support Grant                     |                           |                                |
| SAGE (Uganda)                     | Targeting                 | Mean number of                 |
| days missed in last               |                           |                                |
| 30 scheduled school               |                           |                                |
| days (absenteeism)                |                           |                                |
| 8                                 | Perova and                |                                |
| Vakis (2012)                      |                           |                                |
| Juntos (Peru)                     | Duration of               |                                |
| exposure                          |                           |                                |
| Currently attending school,       |                           |                                |
| conditional on registration       |                           |                                |
| (children aged 6-14)              |                           |                                |
| 0.01                              | Percentage                | NS                             |
| 12-23 months (compared to         |                           |                                |
| less than one year)               |                           |                                |
| Juntos (Peru)                     | Duration of               |                                |
| exposure                          |                           |                                |
| Currently attending school,       |                           |                                |
| conditional on registration       |                           |                                |
| 0.03                              |                           |                                |
| Percentage                        | 1%                        | Being a beneficiary for over   |
| 24-26 months (compared to         |                           |                                |
| less than a year)                 |                           |                                |
| Juntos (Peru)                     | Duration of               |                                |
| exposure                          |                           |                                |
| currently attending school,       |                           |                                |
| conditional on registration       |                           |                                |
| 0.01                              | Percentage                | NS                             |
| 36 months (compared to less       |                           |                                |
| than a year)                      |                           |                                |
| 9                                 | Villa (2014)              | Familias                       |
| en accion                         |                           |                                |
| (Colombia)                        |                           |                                |
| Duration of                       |                           |                                |
| exposure                          |                           |                                |
| Years of education (among         |                           |                                |
| those enrolled at 7 years         |                           |                                |
| old)                              |                           |                                |
| 4.4                               |                           |                                |
| Years of                          |                           |                                |
| difference                        |                           |                                |
| between                           |                           |                                |
| least and                         |                           |                                |
| most                              |                           |                                |
| exposed                           |                           |                                |
| Contents                          |                           |                                |
| Annex 1                           |                           |                                |
| Overview of                       |                           |                                |
| existing cash                     |                           |                                |
| transfers reviews                 |                           |                                |
| Annex 2                           |                           |                                |
| Detailed search                   |                           |                                |
| protocols and study               |                           |                                |
| assessment tools                  |                           |                                |
| Annex 3                           |                           |                                |
| Summary table                     |                           |                                |
| of searches                       |                           |                                |
| and reasons for                   |                           |                                |
| exclusion and flow                |                           |                                |
| diagrams                          |                           |                                |
| Annex 4                           |                           |                                |
| Summary of the                    |                           |                                |
| evidence base                     |                           |                                |
| Annex 5                           |                           |                                |
| Evidence:                         |                           |                                |
| results tables for                |                           |                                |
| overall effects                   |                           |                                |
| disaggregated by                  |                           |                                |
| gender, and cash                  |                           |                                |
| transfer design and               |                           |                                |
| implementation                    |                           |                                |
| effects                           |                           |                                |
| 1%                                | Difference between        |                                |
| households with highest and       |                           |                                |
| lowest proportion of potential    |                           |                                |
| exposure                          |                           |                                |
Table A5.2.2 Summary of results for the role of cash transfer design and implementation parameters on 
education continued
Variable
Effect
Measure of 
change
Significance Details/ explanation
#
Study
Programme and country
Design / Implementation Parameter
Language Test Score
0.14
Standard 
Deviation
1%
CCT, after 2 years, Girls aged 13-22 
1
Baird et al. (2011)
ZCTP (Malawi)
Conditionality
English Reading Comprehension Test Score (standardized)
-0.030
Standard 
Deviation
NS
UCT, after 2 years, Girls aged 13-22
ZCTP (Malawi)
Conditionality
English Reading Comprehension Test Score (standardized)
-0.032
Standard 
Deviation
NS
After 2 years, 13-22 years, Girls, CCT individual amount
ZCTP (Malawi)
Transfer Level
English Reading Comprehension Test Score (standardized)
-0.019
Standard 
Deviation
NS
After 2 years, 13-22 years, Girls, UCT individual amount
ZCTP (Malawi)
Transfer Level
English Reading Comprehension Test Score (standardized)
0
Standard 
Deviation
NS
After 2 years, 13-22 years, Girls, CCT household amount
ZCTP (Malawi)
Transfer Level
English Reading Comprehension Test Score (standardized)
-0.058
Standard 
Deviation
5%
After 2 years, 13-22 years, Girls, UCT household amount
ZCTP (Malawi)
Transfer Level
English Reading Comprehension Test Score (standardized)
Duration of Exposure
Reading skills 
(Woodcock Johnson test)9
-0.11
Percentage
NS
Extra 18 months of the programme, Female aged 9-15 in 1997
2
Behrman et al. (2009)
PROGRESA / Oportunidades (Mexico)
PROGRESA / Oportunidades (Mexico)
Duration of Exposure
Reading skills 
(Woodcock Johnson test)
0.199
Percentage
NS
Extra 18 months of the programme Male, aged 9-15 in 1997
Duration of Exposure
Written Language (Woodcock Johnson test)10
-0.301
Percentage
NS
Extra 18 months of the programme, Female aged 9-15 in 1997
PROGRESA / Oportunidades (Mexico)
PROGRESA / Oportunidades (Mexico)
Duration of Exposure
Written Language (Woodcock Johnson test)
-0.011
Percentage
NS
Extra 18 months of the programme, Male, aged 9-15 in 1997
3
Evans et al. (2014)
TSAF (Tanzania) Duration of 
Exposure
Literate (self-reported)
0.04
Percentage
10%
CCT, children aged 0-18 years, 
 
after 18-21 months 
TSAF (Tanzania) Duration of 
Exposure
Literate (self-reported)
0.02
Percentage
NS
CCT, children aged 0-18 years, 
 
after 31-34 months
4
Fernald et al. (2008)
Oportunidades (Mexico)
Cumulative cash transfer (duration & transfer size)
Peabody score
0.18
Log of raw 
score
1%
Effect of doubling cumulative cash transfers from median of 7500 to 15000 pesos on children 36-68 months old

## Math Test Scores

| 1                         | Baird et al.              |
|---------------------------|---------------------------|
| (2011)                    |                           |
| ZCTP (Malawi)             | Conditionality            |
| score (TIMMS)             |                           |
| 11                        |                           |
| 0.006                     | Standard                  |
| deviation                 |                           |
| NS                        | UCT, after 2 years, 13-22 |
| years Girls               |                           |
| ZCTP (Malawi)             | Conditionality            |
| score (TIMMS)             |                           |
| 6                         |                           |
| 0.12                      |                           |
| Standard                  |                           |
| deviation                 |                           |
| 10%                       | CCT, after 2 years, 13-22 |
| years, Girls              |                           |
| 2                         | Behrman et                |
| al. (2009)                |                           |
| PROGRESA /                |                           |
| Oportunidades             |                           |
| (Mexico)                  |                           |
| Duration of               |                           |
| Exposure                  |                           |
| Math Test Score           |                           |
| (Woodcock Johnson test)   |                           |
| -0.225                    | Percentage                |
| programme when aged       |                           |
| between 9-15, Female aged |                           |
| 9-15 in 1997              |                           |
| PROGRESA /                |                           |
| Oportunidades             |                           |
| (Mexico)                  |                           |
| Duration of               |                           |
| Exposure                  |                           |
| Math Test Score           |                           |
| (Woodcock Johnson test)   |                           |
| -0.574                    | Percentage                |
| programme when aged       |                           |
| between 9-15, Male, aged  |                           |
| 9-15 in 1997              |                           |
| Contents                  |                           |
| Annex 1                   |                           |
| Overview of               |                           |
| existing cash             |                           |
| transfers reviews         |                           |
| Annex 2                   |                           |
| Detailed search           |                           |
| protocols and study       |                           |
| assessment tools          |                           |
| Annex 3                   |                           |
| Summary table             |                           |
| of searches               |                           |
| and reasons for           |                           |
| exclusion and flow        |                           |
| diagrams                  |                           |
| Annex 4                   |                           |
| Summary of the            |                           |
| evidence base             |                           |
| Annex 5                   |                           |
| Evidence:                 |                           |
| results tables for        |                           |
| overall effects           |                           |
| disaggregated by          |                           |
| gender, and cash          |                           |
| transfer design and       |                           |
| implementation            |                           |
| effects                   |                           |

Continued on next page

## Table A5.2.2 Summary Of Results For The Role Of Cash Transfer Design And Implementation Parameters On Education Continued

| Variable                          | Effect                       | Measure of                |
|-----------------------------------|------------------------------|---------------------------|
| change                            |                              |                           |
| Significance Details/ explanation |                              |                           |
| #                                 | Study                        | Programme                 |
| and country                       |                              |                           |
| Design /                          |                              |                           |
| Implementation                    |                              |                           |
| Parameter                         |                              |                           |
| -0.004                            | Change in                    |                           |
| Score                             |                              |                           |
| NS                                | After 2 years, difference    |                           |
| between LCT to mothers and        |                              |                           |
| LCT to fathers                    |                              |                           |
| 3                                 | Benhassine                   |                           |
| et al. (2013)                     |                              |                           |
| Tayssir                           |                              |                           |
| (Morocco)                         |                              |                           |
| Main Recipient                    | Basic Arithmetic test -      |                           |
| Summary Index                     |                              |                           |
| (Based on ASER test,              |                              |                           |
| children 6-12)                    |                              |                           |
| 0.567                             | P value                      | NS                        |
| from Father                       |                              |                           |
| Tayssir                           |                              |                           |
| (Morocco)                         |                              |                           |
| Main Recipient                    | Basic Arithmetic test -      |                           |
| Summary Index                     |                              |                           |
| (Based on ASER test,              |                              |                           |
| children 6-12)                    |                              |                           |
| Tayssir                           |                              |                           |
| (Morocco)                         |                              |                           |
| Conditionality                    | Basic Arithmetic test -      |                           |
| Summary Index (Based on           |                              |                           |
| ASER test, children 6-12)         |                              |                           |
| -0.056                            | Change in                    |                           |
| Score                             |                              |                           |
| NS                                | After 2 years, difference    |                           |
| between CCT to fathers and        |                              |                           |
| LCT to fathers                    |                              |                           |
| 0.034                             |                              |                           |
| P value                           | 5%                           | P-value for CCT different |
| from LCT                          |                              |                           |
| Tayssir                           |                              |                           |
| (Morocco)                         |                              |                           |
| Conditionality                    | Basic Arithmetic test -      |                           |
| Summary Index (Based on           |                              |                           |
| ASER test, children 6-12)         |                              |                           |
| Cognitive development             |                              |                           |
| 1                                 | Esteva                       |                           |
| (2012)                            |                              |                           |
| PROGRESA /                        |                              |                           |
| Oportunidades                     |                              |                           |
| (Mexico)                          |                              |                           |
| Duration of                       |                              |                           |
| Exposure                          |                              |                           |
| Long term memory (log),           |                              |                           |
| assessed using the                |                              |                           |
| Woodcock-Munoz Test               |                              |                           |
| 0.055                             | Change in                    |                           |
| percentage                        |                              |                           |
| NS                                | Effect on children aged 2-6, |                           |
| approx. five years after the      |                              |                           |
| programme began. Effect           |                              |                           |
| of being a beneficiary for        |                              |                           |
| 18 months longer than in          |                              |                           |
| comparison group.                 |                              |                           |
| 0.010                             | Change in                    |                           |
| percentage                        |                              |                           |
| NS                                | As above                     |                           |
| PROGRESA /                        |                              |                           |
| Oportunidades                     |                              |                           |
| (Mexico)                          |                              |                           |
| Duration of                       |                              |                           |
| Exposure                          |                              |                           |
| Short term memory                 |                              |                           |
| (log), assessed using the         |                              |                           |
| Woodcock-Munoz Test               |                              |                           |
| -0.014                            | Change in                    |                           |
| percentage                        |                              |                           |
| NS                                | As above                     |                           |
| PROGRESA /                        |                              |                           |
| Oportunidades                     |                              |                           |
| (Mexico)                          |                              |                           |
| Duration of                       |                              |                           |
| Exposure                          |                              |                           |
| Visual spatial integration,       |                              |                           |
| assessed using the                |                              |                           |
| Woodcock-Munoz Test               |                              |                           |
| PROGRESA /                        |                              |                           |
| Oportunidades                     |                              |                           |
| (Mexico)                          |                              |                           |
| Duration of                       |                              |                           |
| Exposure                          |                              |                           |
| Language development              |                              |                           |
| (log), measured using the         |                              |                           |
| Peabody picture vocabulary        |                              |                           |
| test                              |                              |                           |
| 0.030                             | Change in                    |                           |
| percentage                        |                              |                           |
| NS                                | Effect on children aged 3-6, |                           |
| approx. five years after the      |                              |                           |
| programme began. Effect           |                              |                           |
| of being a beneficiary for        |                              |                           |
| 18 months longer than in          |                              |                           |
| comparison group.                 |                              |                           |
| PROGRESA /                        |                              |                           |
| Oportunidades                     |                              |                           |
| (Mexico)                          |                              |                           |
| Duration of                       |                              |                           |
| Exposure                          |                              |                           |
| Language development              |                              |                           |
| (log), measured using the         |                              |                           |
| Peabody picture vocabulary        |                              |                           |
| test                              |                              |                           |
| 0.101                             | Change in                    |                           |
| percentage                        |                              |                           |
| NS                                | Effect on children aged 3-6, |                           |
| approx. five years after the      |                              |                           |
| programme began. Effect of        |                              |                           |
| additional exposure to the        |                              |                           |
| programme for the full time       |                              |                           |
| in-utero and partially during     |                              |                           |
| early childhood                   |                              |                           |
| PROGRESA /                        |                              |                           |
| Oportunidades                     |                              |                           |
| (Mexico)                          |                              |                           |
| Duration of                       |                              |                           |
| Exposure                          |                              |                           |
| Language development              |                              |                           |
| (log), measured using the         |                              |                           |
| Peabody picture vocabulary        |                              |                           |
| test                              |                              |                           |
| -0.081                            | Change in                    |                           |
| percentage                        |                              |                           |
| NS                                | Effect on children aged 3-6, |                           |
| approx. five years after the      |                              |                           |
| programme began. Effect of        |                              |                           |
| families receiving transfers for  |                              |                           |
| a longer period before having     |                              |                           |
| children.                         |                              |                           |
| PROGRESA /                        |                              |                           |
| Oportunidades                     |                              |                           |
| (Mexico)                          |                              |                           |
| Duration of                       |                              |                           |
| Exposure                          |                              |                           |
| Visual spatial integration,       |                              |                           |
| assessed using the                |                              |                           |
| Woodcock-Munoz Test               |                              |                           |
| 0.041                             | Change in                    |                           |
| percentage                        |                              |                           |
| NS                                | Effect on children aged 2-6, |                           |
| approx. five years after the      |                              |                           |
| programme began. Effect           |                              |                           |
| of extra treatment in early       |                              |                           |
| childhood.                        |                              |                           |
| PROGRESA /                        |                              |                           |
| Oportunidades                     |                              |                           |
| (Mexico)                          |                              |                           |
| Duration of                       |                              |                           |
| Exposure                          |                              |                           |
| Visual spatial integration,       |                              |                           |
| assessed using the                |                              |                           |
| Woodcock-Munoz Test               |                              |                           |
| 0.012                             | Change in                    |                           |
| percentage                        |                              |                           |
| NS                                | Effect on children aged 2-6, |                           |
| approx. five years after the      |                              |                           |
| programme began. Effect of        |                              |                           |
| additional exposure to the        |                              |                           |
| programme for the full time       |                              |                           |
| in-utero and partially during     |                              |                           |
| early childhood                   |                              |                           |
| PROGRESA /                        |                              |                           |
| Oportunidades                     |                              |                           |
| (Mexico)                          |                              |                           |
| Duration of                       |                              |                           |
| Exposure                          |                              |                           |
| Visual spatial integration,       |                              |                           |
| assessed using the                |                              |                           |
| Woodcock-Munoz Test               |                              |                           |
| -0.197                            |                              |                           |
| Change in                         |                              |                           |
| percentage                        |                              |                           |
| 5%                                | Effect on children aged 2-6, |                           |
| approx. five years after the      |                              |                           |
| programme began. Effect of        |                              |                           |
| families receiving transfers for  |                              |                           |
| a longer period before having     |                              |                           |
| children.                         |                              |                           |
| Contents                          |                              |                           |
| Annex 1                           |                              |                           |
| Overview of                       |                              |                           |
| existing cash                     |                              |                           |
| transfers reviews                 |                              |                           |
| Annex 2                           |                              |                           |
| Detailed search                   |                              |                           |
| protocols and study               |                              |                           |
| assessment tools                  |                              |                           |
| Annex 3                           |                              |                           |
| Summary table                     |                              |                           |
| of searches                       |                              |                           |
| and reasons for                   |                              |                           |
| exclusion and flow                |                              |                           |
| diagrams                          |                              |                           |
| Annex 4                           |                              |                           |
| Summary of the                    |                              |                           |
| evidence base                     |                              |                           |
| Annex 5                           |                              |                           |
| Evidence:                         |                              |                           |
| results tables for                |                              |                           |
| overall effects                   |                              |                           |
| disaggregated by                  |                              |                           |
| gender, and cash                  |                              |                           |
| transfer design and               |                              |                           |
| implementation                    |                              |                           |
| effects                           |                              |                           |

## Table A5.2.2 Summary Of Results For The Role Of Cash Transfer Design And Implementation Parameters On Education Continued

| Variable                          | Effect                           | Measure of    |
|-----------------------------------|----------------------------------|---------------|
| change                            |                                  |               |
| Significance Details/ explanation |                                  |               |
| #                                 | Study                            | Programme     |
| and country                       |                                  |               |
| Design /                          |                                  |               |
| Implementation                    |                                  |               |
| Parameter                         |                                  |               |
| 1                                 | Esteva, 2012 PROGRESA /          |               |
| Oportunidades                     |                                  |               |
| (Mexico)                          |                                  |               |
| Duration of                       |                                  |               |
| Exposure                          |                                  |               |
| Long term memory (log),           |                                  |               |
| assessed using the                |                                  |               |
| Woodcock-Munoz Test               |                                  |               |
| 0.145                             |                                  |               |
| Change in                         |                                  |               |
| percentage                        |                                  |               |
| 10%                               | Effect on children aged 2-6,     |               |
| approx. five years after the      |                                  |               |
| programme began. Effect of        |                                  |               |
| additional exposure to the        |                                  |               |
| programme for the full time       |                                  |               |
| in-utero and partially during     |                                  |               |
| early childhood                   |                                  |               |
| PROGRESA /                        |                                  |               |
| Oportunidades                     |                                  |               |
| (Mexico)                          |                                  |               |
| Duration of                       |                                  |               |
| Exposure                          |                                  |               |
| Long term memory (log),           |                                  |               |
| assessed using the                |                                  |               |
| Woodcock-Munoz Test               |                                  |               |
| -0.079                            | Change in                        |               |
| percentage                        |                                  |               |
| NS                                | Effect on children aged 2-6,     |               |
| approx. five years after the      |                                  |               |
| programme began. Effect of        |                                  |               |
| families receiving transfers for  |                                  |               |
| a longer period before having     |                                  |               |
| children.                         |                                  |               |
| PROGRESA /                        |                                  |               |
| Oportunidades                     |                                  |               |
| (Mexico)                          |                                  |               |
| Duration of                       |                                  |               |
| Exposure                          |                                  |               |
| Short term memory                 |                                  |               |
| (log) assessed using the          |                                  |               |
| Woodcock-Munoz Test               |                                  |               |
| 0.073                             | Change in                        |               |
| percentage                        |                                  |               |
| NS                                | Effect on children aged 2-6,     |               |
| approx. five years after the      |                                  |               |
| programme began. Effect of        |                                  |               |
| additional exposure to the        |                                  |               |
| programme for the full time       |                                  |               |
| in-utero and partially during     |                                  |               |
| early childhood                   |                                  |               |
| PROGRESA /                        |                                  |               |
| Oportunidades                     |                                  |               |
| (Mexico)                          |                                  |               |
| Duration of                       |                                  |               |
| Exposure                          |                                  |               |
| Short term memory                 |                                  |               |
| (log) assessed using the          |                                  |               |
| Woodcock-Munoz Test               |                                  |               |
| 0.027                             | Change in                        |               |
| percentage                        |                                  |               |
| NS                                | Effect on children aged 2-6,     |               |
| approx. five years after the      |                                  |               |
| programme began. Effect of        |                                  |               |
| families receiving transfers for  |                                  |               |
| a longer period before having     |                                  |               |
| children.                         |                                  |               |
| 2                                 | Fernald et al.                   |               |
| (2008)                            |                                  |               |
| Oportunidades                     |                                  |               |
| (Mexico)                          |                                  |               |
| Cumulative cash                   |                                  |               |
| transfer (duration                |                                  |               |
| & transfer size)                  |                                  |               |
| Long-term memory                  |                                  |               |
| 0.12                              |                                  |               |
| Log of raw                        |                                  |               |
| score                             |                                  |               |
| 1%                                | Effect of doubling cumulative    |               |
| cash transfers from median        |                                  |               |
| of 7500 to 15000 pesos on         |                                  |               |
| children 36-68 months old         |                                  |               |
| Oportunidades                     |                                  |               |
| (Mexico)                          |                                  |               |
| Cumulative cash                   |                                  |               |
| transfer (duration                |                                  |               |
| & transfer size)                  |                                  |               |
| Short-term memory                 |                                  |               |
| 0.13                              |                                  |               |
| Log of raw                        |                                  |               |
| score                             |                                  |               |
| 1%                                | Effect of doubling cumulative    |               |
| cash transfers from median        |                                  |               |
| of 7500 to 15000 pesos on         |                                  |               |
| children 36-68 months old         |                                  |               |
| Oportunidades                     |                                  |               |
| (Mexico)                          |                                  |               |
| Cumulative cash                   |                                  |               |
| transfer (duration                |                                  |               |
| & transfer size)                  |                                  |               |
| Visual integration                |                                  |               |
| 0.08                              |                                  |               |
| Log of raw                        |                                  |               |
| score                             |                                  |               |
| 1%                                | Effect of doubling cumulative    |               |
| cash transfers from median        |                                  |               |
| of 7500 to 15000 pesos on         |                                  |               |
| children 36-68 months old         |                                  |               |
| 3                                 | Fernald et al.                   |               |
| (2009)                            |                                  |               |
| Oportunidades                     |                                  |               |
| (Mexico)                          |                                  |               |
| Cumulative cash                   |                                  |               |
| transfers (duration               |                                  |               |
| & transfer size)                  |                                  |               |
| 0.73                              |                                  |               |
| Age-                              |                                  |               |
| standardised                      |                                  |               |
| z-score                           |                                  |               |
| Verbal assessment score           |                                  |               |
| from Wechsler Abbreviated         |                                  |               |
| Scale of Intelligence -           |                                  |               |
| (WASI)                            |                                  |               |
| Oportunidades                     |                                  |               |
| (Mexico)                          |                                  |               |
| Duration of                       |                                  |               |
| exposure                          |                                  |               |
| Verbal assessment score           |                                  |               |
| from WASI                         |                                  |               |
| 1.13                              | Age-                             |               |
| standardised                      |                                  |               |
| z-score                           |                                  |               |
| Oportunidades                     |                                  |               |
| (Mexico)                          |                                  |               |
| Cumulative cash                   |                                  |               |
| transfers (duration               |                                  |               |
| & transfer size)                  |                                  |               |
| Cognitive assessment score        |                                  |               |
| from WASI                         |                                  |               |
| 0.47                              |                                  |               |
| Age-                              |                                  |               |
| standardised                      |                                  |               |
| z-score                           |                                  |               |
| Oportunidades                     |                                  |               |
| (Mexico)                          |                                  |               |
| Duration of                       |                                  |               |
| exposure                          |                                  |               |
| Cognitive assessment score        |                                  |               |
| from WASI                         |                                  |               |
| -1.19                             | Age-                             |               |
| standardised                      |                                  |               |
| z-score                           |                                  |               |
| 0.016                             | Change in                        |               |
| standard                          |                                  |               |
| deviation                         |                                  |               |
| 4                                 | Macours and                      |               |
| Vakis (2012)                      |                                  |               |
| Atencion a Crisis                 |                                  |               |
| (Nicaragua)                       |                                  |               |
| Complementary                     |                                  |               |
| Activities                        |                                  |               |
| Cognitive and socio-              |                                  |               |
| emotional outcomes index          |                                  |               |
| (comprised of five different      |                                  |               |
| indicators)                       |                                  |               |
| -0.008                            | Change in                        |               |
| standard                          |                                  |               |
| deviation                         |                                  |               |
| Atencion a Crisis                 |                                  |               |
| (Nicaragua)                       |                                  |               |
| Complementary                     |                                  |               |
| Activities                        |                                  |               |
| Cognitive and socio-              |                                  |               |
| emotional outcomes index          |                                  |               |
| (comprised of six different       |                                  |               |
| indicators)                       |                                  |               |
| Contents                          |                                  |               |
| Annex 1                           |                                  |               |
| Overview of                       |                                  |               |
| existing cash                     |                                  |               |
| transfers reviews                 |                                  |               |
| Annex 2                           |                                  |               |
| Detailed search                   |                                  |               |
| protocols and study               |                                  |               |
| assessment tools                  |                                  |               |
| Annex 3                           |                                  |               |
| Summary table                     |                                  |               |
| of searches                       |                                  |               |
| and reasons for                   |                                  |               |
| exclusion and flow                |                                  |               |
| diagrams                          |                                  |               |
| Annex 4                           |                                  |               |
| Summary of the                    |                                  |               |
| evidence base                     |                                  |               |
| Annex 5                           |                                  |               |
| Evidence:                         |                                  |               |
| results tables for                |                                  |               |
| overall effects                   |                                  |               |
| disaggregated by                  |                                  |               |
| gender, and cash                  |                                  |               |
| transfer design and               |                                  |               |
| implementation                    |                                  |               |
| effects                           |                                  |               |
| 1%                                | Effect of increase in cumulative |               |
| cash transfer of 10000 pesos,     |                                  |               |
| after 10 years                    |                                  |               |
| NS                                | Early versus late treatment      |               |
| (an additional 18 months) on      |                                  |               |
| children aged 8-10, ten years     |                                  |               |
| later                             |                                  |               |
| 1%                                | Effect of increase in cumulative |               |
| cash transfer of 10000 pesos,     |                                  |               |
| after 10 years                    |                                  |               |
| NS                                | Early versus late treatment      |               |
| (an additional 18 months) on      |                                  |               |
| children aged 8-10, ten years     |                                  |               |
| later                             |                                  |               |
| NS                                | Lump sum payment treatment       |               |
| compared to basic treatment,      |                                  |               |
| effect after 9 months'            |                                  |               |
| exposure. Averaged across 3       |                                  |               |
| different CCT treatment arms      |                                  |               |
| NS                                | Lump sum payment treatment       |               |
| compared  to basic treatment,     |                                  |               |
| effect 2 years after programme    |                                  |               |
| finished.  Averaged across        |                                  |               |
| three different CCT treatment     |                                  |               |
| arms                              |                                  |               |

## Table A5.2.2 Summary Of Results For The Role Of Cash Transfer Design And Implementation Parameters On Education Continued

| Variable                          | Effect                          | Measure of    |
|-----------------------------------|---------------------------------|---------------|
| change                            |                                 |               |
| Significance Details/ explanation |                                 |               |
| #                                 | Study                           | Programme     |
| and country                       |                                 |               |
| Design /                          |                                 |               |
| Implementation                    |                                 |               |
| Parameter                         |                                 |               |
| 1.25                              | Change in                       |               |
| score                             |                                 |               |
| NS                                | CCT, effect of 18 additional    |               |
| months in PROGRESA                |                                 |               |
| 5                                 | Manley et al.                   |               |
| (2105)                            |                                 |               |
| PROGRESA /                        |                                 |               |
| Oportunidades                     |                                 |               |
| (Mexico)                          |                                 |               |
| Duration of                       |                                 |               |
| exposure                          |                                 |               |
| Verbal WASI (Wechsler             |                                 |               |
| Abbreviated Scale of              |                                 |               |
| Intelligence) score               |                                 |               |
| 0.7                               |                                 |               |
| Change in                         |                                 |               |
| score                             |                                 |               |
| 1%                                | CCT, effect of larger potential |               |
| transfer amount                   |                                 |               |
| PROGRESA /                        |                                 |               |
| Oportunidades                     |                                 |               |
| (Mexico)                          |                                 |               |
| Transfer Amount                   | Verbal WASI (Wechsler           |               |
| Abbreviated Scale of              |                                 |               |
| Intelligence) score               |                                 |               |
| -1.2                              | Change in                       |               |
| score                             |                                 |               |
| NS                                | CCT, effect of 18 additional    |               |
| months in PROGRESA                |                                 |               |
| PROGRESA /                        |                                 |               |
| Oportunidades                     |                                 |               |
| (Mexico)                          |                                 |               |
| Duration of                       |                                 |               |
| exposure                          |                                 |               |
| Cognitive WASI (Wechsler          |                                 |               |
| Abbreviated Scale of              |                                 |               |
| Intelligence) score               |                                 |               |
| 0.46                              |                                 |               |
| Change in                         |                                 |               |
| score                             |                                 |               |
| 10%                               | CCT, effect of larger potential |               |
| transfer amount                   |                                 |               |
| PROGRESA /                        |                                 |               |
| Oportunidades                     |                                 |               |
| (Mexico)                          |                                 |               |
| Transfer Amount                   | Cognitive WASI (Wechsler        |               |
| Abbreviated Scale of              |                                 |               |
| Intelligence) score               |                                 |               |
| Duration of                       |                                 |               |
| exposure                          |                                 |               |
| Strengths and                     |                                 |               |
| difficulties questionnaire        |                                 |               |
| -0.14                             |                                 |               |
| Change in                         |                                 |               |
| score                             |                                 |               |
| 5%                                | CCT, effect of 18 additional    |               |
| months in PROGRESA                |                                 |               |
| PROGRESA /                        |                                 |               |
| Oportunidades                     |                                 |               |
| (Mexico)                          |                                 |               |
| Transfer Amount                   | Strengths and                   |               |
| difficulties questionnaire        |                                 |               |
| -0.02                             | Change in                       |               |
| score                             |                                 |               |
| NS                                | CCT, effect of larger potential |               |
| transfer amount                   |                                 |               |
| PROGRESA /                        |                                 |               |
| Oportunidades                     |                                 |               |
| (Mexico)                          |                                 |               |

9	
Test 22 of the Woodcock Johnson tests: Letter-word Identification consisting of showing those taking the test various pictures, letters and progressively harder words where the examinee is asked to say what is in the picture, and then to state letters, and then words. In the case of words, the examinee must pronounce the word correctly for it to be classified as a correct answer 
10	 Test 26 of the Woodcock Johnson test: Dictation where the examiner reads aloud letters and words and the examinee must write down the 
letter/word correctly.
11	 TIMMS stands for Trends in Mathematics and Science Study, which is a cycle of internationally comparative assessments in mathematics and 
science carried out at the fourth and eighth grades every 4 years. Authors also borrowed five mathematics questions from the 2007 TIMMS and incorporated them into an independently developed mathematics test (Non-TIMMS).

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

overall effects gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Summary Tables For Results For Health And Nutrition Table A5.3.1 Summary Of Results For Cash Transfer Effects Disaggregated By Gender For Health And Nutrition Indicators

| #                                                          | Study                  | Programme                      | Outcome indicator and treatment    |
|------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------|--------------------------------|------------------------------------|
| population                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| Effect                                                     | Measure of             |                                |                                    |
| change                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| Significance                                               | Details                |                                |                                    |
| Health service use                                         |                        |                                |                                    |
| 1                                                          | Akresh et al.          |                                |                                    |
| (2012)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| NCT                                                        |                        |                                |                                    |
| (Burkina Faso)                                             |                        |                                |                                    |
| Number of child preventative health care                   |                        |                                |                                    |
| visits                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| 0.48                                                       |                        |                                |                                    |
| Visits                                                     | 5%                     | Household receiving CCT (girls |                                    |
| under 60 months)                                           |                        |                                |                                    |
| Akresh et al.                                              |                        |                                |                                    |
| (2012)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| NCT                                                        |                        |                                |                                    |
| (Burkina Faso)                                             |                        |                                |                                    |
| Number of child preventative health care                   |                        |                                |                                    |
| visits                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| 0.39                                                       | Visits                 | NS                             | Household receiving CCT (boys      |
| under 60 months)                                           |                        |                                |                                    |
| Akresh et al.                                              |                        |                                |                                    |
| (2012)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| NCT                                                        |                        |                                |                                    |
| (Burkina Faso)                                             |                        |                                |                                    |
| Number of child preventative health care                   |                        |                                |                                    |
| visits                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| -0.106                                                     | Visits                 | NS                             | Household receiving UCT (girls     |
| under 60 months)                                           |                        |                                |                                    |
| Akresh et al.                                              |                        |                                |                                    |
| (2012)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| NCT                                                        |                        |                                |                                    |
| (Burkina Faso)                                             |                        |                                |                                    |
| Number of child preventative health care                   |                        |                                |                                    |
| visits                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| -0.045                                                     | Visits                 | NS                             | Household receiving UCT (boys      |
| under 60 months)                                           |                        |                                |                                    |
| 2                                                          | Evans et al.           |                                |                                    |
| (2014)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| TSAF                                                       |                        |                                |                                    |
| (Tanzania)                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| Number of health visits (children up to 2                  |                        |                                |                                    |
| years old)                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| -3.8                                                       |                        |                                |                                    |
| Visits                                                     | 5%                     | Girls (after 31 to 34 months)  |                                    |
| Evans et al.                                               |                        |                                |                                    |
| (2014)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| TSAF                                                       |                        |                                |                                    |
| (Tanzania)                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| Number of health visits (children up to 2                  |                        |                                |                                    |
| years old)                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| -2.3                                                       | Visits                 | NS                             | Boys (after 31 to 34 months)       |
| Evans et al.                                               |                        |                                |                                    |
| (2014)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| TSAF                                                       |                        |                                |                                    |
| (Tanzania)                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| Number of health visits (aged 60 plus)                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| -0.58                                                      |                        |                                |                                    |
| Visits                                                     | 10%                    | Women aged 60 plus             |                                    |
| Evans et al.                                               |                        |                                |                                    |
| (2014)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| TSAF                                                       |                        |                                |                                    |
| (Tanzania)                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| Number of health visits (aged 60 plus)                     | -0.15                  | Visits                         | NS                                 |
| 3                                                          | Levy and Ohls          |                                |                                    |
| (2007)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| PATH (Jamaica) Visits to health facilities in the past six |                        |                                |                                    |
| months (children under 6)                                  |                        |                                |                                    |
| 0.45                                                       | Visits                 | NS                             | Girls in beneficiary households    |
| Levy and Ohls                                              |                        |                                |                                    |
| (2007)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| PATH (Jamaica) Visits to health facilities in the past six |                        |                                |                                    |
| months (children under 6)                                  |                        |                                |                                    |
| 0.16                                                       | Visits                 | NS                             | Boys in beneficiary households     |
| Health service use (gender of household head)              |                        |                                |                                    |
| 1                                                          | World Bank             |                                |                                    |
| (2011)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| PKH                                                        |                        |                                |                                    |
| (Indonesia)                                                |                        |                                |                                    |
| Number of prenatal visits                                  |                        |                                |                                    |
| 2.3                                                        |                        |                                |                                    |
| Visits                                                     | 1%                     | Female-headed households       |                                    |
| World Bank                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| (2011)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| PKH                                                        |                        |                                |                                    |
| (Indonesia)                                                |                        |                                |                                    |
| Number of prenatal visits                                  |                        |                                |                                    |
| 0.5                                                        |                        |                                |                                    |
| Visits                                                     | 5%                     | Male-headed households         |                                    |
| World Bank                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| (2011)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| PKH                                                        |                        |                                |                                    |
| (Indonesia)                                                |                        |                                |                                    |
| Number of post-natal visits                                | -0.14                  | Visits                         | NS                                 |
| World Bank                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| (2011)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| PKH                                                        |                        |                                |                                    |
| (Indonesia)                                                |                        |                                |                                    |
| Number of post-natal visits                                |                        |                                |                                    |
| 0.38                                                       |                        |                                |                                    |
| Visits                                                     | 5%                     | Male-headed households         |                                    |
| Child anthropometric measures (gender of household head)   |                        |                                |                                    |
| 1                                                          | World Bank             |                                |                                    |
| (2011)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| PKH                                                        |                        |                                |                                    |
| (Indonesia)                                                |                        |                                |                                    |
| Height-for-age (0-36 months old)                           | -0.049                 | NS                             | Female-headed households           |
| World Bank                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| (2011)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| PKH                                                        |                        |                                |                                    |
| (Indonesia)                                                |                        |                                |                                    |
| Height-for-age (0-36 months old)                           | 0.104                  | NS                             | Male-headed households             |
| World Bank                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| (2011)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| PKH                                                        |                        |                                |                                    |
| (Indonesia)                                                |                        |                                |                                    |
| Weight-for-age (0-36 months old)                           | 0.363                  | NS                             | Female-headed households           |
| World Bank                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| (2011)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| PKH                                                        |                        |                                |                                    |
| (Indonesia)                                                |                        |                                |                                    |
| Weight-for-age (0-36 months old)                           | -0.094                 | NS                             | Male-headed households             |
| World Bank                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| (2011)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| PKH                                                        |                        |                                |                                    |
| (Indonesia)                                                |                        |                                |                                    |
| Weight-for-height z-score (children up to                  |                        |                                |                                    |
| 36 months)                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| 0.71                                                       | NS                     | Female-headed households       |                                    |
| World Bank                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| (2011)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| PKH                                                        |                        |                                |                                    |
| (Indonesia)                                                |                        |                                |                                    |
| Weight-for-height z-score (children up to                  |                        |                                |                                    |
| 36 months)                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| -0.26                                                      |                        |                                |                                    |
| 10%                                                        | Male-headed households |                                |                                    |
| Child anthropometric measures (individual level)           |                        |                                |                                    |
| 1                                                          | Cheema et al.          |                                |                                    |
| (2014)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| BISP (Pakistan) Proportion of children stunted (aged up to |                        |                                |                                    |
| 59 months)                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| 0.1721                                                     | Percentage             |                                |                                    |
| points                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| NS                                                         | Boys                   |                                |                                    |
| Cheema et al.                                              |                        |                                |                                    |
| (2014)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| BISP (Pakistan) Proportion of children stunted (aged up to |                        |                                |                                    |
| 59 months)                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| -0.3745                                                    |                        |                                |                                    |
| Percentage                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| points                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| 5%                                                         | Girls                  |                                |                                    |
| Cheema et al.                                              |                        |                                |                                    |
| (2014)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| BISP (Pakistan) Proportion of children wasted (aged up to  |                        |                                |                                    |
| 59 months)                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| -0.2226                                                    | Percentage             |                                |                                    |
| points                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| NS                                                         | Boys                   |                                |                                    |
| Cheema et al.                                              |                        |                                |                                    |
| (2014)                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| BISP (Pakistan) Proportion of children wasted (aged up to  |                        |                                |                                    |
| 59 months)                                                 |                        |                                |                                    |
| 0.1702                                                     | Percentage             |                                |                                    |
| points                                                     |                        |                                |                                    |
| NS                                                         | Girls                  |                                |                                    |
| Contents                                                   |                        |                                |                                    |
| Annex 1                                                    |                        |                                |                                    |
| Overview of                                                |                        |                                |                                    |
| existing cash                                              |                        |                                |                                    |
| transfers reviews                                          |                        |                                |                                    |
| Annex 2                                                    |                        |                                |                                    |
| Detailed search                                            |                        |                                |                                    |
| protocols and study                                        |                        |                                |                                    |
| assessment tools                                           |                        |                                |                                    |
| Annex 3                                                    |                        |                                |                                    |
| Summary table                                              |                        |                                |                                    |
| of searches                                                |                        |                                |                                    |
| and reasons for                                            |                        |                                |                                    |
| exclusion and flow                                         |                        |                                |                                    |
| diagrams                                                   |                        |                                |                                    |
| Annex 4                                                    |                        |                                |                                    |
| Summary of the                                             |                        |                                |                                    |
| evidence base                                              |                        |                                |                                    |
| Annex 5                                                    |                        |                                |                                    |
| Evidence:                                                  |                        |                                |                                    |
| results tables for                                         |                        |                                |                                    |
| overall effects                                            |                        |                                |                                    |
| disaggregated by                                           |                        |                                |                                    |
| gender, and cash                                           |                        |                                |                                    |
| transfer design and                                        |                        |                                |                                    |
| implementation                                             |                        |                                |                                    |
| effects                                                    |                        |                                |                                    |

## Table A5.3.2 Summary Of Results For The Role Of Cash Transfer Design And Implementation Parameters On Health And Nutrition

| #                                     | Study                                      | Programme                                |
|---------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|
| and country                           |                                            |                                          |
| Outcome indicator and                 |                                            |                                          |
| treatment population                  |                                            |                                          |
| Effect                                | Measure of                                 |                                          |
| change                                |                                            |                                          |
| Significance                          | Details/ explanation                       |                                          |
| Main recipient                        |                                            |                                          |
| 1                                     | Akresh et al.                              |                                          |
| (2012)                                |                                            |                                          |
| NCT (Burkina                          |                                            |                                          |
| Faso)                                 |                                            |                                          |
| Number of preventative health         |                                            |                                          |
| visits for child over past year       |                                            |                                          |
| 0.45                                  |                                            |                                          |
| Visits                                | 5%                                         | CCTs targeted to mothers                 |
| NCT (Burkina                          |                                            |                                          |
| Faso)                                 |                                            |                                          |
| Number of preventative health         |                                            |                                          |
| visits for child over past year       |                                            |                                          |
| 0.42                                  | Visits                                     | NS                                       |
| NCT (Burkina                          |                                            |                                          |
| Faso)                                 |                                            |                                          |
| Number of preventative health         |                                            |                                          |
| visits for child over past year       |                                            |                                          |
| 0.05                                  | Visits                                     | NS                                       |
| NCT (Burkina                          |                                            |                                          |
| Faso)                                 |                                            |                                          |
| Number of preventative health         |                                            |                                          |
| visits for child over past year       |                                            |                                          |
| -0.22                                 | Visits                                     | NS                                       |
| Probability of attending clinic in    |                                            |                                          |
| past year                             |                                            |                                          |
| 0.114                                 |                                            |                                          |
| Percentage                            |                                            |                                          |
| point                                 |                                            |                                          |
| 10%                                   | Transfer being received by the elderly     |                                          |
| person                                |                                            |                                          |
| 2                                     | Behrman and                                |                                          |
| Parker (2013)                         |                                            |                                          |
| PROGRESA/                             |                                            |                                          |
| Oportunidades                         |                                            |                                          |
| (Mexico)                              |                                            |                                          |
| Probability of attending clinic in    |                                            |                                          |
| past year                             |                                            |                                          |
| 0.255                                 |                                            |                                          |
| Percentage                            |                                            |                                          |
| point                                 |                                            |                                          |
| 1%                                    | Transfer being received by a younger       |                                          |
| woman in the house                    |                                            |                                          |
| PROGRESA/                             |                                            |                                          |
| Oportunidades                         |                                            |                                          |
| (Mexico)                              |                                            |                                          |
| Transfer size                         |                                            |                                          |
| 1                                     | Davis et al.                               |                                          |
| (2002)                                |                                            |                                          |
| PROGRESA                              |                                            |                                          |
| (Mexico)                              |                                            |                                          |
| Whether child had a health            |                                            |                                          |
| check-up (0 to 5 years old)           |                                            |                                          |
| 0.0078                                |                                            |                                          |
| Percentage                            |                                            |                                          |
| point                                 |                                            |                                          |
| 1%                                    | Additional peso of transfer (includes non- |                                          |
| beneficiaries)                        |                                            |                                          |
| PROCAMPO                              |                                            |                                          |
| (Mexico)                              |                                            |                                          |
| Whether child had a health            |                                            |                                          |
| check-up (0 to 5 years old)           |                                            |                                          |
| 0.0026                                | Percentage                                 |                                          |
| point                                 |                                            |                                          |
| NS                                    | Additional peso of transfer (includes non- |                                          |
| beneficiaries)                        |                                            |                                          |
| 2                                     | Esteva (2012)                              | PROGRESA                                 |
| (Mexico)                              |                                            |                                          |
| Being stunted (children 2-6           |                                            |                                          |
| years in 2003)                        |                                            |                                          |
| -0.0199                               | Percentage                                 |                                          |
| point                                 |                                            |                                          |
| NS                                    | Effect of increase in amount of cash       |                                          |
| component (equal to $344 Pesos during |                                            |                                          |
| first year of life)                   |                                            |                                          |
| PROGRESA                              |                                            |                                          |
| (Mexico)                              |                                            |                                          |
| Height-for-age z-score                | 0.1539                                     | Z-score                                  |
| component (equal to $344 Pesos during |                                            |                                          |
| first year of life)                   |                                            |                                          |
| PROGRESA                              |                                            |                                          |
| (Mexico)                              |                                            |                                          |
| Weight-for-age z-score                | 0.1484                                     | Z-score                                  |
| component (equal to $344 Pesos during |                                            |                                          |
| first year of life)                   |                                            |                                          |
| 3                                     | Manley (2015)                              | Oportinidades                            |
| (Mexico)                              |                                            |                                          |
| Height-for-age                        |                                            |                                          |
| 0.07                                  |                                            |                                          |
| Z-score                               | 1%                                         | Effect of additional Peso of transfer    |
| 4                                     | Merttens et al.                            |                                          |
| (2013)                                |                                            |                                          |
| HSNP (Kenya)                          | Mean dietary diversity score               | Not                                      |
| reported                              |                                            |                                          |
| Score                                 | NS                                         | (Does not report coefficient of the non- |
| significant result)                   |                                            |                                          |
| Duration of exposure                  |                                            |                                          |
| Probability of attending a clinic     |                                            |                                          |
| 0.048                                 |                                            |                                          |
| Percentage                            |                                            |                                          |
| point                                 |                                            |                                          |
| 5%                                    | Being in the programme for an extra 1.5    |                                          |
| years (women)                         |                                            |                                          |
| 1                                     | Behrman and                                |                                          |
| Parker (2013)                         |                                            |                                          |
| PROGRESA /                            |                                            |                                          |
| Oportunidades                         |                                            |                                          |
| (Mexico)                              |                                            |                                          |
| Probability of attending a clinic     | 0.027                                      | Percentage                               |
| point                                 |                                            |                                          |
| NS                                    | Being in the programme for an extra 1.5    |                                          |
| years (men)                           |                                            |                                          |
| PROGRESA /                            |                                            |                                          |
| Oportunidades                         |                                            |                                          |
| (Mexico)                              |                                            |                                          |
| Probability of attending a clinic     |                                            |                                          |
| 0.20                                  |                                            |                                          |
| Percentage                            |                                            |                                          |
| point                                 |                                            |                                          |
| 1%                                    | Being in the programme for an extra 4      |                                          |
| years (women)                         |                                            |                                          |
| PROGRESA /                            |                                            |                                          |
| Oportunidades                         |                                            |                                          |
| (Mexico)                              |                                            |                                          |
| Probability of attending a clinic     |                                            |                                          |
| 0.17                                  |                                            |                                          |
| Percentage                            |                                            |                                          |
| point                                 |                                            |                                          |
| 1%                                    | Being in the programme for an extra 4      |                                          |
| years (men)                           |                                            |                                          |
| PROGRESA /                            |                                            |                                          |
| Oportunidades                         |                                            |                                          |
| (Mexico)                              |                                            |                                          |
| Probability of attending a clinic     |                                            |                                          |
| 0.23                                  |                                            |                                          |
| Percentage                            |                                            |                                          |
| point                                 |                                            |                                          |
| 1%                                    | Being in the programme for an extra 5.5    |                                          |
| years (women)                         |                                            |                                          |
| PROGRESA /                            |                                            |                                          |
| Oportunidades                         |                                            |                                          |
| (Mexico)                              |                                            |                                          |
| Probability of attending a clinic     |                                            |                                          |
| 0.20                                  |                                            |                                          |
| Percentage                            |                                            |                                          |
| point                                 |                                            |                                          |
| 1%                                    | Being in the programme for an extra 5.5    |                                          |
| years (men)                           |                                            |                                          |
| PROGRESA /                            |                                            |                                          |
| Oportunidades                         |                                            |                                          |
| (Mexico)                              |                                            |                                          |
| Probability of attending a clinic     |                                            |                                          |
| 0.26                                  |                                            |                                          |
| Percentage                            |                                            |                                          |
| point                                 |                                            |                                          |
| 1%                                    | Being in the programme for an extra 5.5    |                                          |
| years (women aged 70 +)               |                                            |                                          |
| PROGRESA /                            |                                            |                                          |
| Oportunidades                         |                                            |                                          |
| (Mexico)                              |                                            |                                          |
| Probability of attending a clinic     | 0.08                                       | Percentage                               |
| point                                 |                                            |                                          |
| NS                                    | Being in the programme for an extra 5.5    |                                          |
| years (men aged 70 +)                 |                                            |                                          |
| PROGRESA /                            |                                            |                                          |
| Oportunidades                         |                                            |                                          |
| (Mexico)                              |                                            |                                          |
| Contents                              |                                            |                                          |
| Annex 1                               |                                            |                                          |
| Overview of                           |                                            |                                          |
| existing cash                         |                                            |                                          |
| transfers reviews                     |                                            |                                          |
| Annex 2                               |                                            |                                          |
| Detailed search                       |                                            |                                          |
| protocols and study                   |                                            |                                          |
| assessment tools                      |                                            |                                          |
| Annex 3                               |                                            |                                          |
| Summary table                         |                                            |                                          |
| of searches                           |                                            |                                          |
| and reasons for                       |                                            |                                          |
| exclusion and flow                    |                                            |                                          |
| diagrams                              |                                            |                                          |
| Annex 4                               |                                            |                                          |
| Summary of the                        |                                            |                                          |
| evidence base                         |                                            |                                          |

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Table A5.3.2 Summary Of Results For The Role Of Cash Transfer Design And Implementation Parameters On Health And Nutrition Continued

| #                                           | Study                                       | Programme                                   |
|---------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------|
| and country                                 |                                             |                                             |
| Outcome indicator and                       |                                             |                                             |
| treatment population                        |                                             |                                             |
| Effect                                      | Measure                                     |                                             |
| of change                                   |                                             |                                             |
| Significance                                | Details/ explanation                        |                                             |
| Probability of attending a clinic           |                                             |                                             |
| 0.09                                        |                                             |                                             |
| Percentage                                  |                                             |                                             |
| point                                       |                                             |                                             |
| 10%                                         | Being in the programme for an extra 5.5     |                                             |
| years (women aged 60-69)                    |                                             |                                             |
| 1                                           | Behrman and                                 |                                             |
| Parker (2013)                               |                                             |                                             |
| PROGRESA /                                  |                                             |                                             |
| Oportunidades                               |                                             |                                             |
| (Mexico)                                    |                                             |                                             |
| Probability of attending a clinic           |                                             |                                             |
| 0.24                                        |                                             |                                             |
| Percentage                                  |                                             |                                             |
| point                                       |                                             |                                             |
| 1%                                          | Being in the programme for an extra 5.5     |                                             |
| years (men aged 60-69)                      |                                             |                                             |
| PROGRESA /                                  |                                             |                                             |
| Oportunidades                               |                                             |                                             |
| (Mexico)                                    |                                             |                                             |
| Probability of attending a clinic           |                                             |                                             |
| 0.29                                        |                                             |                                             |
| Percentage                                  |                                             |                                             |
| point                                       |                                             |                                             |
| 1%                                          | Being in the programme for an extra 5.5     |                                             |
| years (women aged 50-59)                    |                                             |                                             |
| PROGRESA /                                  |                                             |                                             |
| Oportunidades                               |                                             |                                             |
| (Mexico)                                    |                                             |                                             |
| Probability of attending a clinic           |                                             |                                             |
| 0.21                                        |                                             |                                             |
| Percentage                                  |                                             |                                             |
| point                                       |                                             |                                             |
| 1%                                          | Being in the programme for an extra 5.5     |                                             |
| years (men aged 50-59)                      |                                             |                                             |
| PROGRESA /                                  |                                             |                                             |
| Oportunidades                               |                                             |                                             |
| (Mexico)                                    |                                             |                                             |
| Probability of attending a clinic           |                                             |                                             |
| 0.26                                        |                                             |                                             |
| Percentage                                  |                                             |                                             |
| point                                       |                                             |                                             |
| 1%                                          | Transfer being received by the elderly      |                                             |
| woman                                       |                                             |                                             |
| PROGRESA /                                  |                                             |                                             |
| Oportunidades                               |                                             |                                             |
| (Mexico)                                    |                                             |                                             |
| Probability of attending a clinic           |                                             |                                             |
| 0.11                                        |                                             |                                             |
| Percentage                                  |                                             |                                             |
| point                                       |                                             |                                             |
| 10%                                         | Transfer being received by a younger        |                                             |
| woman in the house                          |                                             |                                             |
| PROGRESA /                                  |                                             |                                             |
| Oportunidades                               |                                             |                                             |
| (Mexico)                                    |                                             |                                             |
| 2                                           | Buser et al.                                |                                             |
| (2014)                                      |                                             |                                             |
| BDH (Ecuador)                               | Weight-for-age                              |                                             |
| 0.596                                       |                                             |                                             |
| Z-score                                     | 1%                                          | Continuing to receive transfer, compared to |
| losing it two years ago                     |                                             |                                             |
| BDH (Ecuador)                               | Height-for-age                              |                                             |
| 0.367                                       |                                             |                                             |
| Z-score                                     | 10%                                         | Continuing to receive transfer, compared to |
| losing it two years ago                     |                                             |                                             |
| BDH (Ecuador)                               | Weight-for-height                           |                                             |
| 0.495                                       |                                             |                                             |
| Z-score                                     | 1%                                          | Continuing to receive transfer, compared to |
| losing it two years ago                     |                                             |                                             |
| BDH (Ecuador)                               | Underweight                                 | -0.027                                      |
| point                                       |                                             |                                             |
| NS                                          | Continuing to receive transfer, compared to |                                             |
| losing it two years ago                     |                                             |                                             |
| BDH (Ecuador)                               | Stunted                                     |                                             |
| -0.136                                      |                                             |                                             |
| Percentage                                  |                                             |                                             |
| point                                       |                                             |                                             |
| 5%                                          | Continuing to receive transfer, compared to |                                             |
| losing it two years ago                     |                                             |                                             |
| BDH (Ecuador)                               | Weight-for-age                              |                                             |
| 1.397                                       |                                             |                                             |
| Percentage                                  |                                             |                                             |
| point                                       |                                             |                                             |
| 1%                                          | Continuing to receive transfer, compared to |                                             |
| losing it two years ago                     |                                             |                                             |
| BDH (Ecuador)                               | Height-for-age                              |                                             |
| 0.985                                       |                                             |                                             |
| Percentage                                  |                                             |                                             |
| point                                       |                                             |                                             |
| 1%                                          | Continuing to receive transfer, compared to |                                             |
| losing it two years ago                     |                                             |                                             |
| BDH (Ecuador)                               | Weight-for-height                           |                                             |
| 0.915                                       |                                             |                                             |
| Percentage                                  |                                             |                                             |
| point                                       |                                             |                                             |
| 1%                                          | Continuing to receive transfer, compared to |                                             |
| losing it two years ago                     |                                             |                                             |
| BDH (Ecuador)                               | Received child health check                 | 0.131                                       |
| point                                       |                                             |                                             |
| NS                                          | Continuing to receive transfer, compared to |                                             |
| losing it two years ago                     |                                             |                                             |
| 3                                           | Esteva (2012)                               | Oportinidades                               |
| (Mexico)                                    |                                             |                                             |
| Being stunted (children 2-6                 |                                             |                                             |
| years in 2003)                              |                                             |                                             |
| 0.0226                                      | Percentage                                  |                                             |
| point                                       |                                             |                                             |
| NS                                          | Being in early treatment group (associated  |                                             |
| average of $484, $530 and $1959 Mexican     |                                             |                                             |
| Pesos more during pregnancy, first year and |                                             |                                             |
| cumulatively than 'late entry' households)  |                                             |                                             |
| Oportinidades                               |                                             |                                             |
| (Mexico)                                    |                                             |                                             |
| Height-for-age z-score                      | -0.0279                                     | Z-score                                     |
| Oportinidades                               |                                             |                                             |
| (Mexico)                                    |                                             |                                             |
| Weight-for-age z-score                      | -0.0077                                     | Z-score                                     |
| 4                                           | Fernald et al.                              |                                             |
| (2008)                                      |                                             |                                             |
| Oportunidades                               |                                             |                                             |
| (Mexico)                                    |                                             |                                             |
| Height-for-age (24 to 68 month              |                                             |                                             |
| children)                                   |                                             |                                             |
| 0.2                                         |                                             |                                             |
| Z-score                                     | 1%                                          | Effect of doubling cash transfers from the  |
| median of 7500 to 15000 pesos ($806         |                                             |                                             |
| to $1612)                                   |                                             |                                             |
| Oportunidades                               |                                             |                                             |
| (Mexico)                                    |                                             |                                             |
| Whether stunted or not (24 to 68            |                                             |                                             |
| month children)                             |                                             |                                             |
| -0.1                                        |                                             |                                             |
| Percentage                                  |                                             |                                             |
| point                                       |                                             |                                             |
| 1%                                          | Effect of doubling cash transfers from the  |                                             |
| median of 7500 to 15000 pesos ($806         |                                             |                                             |
| to $1612)                                   |                                             |                                             |
| 5                                           | Fernald et al.                              |                                             |
| (2009)                                      |                                             |                                             |
| Oportunidades                               |                                             |                                             |
| (Mexico)                                    |                                             |                                             |
| Height-for-age                              |                                             |                                             |
| 0.03                                        |                                             |                                             |
| Z-score                                     | 1%                                          | Effect size of increase in cash transfer of |
| around $926 (cumulative cash transfers      |                                             |                                             |
| received)                                   |                                             |                                             |
| 6                                           | Manley et al.                               |                                             |
| (2015)                                      |                                             |                                             |
| Oportinidades                               |                                             |                                             |
| (Mexico)                                    |                                             |                                             |
| Height-for-age                              | 0.03                                        | Z-score                                     |
| programme                                   |                                             |                                             |
| 7                                           | Perova and                                  |                                             |
| Vakis, (2012)                               |                                             |                                             |
| Juntos (Peru)                               | Received health checks in last 3            |                                             |
| months (for children under 5)               |                                             |                                             |
| 0.13                                        |                                             |                                             |
| Percentage                                  |                                             |                                             |
| point                                       |                                             |                                             |
| 5%                                          | Being a beneficiary household for over 36   |                                             |
| months                                      |                                             |                                             |
| Contents                                    |                                             |                                             |
| Annex 1                                     |                                             |                                             |
| Overview of                                 |                                             |                                             |
| existing cash                               |                                             |                                             |
| transfers reviews                           |                                             |                                             |
| Annex 2                                     |                                             |                                             |
| Detailed search                             |                                             |                                             |
| protocols and study                         |                                             |                                             |
| assessment tools                            |                                             |                                             |
| Annex 3                                     |                                             |                                             |
| Summary table                               |                                             |                                             |
| of searches                                 |                                             |                                             |
| and reasons for                             |                                             |                                             |
| exclusion and flow                          |                                             |                                             |
| diagrams                                    |                                             |                                             |
| Annex 4                                     |                                             |                                             |
| Summary of the                              |                                             |                                             |
| evidence base                               |                                             |                                             |
| Annex 5                                     |                                             |                                             |
| Evidence:                                   |                                             |                                             |
| results tables for                          |                                             |                                             |
| overall effects                             |                                             |                                             |
| disaggregated by                            |                                             |                                             |
| gender, and cash                            |                                             |                                             |
| transfer design and                         |                                             |                                             |
| implementation                              |                                             |                                             |
| effects                                     |                                             |                                             |

## Table A5.3.2 Summary Of Results For The Role Of Cash Transfer Design And Implementation Parameters On Health And Nutrition Continued

| #                                            | Study                                      | Programme                                |
|----------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|
| and country                                  |                                            |                                          |
| Outcome indicator and                        |                                            |                                          |
| treatment population                         |                                            |                                          |
| Effect                                       | Measure                                    |                                          |
| of change                                    |                                            |                                          |
| Significance                                 | Details/ explanation                       |                                          |
| Conditionalities                             |                                            |                                          |
| -0.574                                       |                                            |                                          |
| Visits                                       | 1%                                         | Effect of there not being a condition of |
| health visits (versus presence of condition) |                                            |                                          |
| 1                                            | Attanasio et al.                           |                                          |
| (2015)                                       |                                            |                                          |
| Familias                                     |                                            |                                          |
| en Acción                                    |                                            |                                          |
| (Colombia)                                   |                                            |                                          |
| Number of preventative health                |                                            |                                          |
| care visits (Children under 36               |                                            |                                          |
| months)                                      |                                            |                                          |
| 2                                            | Akresh et al.                              |                                          |
| (2012)                                       |                                            |                                          |
| NCTPP                                        |                                            |                                          |
| (Burkina Faso)                               |                                            |                                          |
| Number of routine preventative               |                                            |                                          |
| health clinic visits for child under         |                                            |                                          |
| 60 months                                    |                                            |                                          |
| 0.431                                        |                                            |                                          |
| Visits                                       | 5%                                         | Conditional on obtaining quarterly child |
| growth monitoring at health clinics for all  |                                            |                                          |
| children under 60 months old                 |                                            |                                          |
| -0.079                                       | Visits                                     | NS                                       |
| NCTPP                                        |                                            |                                          |
| (Burkina Faso)                               |                                            |                                          |
| Number of routine preventative               |                                            |                                          |
| health clinic visits for child under         |                                            |                                          |
| 60 months                                    |                                            |                                          |
| 3                                            | Benedetti et al.                           |                                          |
| (2015)                                       |                                            |                                          |
| Bono 10,000                                  |                                            |                                          |
| (Honduras)                                   |                                            |                                          |
| Number of prenatal check-ups                 |                                            |                                          |
| during last or current pregnancy             |                                            |                                          |
| 0.269                                        | Visits                                     | NS                                       |
| regular attendance at health centres         |                                            |                                          |
| Bono 10,000                                  |                                            |                                          |
| (Honduras)                                   |                                            |                                          |
| Number of prenatal check-ups                 |                                            |                                          |
| during last or current pregnancy             |                                            |                                          |
| 0.431                                        | Visits                                     | NS                                       |
| on regular health centre visits nor labelled |                                            |                                          |
| as health transfers                          |                                            |                                          |
| Bono 10,000                                  |                                            |                                          |
| (Honduras)                                   |                                            |                                          |
| Women received postnatal                     |                                            |                                          |
| check-up in 10 days after birth              |                                            |                                          |
| 0.212                                        |                                            |                                          |
| Percentage                                   |                                            |                                          |
| change                                       |                                            |                                          |
| 5%                                           | Households where transfers conditioned on  |                                          |
| regular attendance at health centres         |                                            |                                          |
| Bono 10,000                                  |                                            |                                          |
| (Honduras)                                   |                                            |                                          |
| Women received postnatal                     |                                            |                                          |
| check-up in 10 days after birth              |                                            |                                          |
| 0.118                                        | Percentage                                 |                                          |
| change                                       |                                            |                                          |
| NS                                           | Households where transfers not conditional |                                          |
| on regular health centre visits nor labelled |                                            |                                          |
| as health transfers                          |                                            |                                          |
| Payment mechanisms                           |                                            |                                          |
| 0.5                                          |                                            |                                          |
| Number of                                    |                                            |                                          |
| food groups                                  |                                            |                                          |
| 5%                                           | Whether household received cash via        |                                          |
| e-payment using a mobile phone               |                                            |                                          |
| 1                                            | Aker et al.                                |                                          |
| (2011)                                       |                                            |                                          |
| Mobile money                                 |                                            |                                          |
| experiment                                   |                                            |                                          |
| (Niger)                                      |                                            |                                          |
| Household diet diversity score               |                                            |                                          |
| (number of food groups eaten in              |                                            |                                          |
| past 24 hours, out of 12)                    |                                            |                                          |
| 0.07                                         |                                            |                                          |
| Difference in                                |                                            |                                          |
| means                                        |                                            |                                          |
| 1%                                           | Whether household received cash via        |                                          |
| e-payment using a mobile phone               |                                            |                                          |
| 2                                            | Aker et al.                                |                                          |
| (2014)                                       |                                            |                                          |
| Mobile money                                 |                                            |                                          |
| experiment                                   |                                            |                                          |
| (Niger)                                      |                                            |                                          |
| Household diet diversity score               |                                            |                                          |
| (number of food groups eaten in              |                                            |                                          |
| past 24 hours, out of 12)                    |                                            |                                          |
| Weight-for-height z-score                    | 0                                          | Z-score                                  |
| e-payment using a mobile phone               |                                            |                                          |
| Mobile money                                 |                                            |                                          |
| experiment                                   |                                            |                                          |
| (Niger)                                      |                                            |                                          |
| Prevalence of wasting                        | 0.43                                       | Percentage                               |
| point                                        |                                            |                                          |
| NS                                           | Whether household received cash via        |                                          |
| e-payment using a mobile phone               |                                            |                                          |
| Mobile money                                 |                                            |                                          |
| experiment                                   |                                            |                                          |
| (Niger)                                      |                                            |                                          |

## Complementary Interventions And Supply Side Services

| 1                                       | Langendorf et    |
|-----------------------------------------|------------------|
| al. (2014)                              |                  |
| Prospective                             |                  |
| nutrition study                         |                  |
| (Niger)                                 |                  |
| Moderate acute malnutrition of          |                  |
| children 6-23 months                    |                  |
| 2.3                                     |                  |
| Hazard ratio                            | 1%               |
| foods (HQ-LNS 500 kcal/day              |                  |
| (Supplementary Plumpy, Nutriset)) for   |                  |
| children 6-23 months                    |                  |
| Prospective                             |                  |
| nutrition study                         |                  |
| (Niger)                                 |                  |
| Moderate acute malnutrition of          |                  |
| children 6-23 months                    |                  |
| 2.42                                    |                  |
| Hazard ratio                            | 1%               |
| foods (MQ-LNS 250 kcal/day (Plumpy'Doz, |                  |
| Nutriset)) for children 6-23 months     |                  |
| Prospective                             |                  |
| nutrition study                         |                  |
| (Niger)                                 |                  |
| Moderate acute malnutrition of          |                  |
| children 6-23 months                    |                  |
| 2.07                                    |                  |
| Hazard ratio                            | 1%               |
| foods (Super Cereal Plus 820 kcal/day   |                  |
| (Michiels and Cerfar))                  |                  |
| Contents                                |                  |
| Annex 1                                 |                  |
| Overview of                             |                  |
| existing cash                           |                  |
| transfers reviews                       |                  |
| Annex 2                                 |                  |
| Detailed search                         |                  |
| protocols and study                     |                  |
| assessment tools                        |                  |
| Annex 3                                 |                  |
| Summary table                           |                  |
| of searches                             |                  |
| and reasons for                         |                  |
| exclusion and flow                      |                  |
| diagrams                                |                  |
| Annex 4                                 |                  |
| Summary of the                          |                  |
| evidence base                           |                  |

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Summary Tables For Results For Savings, Investment And Production

Table A5.4.1 Summary of results for cash transfer effects disaggregated by gender for savings, investment and production
#
Study
Programme
Indicator
Effect
Measure of 
change
Significance
Details
0.06
Percentage 
point change
10%
Female headed household
1
Asfaw et al. (2014)
CT-OVC (Kenya)
Proportion of female-headed households owning small livestock (sheep, goat, and so forth)
CT-OVC (Kenya)
Female-headed household participation in non-farm enterprise
0.072
Percentage 
point change
5%
Female headed household
2
Blattman et al. (2012)
YOP (Uganda)
Tools and machines acquired since baseline (beneficiary males)
791.90
'000s UGX
1%
Male beneficiaries
YOP (Uganda)
Tools and machines acquired since baseline (beneficiary females)
-409.80
'000s UGX
5%
Difference in effect compared to male beneficiaries
YOP (Uganda)
Stock of raw materials, tools, and machines (beneficiary males)
658.55
'000s UGX
1%
Male beneficiaries
YOP (Uganda)
Stock of raw materials, tools, and machines (beneficiary females)
 
-408.07
'000s UGX
5%
Difference in effect compared to male beneficiaries
0.473
Percentage 
point change
1%
Female recipient
3
Blattman et al. (2015)
WINGS (Uganda)
Impacts of the full program (Phase 1) on whether female recipient started enterprise since baseline 16 months after grants
0.595
Percentage 
point change
1%
Male recipient
WINGS (Uganda)
Impacts of the full program (Phase 1) on whether male recipient started enterprise since baseline 16 months after grants
101.009 Level change
1%
Female recipient
WINGS (Uganda)
Impacts of the full program (Phase 1) on amount of savings by female recipient 16 months after grants
169.695 Level change
1%
Male recipient
WINGS (Uganda)
Impacts of the full program (Phase 1) on amount of savings by male recipient 16 months after grants
2.631
Level change
5%
Female recipient
WINGS (Uganda)
Impacts of the full program (Phase 1) on amount of debt by female recipient 16 months after grants
4.981
Level change
10%
Male recipient
WINGS (Uganda)
Impacts of the full program (Phase 1) on amount of debt by male recipient 16 months after grants
4
Covarrubias et al. (2012)
SCTP (Malawi) Female-headed household ownership 
of hoes
0.23
Percentage 
point change
1%
Female headed household
SCTP (Malawi) Female-headed household ownership 
of axes
0.436
Percentage 
point change
1%
Female headed household
SCTP (Malawi) Female-headed household ownership 
of goats
0.52
Percentage 
point change
1%
Female headed household
SCTP (Malawi) Female-headed household ownership of 
chickens
0.612
Percentage 
point change
1%
Female headed household
Ownership at endline of indigenous goats (including kids) - female headed hhs
0.23
Percentage 
point change
NS
Female headed household
5
Evans et al. (2014)
Communitybased CCT (Tanzania)
Ownership at endline of indigenous goats (including kids) - male headed hhs
0.47
Percentage 
point change
5%
Male headed household
Communitybased CCT (Tanzania)
Ownership at local chickens (excluding chicks) - female headed hhs
1.62
Percentage 
point change
1%
Female headed household
Communitybased CCT (Tanzania)
Ownership at endline Indigenous goats (including kids) - male headed hhs
0.82
Percentage 
point change
NS
Male headed household
Communitybased CCT (Tanzania)
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

Continued on next page

## Table A5.4.1 Summary Of Results For Cash Transfer Effects Disaggregated By Gender For Savings, Investment And Production Continued

| #                                          | Study                                  | Programme                      | Indicator         | Effect            | Measure of              |
|--------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|--------------------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------------|
| change                                     |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Significance                               | Details                                |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| 6                                          | Handa et al.                           |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| (2014)                                     |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| LEAP (Ghana)                               | Any savings (female headed hhs)        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| 0.07                                       |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Percentage                                 |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| point change                               |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| 10%                                        | Female headed household                |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| LEAP (Ghana)                               | Any savings (male headed hhs)          |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| 0.147                                      |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Percentage                                 |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| point change                               |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| 10%                                        | Male headed household                  |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| LEAP (Ghana)                               | Used Fertiliser (female headed hhs)    | -0.015                         | Percentage        |                   |                         |
| point change                               |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| NS                                         | Female headed household                |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| LEAP (Ghana)                               | Used Fertiliser (male headed hhs)      | -0.074                         | Percentage        |                   |                         |
| point change                               |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| NS                                         | Male headed household                  |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| LEAP (Ghana)                               | Seeds Expenses (female headed hhs)     |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| 21.58                                      |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Level change                               | 5%                                     | Female headed household        |                   |                   |                         |
| LEAP (Ghana)                               | Seeds Expenses (male headed hhs)       |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| 33.81                                      |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Level change                               | 5%                                     | Male headed household          |                   |                   |                         |
| LEAP (Ghana)                               | Hold loan (female headed hh)           | -0.065                         | Percentage        |                   |                         |
| point change                               |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| NS                                         | Female headed household                |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| LEAP (Ghana)                               | Hold loan (male headed hh)             | -0.004                         | Percentage        |                   |                         |
| point change                               |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| NS                                         | Male headed household                  |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| LEAP (Ghana)                               | Amount outstanding (female headed hhs) | -0.28                          | Level change      | NS                | Female headed household |
| LEAP (Ghana)                               | Amount outstanding (male headed hhs)   | -1.003                         | Level change      | NS                | Male headed household   |
| 7                                          | Haushofer and                          |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Shapiro (2013)                             |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Give Directly                              |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| (Kenya)                                    |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Value of livestock (female recipients)     | 7.86                                   | Level change                   | NS                | Female recipients |                         |
| Give Directly                              |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| (Kenya)                                    |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Value of agricultural tools (USD) - female |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| recipients                                 |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| -2.22                                      | Level change                           | NS                             | Female recipients |                   |                         |
| Give Directly                              |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| (Kenya)                                    |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Value of savings (USD) - female            |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| recipients                                 |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| -3.43                                      | Level change                           | NS                             | Female recipients |                   |                         |
| 8                                          | Martinez                               |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| (2004)                                     |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Bonosol                                    |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| (Bolivia)                                  |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Probability of investing on fertiliser,    |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| female oldest HH member                    |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| 0.088                                      |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Percentage                                 |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| point change                               |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| 10%                                        | Female oldest household member         |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Bonosol                                    |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| (Bolivia)                                  |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Probability of investing on seeds, female  |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| oldest HH member                           |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| 0.062                                      | Percentage                             |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| point change                               |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| NS                                         | Female oldest household member         |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Bonosol                                    |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| (Bolivia)                                  |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Monthly expenditures on seeds, female      |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| oldest HH member                           |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| 5.108                                      |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Level change                               | 5%                                     | Female oldest household member |                   |                   |                         |
| Contents                                   |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Annex 1                                    |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Overview of                                |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| existing cash                              |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| transfers reviews                          |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Annex 2                                    |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Detailed search                            |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| protocols and study                        |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| assessment tools                           |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Annex 3                                    |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Summary table                              |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| of searches                                |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| and reasons for                            |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| exclusion and flow                         |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| diagrams                                   |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Annex 4                                    |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Summary of the                             |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| evidence base                              |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Annex 5                                    |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| Evidence:                                  |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| results tables for                         |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| overall effects                            |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| disaggregated by                           |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| gender, and cash                           |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| transfer design and                        |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| implementation                             |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |
| effects                                    |                                        |                                |                   |                   |                         |

## Table A5.4.2 Summary Of Results For The Role Of Cash Transfer Design And Implementation Parameters On Savings, Investment And Production

| #                                            | Study              | Programme        | Variable and treatment population    |
|----------------------------------------------|--------------------|------------------|--------------------------------------|
| of change                                    |                    |                  |                                      |
| Significance                                 | Details            |                  |                                      |
| Main recipient                               |                    |                  |                                      |
| 1                                            | Haushofer and      |                  |                                      |
| Shapiro (2013)                               |                    |                  |                                      |
| Give Directly                                |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Kenya)                                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| Value of livestock - female recipient vs     |                    |                  |                                      |
| male                                         |                    |                  |                                      |
| 7.86                                         | Level change       | NS               | Main recipient (female vs            |
| male)                                        |                    |                  |                                      |
| Give Directly                                |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Kenya)                                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| Value of savings - female recipient vs       |                    |                  |                                      |
| male                                         |                    |                  |                                      |
| -3.43                                        | Level change       | NS               | Main recipient (female vs            |
| male)                                        |                    |                  |                                      |
| Give Directly                                |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Kenya)                                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| Non-ag business investment in durables,      |                    |                  |                                      |
| monthly (USD) - female recipient vs male     |                    |                  |                                      |
| -0.15                                        | Level change       | NS               | Main recipient (female vs            |
| male)                                        |                    |                  |                                      |
| Transfer size and frequency                  |                    |                  |                                      |
| 1                                            | Haushofer and      |                  |                                      |
| Shapiro (2013)                               |                    |                  |                                      |
| Give Directly                                |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Kenya)                                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| Value of livestock - monthly transfer vs     |                    |                  |                                      |
| lump-sum                                     |                    |                  |                                      |
| 2.07                                         | Level change       | NS               | Transfer frequency                   |
| Give Directly                                |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Kenya)                                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| Value of cows - monthly transfer vs          |                    |                  |                                      |
| lump-sum                                     |                    |                  |                                      |
| -13.46                                       | Level change       | NS               | Transfer frequency                   |
| Give Directly                                |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Kenya)                                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| Value of small livestock - monthly           |                    |                  |                                      |
| transfer vs lump-sum                         |                    |                  |                                      |
| 6.84                                         | Level change       | NS               | Transfer frequency                   |
| Give Directly                                |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Kenya)                                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| Value of livestock - large vs small transfer |                    |                  |                                      |
| 63.19                                        |                    |                  |                                      |
| Level change                                 | 5%                 | Transfer size    |                                      |
| Give Directly                                |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Kenya)                                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| Value of cows - large vs small transfer      |                    |                  |                                      |
| 43.79                                        |                    |                  |                                      |
| Level change                                 | 10%                | Transfer size    |                                      |
| Give Directly                                |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Kenya)                                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| Value of small livestock - large vs small    |                    |                  |                                      |
| transfer                                     |                    |                  |                                      |
| 20.09                                        |                    |                  |                                      |
| Level change                                 | 1%                 | Transfer size    |                                      |
| Give Directly                                |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Kenya)                                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| Value of savings - monthly transfer vs       |                    |                  |                                      |
| lump-sum                                     |                    |                  |                                      |
| 1.81                                         | Level change       | NS               | Transfer frequency                   |
| Give Directly                                |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Kenya)                                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| Value of savings - large vs small transfer   |                    |                  |                                      |
| 10.22                                        |                    |                  |                                      |
| Level change                                 | 5%                 | Transfer size    |                                      |
| 0.01                                         | Level change       | NS               | Transfer frequency                   |
| Give Directly                                |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Kenya)                                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| Non-ag business investment in durables,      |                    |                  |                                      |
| monthly (USD) - monthly transfer vs          |                    |                  |                                      |
| lump-sum                                     |                    |                  |                                      |
| Give Directly                                |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Kenya)                                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| Non-ag business investment in durables,      |                    |                  |                                      |
| monthly (USD) - large vs small transfer      |                    |                  |                                      |
| -0.15                                        | Level change       | NS               | Transfer size                        |
| Duration of exposure                         |                    |                  |                                      |
| 1                                            | Gertler et al.     |                  |                                      |
| (2012)                                       |                    |                  |                                      |
| Oportunidades                                |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Mexico)                                     |                    |                  |                                      |
| Draft animal ownership - long term 2003      |                    |                  |                                      |
| sample                                       |                    |                  |                                      |
| 0.031                                        | Percentage         |                  |                                      |
| point                                        |                    |                  |                                      |
| NS                                           | Longer exposure to |                  |                                      |
| programme - four years after                 |                    |                  |                                      |
| control households were                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| incorporated                                 |                    |                  |                                      |
| Oportunidades                                |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Mexico)                                     |                    |                  |                                      |
| Productive animal ownership - long term      |                    |                  |                                      |
| 2003 sample                                  |                    |                  |                                      |
| 0.02                                         | Percentage         |                  |                                      |
| point                                        |                    |                  |                                      |
| NS                                           | Longer exposure to |                  |                                      |
| programme - four years after                 |                    |                  |                                      |
| control households were                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| incorporated                                 |                    |                  |                                      |
| Oportunidades                                |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Mexico)                                     |                    |                  |                                      |
| Productive loans                             |                    |                  |                                      |
| 0.004                                        |                    |                  |                                      |
| Percentage                                   |                    |                  |                                      |
| point                                        |                    |                  |                                      |
| 5%                                           | Longer exposure to |                  |                                      |
| programme - four years after                 |                    |                  |                                      |
| control households were                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| incorporated                                 |                    |                  |                                      |
| 0.086                                        |                    |                  |                                      |
| Level change                                 | 10%                | Shorter exposure |                                      |
| 2                                            | Maluccio           |                  |                                      |
| (2010)                                       |                    |                  |                                      |
| RPS                                          |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Nicaragua)                                  |                    |                  |                                      |
| Number of productive agricultural            |                    |                  |                                      |
| goods (2002) - ploughs, water pumps,         |                    |                  |                                      |
| sprayers, tools, and carts                   |                    |                  |                                      |
| 3.4                                          | Level change       | NS               | Shorter exposure                     |
| RPS                                          |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Nicaragua)                                  |                    |                  |                                      |
| Value of productive agricultural goods       |                    |                  |                                      |
| (2002) - ploughs, water pumps,               |                    |                  |                                      |
| sprayers, tools, and carts                   |                    |                  |                                      |
| -0.023                                       | Level change       | NS               | Longer exposure                      |
| RPS                                          |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Nicaragua)                                  |                    |                  |                                      |
| Number of productive agricultural            |                    |                  |                                      |
| goods (2004) - ploughs, water pumps,         |                    |                  |                                      |
| sprayers, tools, and carts                   |                    |                  |                                      |
| -18.2                                        | Level change       | NS               | Longer exposure                      |
| RPS                                          |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Nicaragua)                                  |                    |                  |                                      |
| Value of productive agricultural goods       |                    |                  |                                      |
| (2004) -  ploughs, water pumps,              |                    |                  |                                      |
| sprayers, tools, and carts                   |                    |                  |                                      |
| RPS                                          |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Nicaragua)                                  |                    |                  |                                      |
| Number of types of animals owned             |                    |                  |                                      |
| (cattle, work animals and poultry) (2002)    |                    |                  |                                      |
| -0.032                                       | Level change       | NS               | Shorter exposure                     |
| RPS                                          |                    |                  |                                      |
| (Nicaragua)                                  |                    |                  |                                      |
| Value of all animals owned (cattle, work     |                    |                  |                                      |
| animals and poultry) (2002)                  |                    |                  |                                      |
| -110.1                                       | Level change       | NS               | Shorter exposure                     |
| Contents                                     |                    |                  |                                      |
| Annex 1                                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| Overview of                                  |                    |                  |                                      |
| existing cash                                |                    |                  |                                      |
| transfers reviews                            |                    |                  |                                      |
| Annex 2                                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| Detailed search                              |                    |                  |                                      |
| protocols and study                          |                    |                  |                                      |
| assessment tools                             |                    |                  |                                      |
| Annex 3                                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| Summary table                                |                    |                  |                                      |
| of searches                                  |                    |                  |                                      |
| and reasons for                              |                    |                  |                                      |
| exclusion and flow                           |                    |                  |                                      |
| diagrams                                     |                    |                  |                                      |
| Annex 4                                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| Summary of the                               |                    |                  |                                      |
| evidence base                                |                    |                  |                                      |
| Annex 5                                      |                    |                  |                                      |
| Evidence:                                    |                    |                  |                                      |
| results tables for                           |                    |                  |                                      |
| overall effects                              |                    |                  |                                      |
| disaggregated by                             |                    |                  |                                      |
| gender, and cash                             |                    |                  |                                      |
| transfer design and                          |                    |                  |                                      |
| implementation                               |                    |                  |                                      |
| effects                                      |                    |                  |                                      |

## Table A5.4.2 Summary Of Results For The Role Of Cash Transfer Design And Implementation Parameters On Savings, Investment And Production Continued

| #                                                      | Study                 | Programme   | Variable and treatment population    |
|--------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------|-------------|--------------------------------------|
| of change                                              |                       |             |                                      |
| Significance                                           | Details               |             |                                      |
| 2                                                      | Maluccio              |             |                                      |
| (2010)                                                 |                       |             |                                      |
| RPS                                                    |                       |             |                                      |
| (Nicaragua)                                            |                       |             |                                      |
| Number of types of animals owned                       |                       |             |                                      |
| (cattle, work animals and poultry) (2004)              |                       |             |                                      |
| -0.008                                                 | Level change          | NS          | Longer exposure                      |
| RPS                                                    |                       |             |                                      |
| (Nicaragua)                                            |                       |             |                                      |
| Value of all animals owned (cattle, work               |                       |             |                                      |
| animals and poultry) (2004)                            |                       |             |                                      |
| 208.4                                                  | Level change          | NS          | Longer exposure                      |
| Targeting mechanism                                    |                       |             |                                      |
| 1                                                      | Merttens et al.       |             |                                      |
| (2015)                                                 |                       |             |                                      |
| SAGE (Uganda) Proportion of HHs owning livestock       |                       |             |                                      |
| (Senior Citizens Grant)                                |                       |             |                                      |
| 4.1                                                    | Percentage            |             |                                      |
| point                                                  |                       |             |                                      |
| NS                                                     | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG |             |                                      |
| SAGE (Uganda) Proportion of HHs owning livestock       |                       |             |                                      |
| (Vulnerable Family Support Grant)                      |                       |             |                                      |
| 9.3                                                    |                       |             |                                      |
| Percentage                                             |                       |             |                                      |
| point                                                  |                       |             |                                      |
| 1%                                                     | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG |             |                                      |
| 9.3                                                    |                       |             |                                      |
| Percentage                                             |                       |             |                                      |
| point                                                  |                       |             |                                      |
| 5%                                                     | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG |             |                                      |
| SAGE (Uganda) Proportion of households purchasing      |                       |             |                                      |
| livestock in last 12 months (Senior                    |                       |             |                                      |
| Citizens Grant)                                        |                       |             |                                      |
| 26.2                                                   |                       |             |                                      |
| Percentage                                             |                       |             |                                      |
| point                                                  |                       |             |                                      |
| 1%                                                     | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG |             |                                      |
| SAGE (Uganda) Proportion of households purchasing      |                       |             |                                      |
| livestock in last 12 months (Vulnerable                |                       |             |                                      |
| Family Support Grant)                                  |                       |             |                                      |
| SAGE (Uganda) Proportion of households owning cattle   |                       |             |                                      |
| (Senior Citizens Grant)                                |                       |             |                                      |
| -0.28                                                  | Percentage            |             |                                      |
| point                                                  |                       |             |                                      |
| NS                                                     | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG |             |                                      |
| SAGE (Uganda) Proportion of households owning cattle   |                       |             |                                      |
| (Vulnerable Family Support Grant)                      |                       |             |                                      |
| 6.7                                                    |                       |             |                                      |
| Percentage                                             |                       |             |                                      |
| point                                                  |                       |             |                                      |
| 1%                                                     | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG |             |                                      |
| SAGE (Uganda) Proportion of households owning goats    |                       |             |                                      |
| (Senior Citizens Grant)                                |                       |             |                                      |
| 2.1                                                    | Percentage            |             |                                      |
| point                                                  |                       |             |                                      |
| NS                                                     | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG |             |                                      |
| SAGE (Uganda) Proportion of households owning goats    |                       |             |                                      |
| (Vulnerable Family Support Grant)                      |                       |             |                                      |
| 7.3                                                    |                       |             |                                      |
| Percentage                                             |                       |             |                                      |
| point                                                  |                       |             |                                      |
| 5%                                                     | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG |             |                                      |
| 0.24                                                   | Percentage            |             |                                      |
| point                                                  |                       |             |                                      |
| NS                                                     | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG |             |                                      |
| SAGE (Uganda) Proportion of households purchasing      |                       |             |                                      |
| productive assets in last 12 months                    |                       |             |                                      |
| (Senior Citizens Grant) - agricultural or              |                       |             |                                      |
| non-agricultural tools or machines used                |                       |             |                                      |
| for economic activities                                |                       |             |                                      |
| 8.8                                                    |                       |             |                                      |
| Percentage                                             |                       |             |                                      |
| point                                                  |                       |             |                                      |
| 5%                                                     | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG |             |                                      |
| SAGE (Uganda) Proportion of households purchasing      |                       |             |                                      |
| productive assets in last 12 months                    |                       |             |                                      |
| (Vulnerable Family Support Grant) -                    |                       |             |                                      |
| agricultural or non-agricultural tools or              |                       |             |                                      |
| machines used for economic activities                  |                       |             |                                      |
| SAGE (Uganda) Mean total value of productive assets    |                       |             |                                      |
| purchased (SCG) (2012 prices, UGX)                     |                       |             |                                      |
| 500                                                    | Percentage            |             |                                      |
| point                                                  |                       |             |                                      |
| NS                                                     | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG |             |                                      |
| SAGE (Uganda) Mean total value of productive assets    |                       |             |                                      |
| purchased (VFSG) (2012 prices, UGX)                    |                       |             |                                      |
| 500                                                    | Percentage            |             |                                      |
| point                                                  |                       |             |                                      |
| NS                                                     | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG |             |                                      |
| 4.9                                                    | Percentage            |             |                                      |
| point                                                  |                       |             |                                      |
| NS                                                     | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG |             |                                      |
| SAGE (Uganda) Proportion of households reporting       |                       |             |                                      |
| current cash savings (Senior Citizens                  |                       |             |                                      |
| Grant)                                                 |                       |             |                                      |
| SAGE (Uganda) Proportion of households reporting       |                       |             |                                      |
| current cash savings (VSFG)                            |                       |             |                                      |
| 9.5                                                    |                       |             |                                      |
| Percentage                                             |                       |             |                                      |
| point                                                  |                       |             |                                      |
| 5%                                                     | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG |             |                                      |
| -156,000                                               | Level change          | NS          | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG                |
| SAGE (Uganda) Mean total value of current savings, for |                       |             |                                      |
| those with any                                         |                       |             |                                      |
| savings (2012 prices, UGX) - (Senior                   |                       |             |                                      |
| Citizens Grant)                                        |                       |             |                                      |
| 90,500                                                 | Level change          | NS          | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG                |
| SAGE (Uganda) Mean total value of current savings, for |                       |             |                                      |
| those with any savings (2012 prices,                   |                       |             |                                      |
| UGX) (VSFG)                                            |                       |             |                                      |
| SAGE (Uganda) Proportion of households reporting       |                       |             |                                      |
| borrowing money in last 12 months (SCG)                |                       |             |                                      |
| 7.3                                                    |                       |             |                                      |
| Percentage                                             |                       |             |                                      |
| point                                                  |                       |             |                                      |
| 10%                                                    | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG |             |                                      |
| -1.3                                                   | Percentage            |             |                                      |
| point                                                  |                       |             |                                      |
| NS                                                     | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG |             |                                      |
| SAGE (Uganda) Proportion of households reporting       |                       |             |                                      |
| borrowing money in last 12 months                      |                       |             |                                      |
| (VFSG)                                                 |                       |             |                                      |
| Contents                                               |                       |             |                                      |
| Annex 1                                                |                       |             |                                      |
| Overview of                                            |                       |             |                                      |
| existing cash                                          |                       |             |                                      |
| transfers reviews                                      |                       |             |                                      |
| Annex 2                                                |                       |             |                                      |
| Detailed search                                        |                       |             |                                      |
| protocols and study                                    |                       |             |                                      |
| assessment tools                                       |                       |             |                                      |
| Annex 3                                                |                       |             |                                      |
| Summary table                                          |                       |             |                                      |
| of searches                                            |                       |             |                                      |
| and reasons for                                        |                       |             |                                      |
| exclusion and flow                                     |                       |             |                                      |
| diagrams                                               |                       |             |                                      |
| Annex 4                                                |                       |             |                                      |
| Summary of the                                         |                       |             |                                      |
| evidence base                                          |                       |             |                                      |

Annex 5 
Evidence: 
results tables for 
overall effects 
disaggregated by 
gender, and cash 
transfer design and 
implementation 
effects

Continued on next page

## Table A5.4.2 Summary Of Results For The Role Of Cash Transfer Design And Implementation Parameters On Savings, Investment And Production Continued

| #                                                      | Study                        | Programme   | Variable and treatment population    |
|--------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------|-------------|--------------------------------------|
| of change                                              |                              |             |                                      |
| Significance                                           | Details                      |             |                                      |
| 7500                                                   | Level change                 | NS          | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG                |
| 1                                                      | Merttens et al.              |             |                                      |
| (2015)                                                 |                              |             |                                      |
| SAGE (Uganda) Mean total value of current outstanding  |                              |             |                                      |
| debt, for those with outstanding debt                  |                              |             |                                      |
| (2012 prices, UGX) (SCG)                               |                              |             |                                      |
| 31000                                                  | Level change                 | NS          | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG                |
| SAGE (Uganda) Mean total value of current outstanding  |                              |             |                                      |
| debt, for those with outstanding debt                  |                              |             |                                      |
| (2012 prices, UGX) (VFSG)                              |                              |             |                                      |
| 11                                                     |                              |             |                                      |
| Percentage                                             |                              |             |                                      |
| point                                                  |                              |             |                                      |
| 1%                                                     | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG        |             |                                      |
| SAGE (Uganda) Proportion of households reporting being |                              |             |                                      |
| able to borrow a large (e.g. UGX 60,000                |                              |             |                                      |
| or more) amount of cash in an emergency                |                              |             |                                      |
| (SCG)                                                  |                              |             |                                      |
| 10                                                     |                              |             |                                      |
| Percentage                                             |                              |             |                                      |
| point                                                  |                              |             |                                      |
| 5%                                                     | SCG (elderly) vs VFSG        |             |                                      |
| SAGE (Uganda) Proportion of households reporting being |                              |             |                                      |
| able to borrow a large (e.g. UGX 60,000                |                              |             |                                      |
| or more) amount of cash in an emergency                |                              |             |                                      |
| (VFSG)                                                 |                              |             |                                      |
| Payment mechanism                                      |                              |             |                                      |
| 1                                                      | Aker et al.                  |             |                                      |
| (2011)                                                 |                              |             |                                      |
| Concern                                                |                              |             |                                      |
| Worldwide CT                                           |                              |             |                                      |
| (Niger)                                                |                              |             |                                      |
| Types of crops grown (Zap m-transfer)                  |                              |             |                                      |
| 0.49                                                   |                              |             |                                      |
| Number of                                              |                              |             |                                      |
| different types                                        |                              |             |                                      |
| of crops                                               |                              |             |                                      |
| Types of crops grown (Placebo transfer                 |                              |             |                                      |
| 12                                                     |                              |             |                                      |
| )                                                      | 0.12                         | Number of   |                                      |
| different types                                        |                              |             |                                      |
| of crops                                               |                              |             |                                      |
| Concern                                                |                              |             |                                      |
| Worldwide CT                                           |                              |             |                                      |
| (Niger)                                                |                              |             |                                      |
| Number of asset categories owned (out of               |                              |             |                                      |
| 12)                                                    |                              |             |                                      |
| 13                                                     |                              |             |                                      |
| (Zap m-transfer)                                       |                              |             |                                      |
| 0.66                                                   |                              |             |                                      |
| Number asset                                           |                              |             |                                      |
| categories                                             |                              |             |                                      |
| 1%                                                     | DD estimator between Zap     |             |                                      |
| and cash households                                    |                              |             |                                      |
| Concern                                                |                              |             |                                      |
| Worldwide CT                                           |                              |             |                                      |
| (Niger)                                                |                              |             |                                      |
| Number of asset categories owned (out of               |                              |             |                                      |
| 12) (Placebo transfer)                                 |                              |             |                                      |
| 0.2                                                    | Number asset                 |             |                                      |
| categories                                             |                              |             |                                      |
| NS                                                     | DD estimator between placebo |             |                                      |
| and cash households                                    |                              |             |                                      |
| Concern                                                |                              |             |                                      |
| Worldwide CT                                           |                              |             |                                      |
| (Niger)                                                |                              |             |                                      |

## Complementary Interventions And Supply Side Services

26.41
Level change
10%
Supervision without advice received 
1
Blattman et al. (2015)
WINGS (Uganda)
Impacts of the full program (Phase 2) on amount of savings by recipients 12-month after grant as effect of 1-2 follow-ups (supervision without advice) 
0.107
Percentage 
point 
1%
Supervision without advice received 
Blattman et al. (2015)
WINGS (Uganda)
Impacts of the full program (Phase 2) on whether recipients started enterprise 12 months after grant as effect of additional 1-2 follow-ups (supervision)
2
Green et al. (2015)
WINGS (Uganda)
Currently doing business (women selected and trained with partner compared to women without)
-0.09
Percentage 
point 
10%
Women selected and trained with partner compared to women without
0.02
Percentage 
point
NS
Women selected and trained with partner compared to women without
WINGS (Uganda)
Started enterprise since baseline Currently doing business (women selected and trained with partner compared to women without)
Value of business assets (CT + training)
-17.8
Level change
NS
Vocational training
3
Macours and Vakis (2009)
Atencion a Crisis (Nicaragua)
Value of business assets (CT + productive grant)
235.3
Level change
10%
Productive grant
Atencion a Crisis (Nicaragua)
Value of livestock sold or self-consumed (CT + training)
-33.57
Level change
NS
Vocational training
Atencion a Crisis (Nicaragua)
Value of livestock sold or self-consumed (CT + productive grant)
221.8
Level change
10%
Productive grant
Atencion a Crisis (Nicaragua)
4
Karlan et al. (2014)
IPA RCT (Ghana)
Value of chemicals used
55.63
US dollars
1%
Capital grant
66.44 
(104.34)
US dollars
1% (difference 
compared to 
insurance alone)
IPA RCT (Ghana)
Value of chemicals used relative to receiving insurance alone (figure in 
brackets is total effect for grant + insurance)
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base
5%
DD estimator between Zap and cash households
NS
DD estimator between placebo and cash households
Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
Capital grant + weather insurance

## Table A5.4.2 Summary Of Results For The Role Of Cash Transfer Design And Implementation Parameters On Savings, Investment And Production Continued

| #                                             | Study                        | Programme     |
|-----------------------------------------------|------------------------------|---------------|
| of change                                     |                              |               |
| Significance                                  | Details                      |               |
| 4                                             | Karlan et al.                |               |
| (2014)                                        |                              |               |
| IPA RCT                                       |                              |               |
| (Ghana)                                       |                              |               |
| Household has nonfarm income                  |                              |               |
| generating activity (binary)                  |                              |               |
| -0.04                                         | Percentage                   |               |
| point                                         |                              |               |
| NS                                            | Capital grant                |               |
| 0.07                                          |                              |               |
| (0.01)                                        |                              |               |
| Percentage                                    |                              |               |
| point                                         |                              |               |
| 5% (difference                                |                              |               |
| compared to                                   |                              |               |
| insurance alone)                              |                              |               |
| IPA RCT                                       |                              |               |
| (Ghana)                                       |                              |               |
| Whether household has nonfarm income          |                              |               |
| generating activity                           | relative to receiving        |               |
| insurance alone                               | (figure in brackets is total |               |
| effect for grant + insurance)                 |                              |               |
| IPA RCT                                       |                              |               |
| (Ghana)                                       |                              |               |
| Post-harvest assets (livestock and grain)     |                              |               |
| 606.12                                        |                              |               |
| US dollars                                    | 5%                           | Capital grant |
| 310.66                                        |                              |               |
| (841.40)                                      |                              |               |
| US dollars                                    | NS (difference               |               |
| compared to                                   |                              |               |
| insurance alone)                              |                              |               |
| IPA RCT                                       |                              |               |
| (Ghana)                                       |                              |               |
| Post-harvest assets (livestock and grain)     |                              |               |
| relative to receiving insurance alone         |                              |               |
| (figure in brackets is total effect for grant |                              |               |
| + insurance)                                  |                              |               |

12	 Placebo transfer is a normal cash disbursement plus one-off donation of mobile phone 
13	 Note these are not all productive assets

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews
Capital grant + weather insurance
Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools
Capital grant + weather insurance
Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Summary Tables For Results For Employment Table A5.5.1 Summary Of Results For Overall Cash Transfer Effect On Adult Labour Participation - By Gender

| #                             | Study                       | Programme and    |
|-------------------------------|-----------------------------|------------------|
| country                       |                             |                  |
| Outcome variable              | Treatment population        | Effect           |
| change                        |                             |                  |
| Significance                  |                             |                  |
| 1                             | Alzua et al. (2013)         | PRAF (Honduras)  |
| Whether working               | Male                        | -0.005           |
| RPS (Nicaragua)               | Whether working             | Female           |
| Whether working               | Male                        | -0.009           |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)             | Whether working             | Female           |
| Whether working               | Male                        | 0.003            |
| 2                             | Ardington et al.            | SA-OAP (South    |
| Africa)                       |                             |                  |
| Whether working               | Females 17-51 living in the |                  |
| households of pensioners      |                             |                  |
| -0.009                        | Percentage point            | NS               |
| SA-OAP (South                 |                             |                  |
| Africa)                       |                             |                  |
| Whether working               | Males 17-51 living in the   |                  |
| households of pensioners      |                             |                  |
| -0.051                        |                             |                  |
| Percentage point              | 5%                          |                  |
| Whether working               | Men                         | 0.017            |
| 3                             | Bacarreza and               |                  |
| Vazquez-Ruiz                  |                             |                  |
| (2013)                        |                             |                  |
| SP (                          | Comer es                    |                  |
| primero                       | component)                  |                  |
| (Dominican Republic)          |                             |                  |
| Whether working               | Women                       | 0.047            |
| SP (                          | Comer es                    |                  |
| primero                       | component)                  |                  |
| (Dominican Republic)          |                             |                  |
| SP (                          | ILEA component              | )                |
| (Dominican Republic)          |                             |                  |
| Whether working               | Men                         | 0.012            |
| SP (                          | ILEA component              | )                |
| (Dominican Republic)          |                             |                  |
| Whether working               | Women                       | 0.018            |
| 4                             | Barrientos and Villa        |                  |
| (2013)                        |                             |                  |
| Familias en Acción            |                             |                  |
| (Colombia)                    |                             |                  |
| Whether working               | Single female adults with   |                  |
| children aged 0-6 years       |                             |                  |
| (urban)                       |                             |                  |
| Familias en Acción            |                             |                  |
| (Colombia)                    |                             |                  |
| Whether working               | Male adults 21-35 years     |                  |
| old (urban)                   |                             |                  |
| 0.079                         |                             |                  |
| Percentage point              | 1%                          |                  |
| Women aged 50 and older       |                             |                  |
| 0.101                         |                             |                  |
| Percentage point              | 1%                          |                  |
| 5                             | Behrman and                 |                  |
| Parker (2013)                 |                             |                  |
| PROGRESA /                    |                             |                  |
| Oportunidades                 |                             |                  |
| (Mexico)                      |                             |                  |
| Proportion working in the     |                             |                  |
| previous week in activity     |                             |                  |
| contributing to family income |                             |                  |
| (5.5 years of exposure)       |                             |                  |
| Men aged 50 and older         |                             |                  |
| 0.037                         |                             |                  |
| Percentage point              | 10%                         |                  |
| PROGRESA /                    |                             |                  |
| Oportunidades                 |                             |                  |
| (Mexico)                      |                             |                  |
| Proportion working in the     |                             |                  |
| previous week in activity     |                             |                  |
| contributing to family income |                             |                  |
| (5.5 years of exposure)       |                             |                  |
| Women (50-59 pre-             |                             |                  |
| programme)                    |                             |                  |
| 0.109                         |                             |                  |
| Percentage point              | 1%                          |                  |
| PROGRESA /                    |                             |                  |
| Oportunidades                 |                             |                  |
| (Mexico)                      |                             |                  |
| Proportion working in the     |                             |                  |
| previous week in activity     |                             |                  |
| contributing to family income |                             |                  |
| (5.5 years of exposure)       |                             |                  |
| Women (60-69 pre-             |                             |                  |
| programme)                    |                             |                  |
| 0.118                         |                             |                  |
| Percentage point              | 5%                          |                  |
| PROGRESA /                    |                             |                  |
| Oportunidades                 |                             |                  |
| (Mexico)                      |                             |                  |
| Proportion working in the     |                             |                  |
| previous week in activity     |                             |                  |
| contributing to family income |                             |                  |
| (5.5 years of exposure)       |                             |                  |
| Women (70 and older pre-      |                             |                  |
| programme)                    |                             |                  |
| 0.081                         |                             |                  |
| Percentage point              | 10%                         |                  |
| PROGRESA /                    |                             |                  |
| Oportunidades                 |                             |                  |
| (Mexico)                      |                             |                  |
| Proportion working in the     |                             |                  |
| previous week in activity     |                             |                  |
| contributing to family income |                             |                  |
| (5.5 years of exposure)       |                             |                  |
| 6                             | Benedetti et al.            |                  |
| (2015)                        |                             |                  |
| PRAF (Honduras)               | Worked more than 1 hour in  |                  |
| past week                     |                             |                  |
| Male (21-65 at baseline)      | -0.001                      | Percentage point |
| PRAF (Honduras)               | Worked more than 1 hour in  |                  |
| past week                     |                             |                  |
| Female (21-65 at baseline)    | -0.002                      | Percentage point |
| Female                        | 0.0000106                   | Percentage point |
| 7                             | Cheema et al.               |                  |
| (2014)                        |                             |                  |
| BISP (Pakistan)               | Proportion of working age   |                  |
| adults (18-64) engaged in     |                             |                  |
| economically productive       |                             |                  |
| activities                    |                             |                  |
| 8                             | Daidone et al.              |                  |
| (2014a)                       |                             |                  |
| LCGP (Lesotho)                | Participation in any labour |                  |
| activity in last 12 months    |                             |                  |
| Adult men                     | -0.055                      | Percentage point |
| LCGP (Lesotho)                | Participation in any labour |                  |
| activity in last 12 months    |                             |                  |
| Elderly men                   | 0.038                       | Percentage point |
| Contents                      |                             |                  |
| Annex 1                       |                             |                  |
| Overview of                   |                             |                  |
| existing cash                 |                             |                  |
| transfers reviews             |                             |                  |
| Annex 2                       |                             |                  |
| Detailed search               |                             |                  |
| protocols and study           |                             |                  |
| assessment tools              |                             |                  |
| Annex 3                       |                             |                  |
| Summary table                 |                             |                  |
| of searches                   |                             |                  |
| and reasons for               |                             |                  |
| exclusion and flow            |                             |                  |
| diagrams                      |                             |                  |
| Annex 4                       |                             |                  |
| Summary of the                |                             |                  |
| evidence base                 |                             |                  |
| 0.105                         |                             |                  |
| Percentage point              | 1%                          |                  |
| Annex 5                       |                             |                  |
| Evidence:                     |                             |                  |
| results tables for            |                             |                  |
| overall effects               |                             |                  |
| disaggregated by              |                             |                  |
| gender, and cash              |                             |                  |
| transfer design and           |                             |                  |
| implementation                |                             |                  |
| effects                       |                             |                  |

## Table A5.5.1 Summary Of Results For Overall Cash Transfer Effect On Adult Labour Participation - By Gender Continued

| #                                        | Study                           | Programme and    |
|------------------------------------------|---------------------------------|------------------|
| country                                  |                                 |                  |
| Outcome variable                         | Treatment population            | Effect           |
| change                                   |                                 |                  |
| Significance                             |                                 |                  |
| 8                                        | Daidone et al.                  |                  |
| (2014a)                                  |                                 |                  |
| LCGP (Lesotho)                           | Participation in any labour     |                  |
| activity in last 12 months               |                                 |                  |
| Adult women                              |                                 |                  |
| 0.079                                    |                                 |                  |
| Percentage point                         | 10%                             |                  |
| LCGP (Lesotho)                           | Participation in any labour     |                  |
| activity in last 12 months               |                                 |                  |
| Elderly women                            | 0.004                           | Percentage point |
| 9                                        | Ferro and Nicollela             |                  |
| (2007)                                   |                                 |                  |
| Bolsa Escola/Bolsa                       |                                 |                  |
| Familia (Brazil)                         |                                 |                  |
| Whether working                          | Urban females (mothers)         | 0.007            |
| Bolsa Escola/Bolsa                       |                                 |                  |
| Familia (Brazil)                         |                                 |                  |
| Whether working                          | Rural females (mothers)         | -0.002           |
| Bolsa Escola/Bolsa                       |                                 |                  |
| Familia (Brazil)                         |                                 |                  |
| Whether working                          | Urban males (fathers)           | 0.006            |
| Bolsa Escola/Bolsa                       |                                 |                  |
| Familia (Brazil)                         |                                 |                  |
| Whether working                          | Rural males (fathers)           | -0.004           |
| 10 Galiani and                           |                                 |                  |
| McEwan (2013)                            |                                 |                  |
| PRAF (Honduras)                          | Works outside the home          | Adult women      |
| PRAF (Honduras)                          | Works outside the home          | Adult men        |
| 11 Novella et al. (2012) PRAF (Honduras) | Whether working                 | Female (mothers) |
| PRAF (Honduras)                          | Whether working                 | Male (fathers)   |
| -                                        |                                 |                  |
| 0.007                                    | Percentage point                | NS               |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                        | Whether working                 | Female (mothers) |
| -0.028                                   |                                 |                  |
| Percentage point                         | 5%                              |                  |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                        | Whether working                 | Male (fathers)   |
| -                                        |                                 |                  |
| 0.002                                    | Percentage point                | NS               |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                          | Whether working                 | Female (mothers) |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                          | Whether working                 | Male (fathers)   |
| 12 Parker and Skoufias                   |                                 |                  |
| (2000)                                   |                                 |                  |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                        | Whether working                 | Women (18-24)    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                        | Whether working                 | Women (25-34)    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                        | Whether working                 | Women (35-44)    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                        | Whether working                 | Women (45-54)    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                        | Whether working                 | Women (55+)      |
| 0.037                                    |                                 |                  |
| Percentage point                         | 5%                              |                  |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                        | Whether working                 | Men (18-24)      |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                        | Whether working                 | Men (25-34)      |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                        | Whether working                 | Men (35-44)      |
| 0.017                                    |                                 |                  |
| Percentage point                         | 10%                             |                  |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                        | Whether working                 | Men (45-54)      |
| 0.021                                    |                                 |                  |
| Percentage point                         | 10%                             |                  |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                        | Whether working                 | Men (55+)        |
| 13 Rubio-Codina                          |                                 |                  |
| (2009)                                   |                                 |                  |
| Oportunidades                            |                                 |                  |
| (Mexico)                                 |                                 |                  |
| Participated in any work                 | Women                           | -0.008           |
| Oportunidades                            |                                 |                  |
| (Mexico)                                 |                                 |                  |
| Participated in any work                 | Men                             | -0.007           |
| 14 Siaplay (2012)                        | SA-OAP (South                   |                  |
| Africa)                                  |                                 |                  |
| Whether working                          | Female (21-26)                  | 0.038            |
| SA-OAP (South                            |                                 |                  |
| Africa)                                  |                                 |                  |
| Whether working                          | Male (21-26)                    | -0.088           |
| Female (18-50 at baseline)               | 0.02                            | Percentage point |
| 15 Skoufias et al.                       |                                 |                  |
| (2013)                                   |                                 |                  |
| PAL (Mexico)                             | Having worked over previous     |                  |
| week (paid or unpaid) or had             |                                 |                  |
| work but did not work                    |                                 |                  |
| Male (18-50 at baseline)                 | 0.013                           | Percentage point |
| PAL (Mexico)                             | Having worked over previous     |                  |
| week (paid or unpaid) or had             |                                 |                  |
| work but did not work                    |                                 |                  |
| Males                                    | -0.03                           | Percentage point |
| 16 Skoufias and Di                       |                                 |                  |
| Maro (2008)                              |                                 |                  |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                        | Worked in labour market in last |                  |
| week (if worked at all, paid or          |                                 |                  |
| unpaid) (Oct 98)                         |                                 |                  |
| 17 Teixeira (2010)                       | Bolsa Familia (Brazil)          | Whether working  |
| Bolsa Familia (Brazil)                   | Whether working                 | Female           |

Notes: results represent all overall results reported and do not include those disaggregated by gender or showing the effect of variations in design features. Figures in bold indicate statistically significant. NS means the study did not find a statistically significant result, typically up to the 10% significance level.

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Table A5.5.2 Summary Of Results For Overall Cash Transfer Effect On Intensity Of Adult Work - By Gender

| #                                          | Study                                      | Programme and                      |
|--------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|------------------------------------|
| country                                    |                                            |                                    |
| Outcome variable                           | Treatment                                  |                                    |
| population                                 |                                            |                                    |
| Effect                                     | Measure of                                 |                                    |
| change                                     |                                            |                                    |
| Significance                               |                                            |                                    |
| 1                                          | Alzua et al. (2013)                        | PRAF (Honduras)                    |
| (among those working)                      |                                            |                                    |
| Female                                     | 1.84                                       | Hours per week                     |
| PRAF (Honduras)                            | No. of hours worked                        |                                    |
| (among those working)                      |                                            |                                    |
| Male                                       | 0.493                                      | Hours per week                     |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                            | No. of hours worked                        |                                    |
| (among those working)                      |                                            |                                    |
| Female                                     | -5.668                                     | Hours per week                     |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                            | No. of hours worked                        |                                    |
| (among those working)                      |                                            |                                    |
| Male                                       | -1.475                                     | Hours per week                     |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                          | No. of hours worked                        |                                    |
| (among those working)                      |                                            |                                    |
| Female                                     |                                            |                                    |
| 0.184                                      |                                            |                                    |
| Hours per week                             | 10%                                        |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                          | No. of hours worked                        |                                    |
| (among those working)                      |                                            |                                    |
| Male                                       | -0.015                                     | Hours per week                     |
| 2                                          | Asfaw et al. (2014)                        | OVC-CT (Kenya)                     |
| OVC-CT (Kenya)                             | Days worked per year                       | Male (over 18)                     |
| 3                                          | Buser et al. (2014)                        | BDH (Ecuador)                      |
| Women                                      | 6.36                                       | Hours per month                    |
| 4                                          | Blattman et al.                            |                                    |
| (2012)                                     |                                            |                                    |
| YOP (Uganda)                               | Hours spent on all economic                |                                    |
| activities in past 4 weeks (differential   |                                            |                                    |
| impact compared to men)                    |                                            |                                    |
| YOP (Uganda)                               | Hours spent on all economic                |                                    |
| activities in past 4 weeks                 |                                            |                                    |
| Men                                        |                                            |                                    |
| 17.60                                      |                                            |                                    |
| Hours per month                            | 5%                                         |                                    |
| 5                                          | Blattman et al.                            |                                    |
| (2013)                                     |                                            |                                    |
| YOP (Uganda)                               | No. of hours worked per month              |                                    |
| (after 4 years)                            |                                            |                                    |
| Male                                       |                                            |                                    |
| 18.76                                      |                                            |                                    |
| Hours per month                            | 5%                                         |                                    |
| YOP (Uganda)                               | No. of hours worked per month              |                                    |
| (after 4 years)                            |                                            |                                    |
| Female                                     |                                            |                                    |
| 38.13                                      |                                            |                                    |
| Hours per month                            | 1%                                         |                                    |
| 6                                          | Ferro and Nicollela                        |                                    |
| (2007)                                     |                                            |                                    |
| Bolsa Escola / Bolsa                       |                                            |                                    |
| Familia (Brazil)                           |                                            |                                    |
| No. of hours worked                        | Female (mothers)                           |                                    |
| urban                                      |                                            |                                    |
| 1.455                                      |                                            |                                    |
| Hours per week                             | 5%                                         |                                    |
| Bolsa Escola / Bolsa                       |                                            |                                    |
| Familia (Brazil)                           |                                            |                                    |
| No. of hours worked                        | Female (mothers)                           |                                    |
| rural                                      |                                            |                                    |
| -1.842                                     |                                            |                                    |
| Hours per week                             | 1%                                         |                                    |
| Bolsa Escola / Bolsa                       |                                            |                                    |
| Familia (Brazil)                           |                                            |                                    |
| No. of hours worked                        | Male (fathers)                             |                                    |
| urban                                      |                                            |                                    |
| -0.635                                     |                                            |                                    |
| Hours per week                             | 5%                                         |                                    |
| Bolsa Escola / Bolsa                       |                                            |                                    |
| Familia (Brazil)                           |                                            |                                    |
| No. of hours worked                        | Male (fathers) rural                       | -0.789                             |
| 7                                          | Novella et al. (2012)                      | PRAF (Honduras)                    |
| PRAF (Honduras)                            | No. of hours worked                        | Male                               |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                          | No. of hours worked                        | Female                             |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                          | No. of hours worked                        | Male                               |
| 2.137                                      |                                            |                                    |
| Hours per week                             | 5%                                         |                                    |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                            | No. of hours worked                        | Female                             |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                            | No. of hours worked                        | Male                               |
| -2.918                                     |                                            |                                    |
| Hours per week                             | 1%                                         |                                    |
| 8                                          | Ospina (2010)                              | Familias en Acción                 |
| (Colombia)                                 |                                            |                                    |
| Hours spent on paid work                   | Males (18-60)                              |                                    |
| 0.889                                      |                                            |                                    |
| Hours in                                   |                                            |                                    |
| previous day                               |                                            |                                    |
| 1%                                         |                                            |                                    |
| Ospina (2010)                              | Familias en Acción                         |                                    |
| (Colombia)                                 |                                            |                                    |
| Hours spent on paid work                   | Females (18-60)                            | 0.174                              |
| previous day                               |                                            |                                    |
| NS                                         |                                            |                                    |
| 9                                          | Rubio-Codina (2009) Oportunidades (Mexico) | Number of hours worked in all work |
| previous day                               |                                            |                                    |
| NS                                         |                                            |                                    |
| Rubio-Codina (2009) Oportunidades (Mexico) | Number of hours worked in all work         | Men                                |
| -0.141                                     |                                            |                                    |
| Hours in                                   |                                            |                                    |
| previous day                               |                                            |                                    |
| 5%                                         |                                            |                                    |
| 10 Teixeira (2010)                         | Bolsa Familia (Brazil)                     | No. of hours worked                |
| -1.184                                     |                                            |                                    |
| Hours per week                             | 5%                                         |                                    |
| Teixeira (2010)                            | Bolsa Familia (Brazil)                     | No. of hours worked                |
| -0.555                                     |                                            |                                    |
| Hours per week                             | 5%                                         |                                    |

Notes: results represent all overall results reported and do not include those disaggregated by gender or showing the effect of variations in design features. Figures in bold indicate statistically significant. NS means the study did not find a statistically significant result, typically up to the 10% significance level.

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

Annex 5 
Evidence: 
results tables for 
overall effects 
disaggregated by 
gender, and cash 
transfer design and 
implementation 
effects

Contents

## Table A5.5.3 Summary Of Results For Overall Cash Transfer Effect On Adult Labour Force Participation - By Sector And Gender

| #                            | Study                  | Programme and           |
|------------------------------|------------------------|-------------------------|
| country                      |                        |                         |
| Female /                     |                        |                         |
| Male                         |                        |                         |
| Age                          | Outcome variable       | Effect                  |
| change                       |                        |                         |
| Significance                 |                        |                         |
| Annex 1                      |                        |                         |
| Overview of                  |                        |                         |
| existing cash                |                        |                         |
| transfers reviews            |                        |                         |
| 1                            | Alzua et al. (2013)    | PRAF (Honduras)         |
| occupation                   |                        |                         |
| -0.036                       | Percentage points      | NS                      |
| PRAF (Honduras)              | Male                   | Working in agricultural |
| occupation                   |                        |                         |
| -0.03                        | Percentage points      | NS                      |
| Annex 2                      |                        |                         |
| Detailed search              |                        |                         |
| protocols and study          |                        |                         |
| assessment tools             |                        |                         |
| RPS (Nicaragua)              | Female                 | Working in agricultural |
| occupation                   |                        |                         |
| -0.037                       | Percentage points      | NS                      |
| RPS (Nicaragua)              | Male                   | Working in agricultural |
| occupation                   |                        |                         |
| -0.002                       | Percentage points      | NS                      |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)            | Female                 | Working in agricultural |
| occupation                   |                        |                         |
| -0.031                       | Percentage points      | NS                      |
| Annex 3                      |                        |                         |
| Summary table                |                        |                         |
| of searches                  |                        |                         |
| and reasons for              |                        |                         |
| exclusion and flow           |                        |                         |
| diagrams                     |                        |                         |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)            | Male                   | Working in agricultural |
| occupation                   |                        |                         |
| 0.016                        | Percentage points      | NS                      |
| 2                            | Asfaw et al. (2014)    | OVC-CT (Kenya)          |
| labour                       |                        |                         |
| 0.007                        | Percentage point       | NS                      |
| Annex 4                      |                        |                         |
| Summary of the               |                        |                         |
| evidence base                |                        |                         |
| OVC-CT (Kenya)               | Male                   | > 18                    |
| labour                       |                        |                         |
| -0.055                       | Percentage point       | NS                      |
| 3                            | Daidone et al. (2014a) | LCGP (Lesotho)          |
| non-farm business            |                        |                         |
| 0.012                        | Percentage point       | NS                      |
| LCGP (Lesotho)               | Male                   | adult                   |
| agricultural activities      |                        |                         |
| 0.027                        | Percentage point       | NS                      |
| LCGP (Lesotho)               | Male                   | adult                   |
| work outside household       |                        |                         |
| -0.087                       |                        |                         |
| Percentage point             | 1%                     |                         |
| Annex 5                      |                        |                         |
| Evidence:                    |                        |                         |
| results tables for           |                        |                         |
| overall effects              |                        |                         |
| disaggregated by             |                        |                         |
| gender, and cash             |                        |                         |
| transfer design and          |                        |                         |
| implementation               |                        |                         |
| effects                      |                        |                         |
| LCGP (Lesotho)               | Female                 | adult                   |
| non-farm business            |                        |                         |
| -0.015                       | Percentage point       | NS                      |
| LCGP (Lesotho)               | Female                 | adult                   |
| agricultural activities      |                        |                         |
| 0.067                        | Percentage point       | NS                      |
| LCGP (Lesotho)               | Female                 | adult                   |
| work outside household       |                        |                         |
| -0.03                        | Percentage point       | NS                      |
| LCGP (Lesotho)               | Female                 | elderly                 |
| female                       |                        |                         |
| Participation last 12m own   |                        |                         |
| non-farm business            |                        |                         |
| -0.103                       |                        |                         |
| Percentage point             | 5%                     |                         |
| LCGP (Lesotho)               | Female                 | elderly                 |
| female                       |                        |                         |
| Participation last 12m own   |                        |                         |
| agricultural activities      |                        |                         |
| 0.107                        |                        |                         |
| Percentage point             | 10%                    |                         |
| LCGP (Lesotho)               | Female                 | elderly                 |
| female                       |                        |                         |
| Participation last 12m paid  |                        |                         |
| work outside household       |                        |                         |
| -0.004                       | Percentage point       | NS                      |
| LCGP (Lesotho)               | Female                 | elderly                 |
| female                       |                        |                         |
| Participation last week Own  |                        |                         |
| non-farm business            |                        |                         |
| -0.034                       | Percentage point       | NS                      |
| LCGP (Lesotho)               | Female                 | elderly                 |
| female                       |                        |                         |
| Participation last week Own  |                        |                         |
| crop & livestock production  |                        |                         |
| 0.141                        |                        |                         |
| Percentage point             | 10%                    |                         |
| LCGP (Lesotho)               | Female                 | elderly                 |
| female                       |                        |                         |
| Participation last week paid |                        |                         |
| work outside household       |                        |                         |
| -0.066                       | Percentage point       | NS                      |
| 4                            | Galiani and McEwan     |                         |
| (2013)                       |                        |                         |
| PRAF (Honduras)              | Female                 | 21-65                   |
| change                       |                        |                         |
| NS                           |                        |                         |
| PRAF (Honduras)              | Female                 | 21-65                   |
| change                       |                        |                         |
| NS                           |                        |                         |
| PRAF (Honduras)              | Male                   | 21-65                   |
| change                       |                        |                         |
| NS                           |                        |                         |
| PRAF (Honduras)              | Male                   | 21-65                   |
| 0.008                        |                        |                         |
| Percent point                |                        |                         |
| change                       |                        |                         |
| 10%                          |                        |                         |
| 5                            | Parker and Skoufias    |                         |
| (2000)                       |                        |                         |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)            | Female                 | 18-24                   |
| salaried work                |                        |                         |
| -0.003                       | % point from pre-      |                         |
| programme level              |                        |                         |
| NS                           |                        |                         |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)            | Female                 | 25-34                   |
| salaried work                |                        |                         |
| 0.008                        | % point from pre-      |                         |
| programme level              |                        |                         |
| NS                           |                        |                         |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)            | Female                 | 35-44                   |
| salaried work                |                        |                         |
| -0.003                       | % point from pre-      |                         |
| programme level              |                        |                         |
| NS                           |                        |                         |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)            | Female                 | 45-54                   |
| salaried work                |                        |                         |
| 0.008                        | % point from pre-      |                         |
| programme level              |                        |                         |
| NS                           |                        |                         |
| continued on next page       |                        |                         |

## Table A5.5.3 Summary Of Results For Overall Cash Transfer Effect On Adult Labour Force Participation - By Sector And Gender Continued

| #                           | Study                  | Programme and    |
|-----------------------------|------------------------|------------------|
| country                     |                        |                  |
| Female /                    |                        |                  |
| Male                        |                        |                  |
| Age                         | Outcome variable       | Effect           |
| change                      |                        |                  |
| Significance                |                        |                  |
| 5                           | Parker and Skoufias    |                  |
| (2000)                      |                        |                  |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)           | Female                 | 55+              |
| salaried work               |                        |                  |
| 0.015                       |                        |                  |
| % point from pre-           |                        |                  |
| programme level             |                        |                  |
| 10%                         |                        |                  |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)           | Female                 | 18-24            |
| employed/family business    |                        |                  |
| 0.012                       | % point from pre-      |                  |
| programme level             |                        |                  |
| NS                          |                        |                  |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)           | Female                 | 25-34            |
| employed/family business    |                        |                  |
| 0.014                       | % point from pre-      |                  |
| programme level             |                        |                  |
| NS                          |                        |                  |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)           | Female                 | 35-44            |
| employed/family business    |                        |                  |
| 0.007                       | % point from pre-      |                  |
| programme level             |                        |                  |
| NS                          |                        |                  |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)           | Female                 | 45-54            |
| employed/family business    |                        |                  |
| 0                           | % point from pre-      |                  |
| programme level             |                        |                  |
| NS                          |                        |                  |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)           | Female                 | 55+              |
| employed/family business    |                        |                  |
| 0.021                       | % point from pre-      |                  |
| programme level             |                        |                  |
| NS                          |                        |                  |
| 6                           | Skoufias et al. (2013) | PAL (Mexico)     |
| the baseline                |                        |                  |
| round; rural                |                        |                  |
| Probability of working in   |                        |                  |
| AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES     |                        |                  |
| - FEMALE                    |                        |                  |
| PAL (Mexico)                | Female                 | 18-60 in         |
| the baseline                |                        |                  |
| round; rural                |                        |                  |
| Probability of working in   |                        |                  |
| NON- AGRICULTURAL           |                        |                  |
| ACTIVITIES - FEMALE         |                        |                  |
| PAL (Mexico)                | Male                   | 18-60 in         |
| the baseline                |                        |                  |
| round; rural                |                        |                  |
| Probability of working in   |                        |                  |
| AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES     |                        |                  |
| - MALE                      |                        |                  |
| PAL (Mexico)                | Male                   | 18-60 in         |
| the baseline                |                        |                  |
| round; rural                |                        |                  |
| Probability of working in   |                        |                  |
| NON- AGRICULTURAL           |                        |                  |
| ACTIVITIES - MALE           |                        |                  |
| 7                           | Skoufias and Di Maro   |                  |
| (2008)                      |                        |                  |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)           | Male                   | 18-55+           |
| last week - Salaried work   |                        |                  |
| (Nov 99)                    |                        |                  |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)           | Male                   | 18-55+           |
| last week - self-employed / |                        |                  |
| family business (Nov 99)    |                        |                  |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)           | Female                 | 18-55+           |
| last week - Salaried work   |                        |                  |
| (Nov 99)                    |                        |                  |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)           | Female                 | 18-55+           |
| last week - self-employed / |                        |                  |
| family business (Nov 99)    |                        |                  |

Note: When studies report results for last 12 months and last week/shorter time span, reporting working/ not working and hours over last 12 months. Skoufias and Di Maro (2008) results disaggregated by age are also mostly non-significant. Figures in bold indicate statistically significant. NS means the study did not find a statistically significant result, typically up to the 10% significance level.

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base
-0.006
Percentage point
NS 
0.026
Percentage point
NS 
-0.05
Percentage point
5%
Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
0.063
Percentage point
1%
0.025
% point from preprogramme level
NS
-0.007
% point from preprogramme level
NS 
0.001
% point from preprogramme level
NS
0
% point from preprogramme level
NS

## Table A5.5.4 Summary Of Results For Overall Cash Transfer Effect On Adult Work Intensity - By Sector And Gender

| #                             | Study                   | Programme and              |
|-------------------------------|-------------------------|----------------------------|
| country                       |                         |                            |
| Female/                       |                         |                            |
| Male                          |                         |                            |
| Age                           | Outcome variable        | Effect                     |
| change                        |                         |                            |
| Significance                  |                         |                            |
| 1                             | Asfaw et al. (2014)     | OVC-CT (Kenya)             |
| farm labour                   |                         |                            |
| 0.406                         | Days per year           | NS                         |
| OVC-CT (Kenya)                | Male                    | > 18                       |
| farm labour                   |                         |                            |
| -0.622                        | Days per year           | NS                         |
| 2                             | Blattman et al. (2012)  | YOP (Uganda)               |
| activities in past 4 weeks    |                         |                            |
| (differential effect compared |                         |                            |
| to men)                       |                         |                            |
| YOP (Uganda)                  | Male                    | Hours spent on market      |
| activities in past 4 weeks    |                         |                            |
| 20.473                        |                         |                            |
| Hours                         | 1%                      |                            |
| 3                             | Daidone et al. (2014a)  | LCGP (Lesotho)             |
| non-farm enterprise           |                         |                            |
| 0.5                           |                         |                            |
| hours                         | 10%                     |                            |
| LCGP (Lesotho)                | Male                    | Adult                      |
| crop & livestock              |                         |                            |
| -1.9                          | hours                   | NS                         |
| LCGP (Lesotho)                | Male                    | Adult                      |
| labour                        |                         |                            |
| -5.2                          |                         |                            |
| hours                         | 5%                      |                            |
| LCGP (Lesotho)                | Female                  | Adult                      |
| non-farm enterprise           |                         |                            |
| -0.4                          | hours                   | NS                         |
| LCGP (Lesotho)                | Female                  | Adult                      |
| crop & livestock              |                         |                            |
| -0.5                          | hours                   | NS                         |
| LCGP (Lesotho)                | Female                  | Adult                      |
| labour                        |                         |                            |
| -1.2                          | hours                   | NS                         |
| LCGP (Lesotho)                | Female                  | Elderly                    |
| female                        |                         |                            |
| hours worked last week own    |                         |                            |
| non-farm enterprise           |                         |                            |
| -2.5                          |                         |                            |
| hours                         | 10%                     |                            |
| LCGP (Lesotho)                | Female                  | Elderly                    |
| female                        |                         |                            |
| hours worked last week Own    |                         |                            |
| crop & livestock              |                         |                            |
| 3.6                           |                         |                            |
| hours                         | 5%                      |                            |
| LCGP (Lesotho)                | Female                  | Elderly                    |
| female                        |                         |                            |
| hours worked last week Paid   |                         |                            |
| labour                        |                         |                            |
| -1.9                          | hours                   | NS                         |
| 4                             | Handa et al. (2014)     | LEAP (Ghana)               |
| activity over last season     |                         |                            |
| 7.7                           |                         |                            |
| days                          | 10%                     |                            |
| LEAP (Ghana)                  | Female                  | Number of days on own farm |
| activity over last season     |                         |                            |
| 6.1                           | days                    | NS                         |
| 5                             | Ospina (2010)           | Familias en Accion         |
| (Colombia)                    |                         |                            |
| Male                          | 18 to 60                | Hours spent on domestic    |
| labour                        |                         |                            |
| -0.406                        |                         |                            |
| 1%                            |                         |                            |
| Familias en Accion            |                         |                            |
| (Colombia)                    |                         |                            |
| Male                          | 18 to 60                | Hours spent on paid work   |
| 0.889                         |                         |                            |
| 1%                            |                         |                            |
| Familias en Accion            |                         |                            |
| (Colombia)                    |                         |                            |
| Female                        | 18 to 60                | Hours spent on domestic    |
| labour                        |                         |                            |
| 0.274                         |                         |                            |
| 10%                           |                         |                            |
| Familias en Accion            |                         |                            |
| (Colombia)                    |                         |                            |
| Female                        | 18 to 60                | Hours spent on paid work   |
| 6                             | Rubio-Codina, M. (2009) | PROGRESA/                  |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)        |                         |                            |
| Women                         | All                     | Number of hours worked in  |
| market work                   |                         |                            |
| 0.104                         | Hours                   | NS                         |
| PROGRESA/                     |                         |                            |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)        |                         |                            |
| Men                           | All                     | Number of hours worked in  |
| market work                   |                         |                            |
| -0.06                         | Hours                   | NS                         |
| PROGRESA/                     |                         |                            |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)        |                         |                            |
| Women                         | All                     | Number of hours worked in  |
| farm work                     |                         |                            |
| 0.012                         | Hours                   | NS                         |
| PROGRESA/                     |                         |                            |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)        |                         |                            |
| Men                           | All                     | Number of hours worked in  |
| farm work                     |                         |                            |
| -0.025                        | Hours                   | NS                         |
| PROGRESA/                     |                         |                            |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)        |                         |                            |
| Women                         | All                     | Number of hours worked in  |
| domestic work                 |                         |                            |
| 0.046                         |                         |                            |
| Hours                         | 5%                      |                            |
| PROGRESA/                     |                         |                            |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)        |                         |                            |
| Men                           | All                     | Number of hours worked in  |
| domestic work                 |                         |                            |
| -0.012                        | Hours                   | NS                         |
| PROGRESA/                     |                         |                            |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)        |                         |                            |
| Women                         | 18-24                   | Number of hours worked in  |
| market work                   |                         |                            |
| -0.098                        | Hours                   | NS                         |
| PROGRESA/                     |                         |                            |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)        |                         |                            |
| Women                         | 25-34                   | Number of hours worked in  |
| market work                   |                         |                            |
| 0.050                         | Hours                   | NS                         |
| Contents                      |                         |                            |
| Annex 1                       |                         |                            |
| Overview of                   |                         |                            |
| existing cash                 |                         |                            |
| transfers reviews             |                         |                            |
| Annex 2                       |                         |                            |
| Detailed search               |                         |                            |
| protocols and study           |                         |                            |
| assessment tools              |                         |                            |
| 5.328                         | Hours                   | NS                         |
| Annex 3                       |                         |                            |
| Summary table                 |                         |                            |
| of searches                   |                         |                            |
| and reasons for               |                         |                            |
| exclusion and flow            |                         |                            |
| diagrams                      |                         |                            |
| Annex 4                       |                         |                            |
| Summary of the                |                         |                            |
| evidence base                 |                         |                            |
| Annex 5                       |                         |                            |
| Evidence:                     |                         |                            |
| results tables for            |                         |                            |
| overall effects               |                         |                            |
| disaggregated by              |                         |                            |
| gender, and cash              |                         |                            |
| transfer design and           |                         |                            |
| implementation                |                         |                            |
| effects                       |                         |                            |

## Table A5.5.4 Summary Of Results For Overall Cash Transfer Effect On Adult Work Intensity - By Sector And Gender Continued

| #                      | Study                   | Programme and             |
|------------------------|-------------------------|---------------------------|
| country                |                         |                           |
| Female/                |                         |                           |
| Male                   |                         |                           |
| Age                    | Outcome variable        | Effect                    |
| change                 |                         |                           |
| Significance           |                         |                           |
| 6                      | Rubio-Codina, M. (2009) | PROGRESA/                 |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                         |                           |
| Women                  | 35-44                   | Number of hours worked in |
| market work            |                         |                           |
| 0.214                  | Hours                   | NS                        |
| PROGRESA/              |                         |                           |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                         |                           |
| Women                  | 45-54                   | Number of hours worked in |
| market work            |                         |                           |
| 0.485                  | Hours                   | NS                        |
| PROGRESA/              |                         |                           |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                         |                           |
| Women                  | 55+                     | Number of hours worked in |
| market work            |                         |                           |
| 0.265                  | Hours                   | NS                        |
| PROGRESA/              |                         |                           |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                         |                           |
| Women                  | 18-24                   | Number of hours worked in |
| farm work              |                         |                           |
| 0.006                  | Hours                   | NS                        |
| PROGRESA/              |                         |                           |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                         |                           |
| Women                  | 25-34                   | Number of hours worked in |
| farm work              |                         |                           |
| 0.021                  | Hours                   | NS                        |
| PROGRESA/              |                         |                           |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                         |                           |
| Women                  | 35-44                   | Number of hours worked in |
| farm work              |                         |                           |
| 0.028                  | Hours                   | NS                        |
| PROGRESA/              |                         |                           |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                         |                           |
| Women                  | 45-54                   | Number of hours worked in |
| farm work              |                         |                           |
| -0.022                 | Hours                   | NS                        |
| PROGRESA/              |                         |                           |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                         |                           |
| Women                  | 55+                     | Number of hours worked in |
| farm work              |                         |                           |
| 0.009                  | Hours                   | NS                        |
| PROGRESA/              |                         |                           |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                         |                           |
| Women                  | 18-24                   | Number of hours worked in |
| domestic work          |                         |                           |
| -0.158                 | Hours                   | NS                        |
| PROGRESA/              |                         |                           |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                         |                           |
| Women                  | 25-34                   | Number of hours worked in |
| domestic work          |                         |                           |
| 0.201                  |                         |                           |
| Hours                  | 5%                      |                           |
| PROGRESA/              |                         |                           |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                         |                           |
| Women                  | 35-44                   | Number of hours worked in |
| domestic work          |                         |                           |
| 0.087                  | Hours                   | NS                        |
| PROGRESA/              |                         |                           |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                         |                           |
| Women                  | 45-54                   | Number of hours worked in |
| domestic work          |                         |                           |
| 0.044                  | Hours                   | NS                        |
| PROGRESA/              |                         |                           |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                         |                           |
| Women                  | 55+                     | Number of hours worked in |
| domestic work          |                         |                           |
| -0.005                 | Hours                   | NS                        |

Figures in bold indicate statistically significant. NS means the study did not find a statistically significant result, typically up to the 10% significance level.

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Table A5.5.5 Summary Of Results For Overall Cash Transfer Effect On Child Labour Participation - By Gender

| #                                                       | Study                                   | Programme and                   |
|---------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|---------------------------------|
| country                                                 |                                         |                                 |
| Outcome variable                                        | Treatment population                    | Effect                          |
| of change                                               |                                         |                                 |
| Significance                                            |                                         |                                 |
| Girls 12-19 years old                                   |                                         |                                 |
| -0.049                                                  |                                         |                                 |
| Percentage                                              |                                         |                                 |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| 5%                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| 1                                                       | Alam et al.                             |                                 |
| (2011)                                                  |                                         |                                 |
| PFSSP (Pakistan)                                        | Whether looking for a job or            |                                 |
| participating in work for pay or                        |                                         |                                 |
| unpaid work (unpaid family helper                       |                                         |                                 |
| and unpaid work outside the home)                       |                                         |                                 |
| Girls 15-16 years old                                   |                                         |                                 |
| 0.0401                                                  |                                         |                                 |
| Percentage                                              |                                         |                                 |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| 5%                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| PFSSP (Pakistan)                                        | Whether looking for a job or            |                                 |
| participating in work for pay or                        |                                         |                                 |
| unpaid work (unpaid family helper                       |                                         |                                 |
| and unpaid work outside the home)                       |                                         |                                 |
| 2                                                       | Behrman et                              |                                 |
| al. (2011)                                              |                                         |                                 |
| PROGRESA /                                              |                                         |                                 |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)                                  |                                         |                                 |
| Whether working in 2003                                 |                                         |                                 |
| (after 5.5 years)                                       |                                         |                                 |
| Girls 15-16 years old                                   | 0.01                                    | Percentage                      |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| NS                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| PROGRESA /                                              |                                         |                                 |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)                                  |                                         |                                 |
| Whether working in 2003                                 |                                         |                                 |
| (after 5.5 years)                                       |                                         |                                 |
| Girls 17-18 years old                                   | -0.01                                   | Percentage                      |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| NS                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| PROGRESA /                                              |                                         |                                 |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)                                  |                                         |                                 |
| Whether working in 2003                                 |                                         |                                 |
| (after 5.5 years)                                       |                                         |                                 |
| Girls 19-21 years old                                   |                                         |                                 |
| 0.064                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| Percentage                                              |                                         |                                 |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| 10%                                                     |                                         |                                 |
| PROGRESA /                                              |                                         |                                 |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)                                  |                                         |                                 |
| Whether working in 2003                                 |                                         |                                 |
| (after 5.5 years)                                       |                                         |                                 |
| Boys 15-16 years old                                    |                                         |                                 |
| -0.14                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| Percentage                                              |                                         |                                 |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| 1%                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| PROGRESA /                                              |                                         |                                 |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)                                  |                                         |                                 |
| Whether working in 2003                                 |                                         |                                 |
| (after 5.5 years)                                       |                                         |                                 |
| Boys 17-18 years old                                    | 0.06                                    | Percentage                      |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| NS                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| PROGRESA /                                              |                                         |                                 |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)                                  |                                         |                                 |
| Whether working in 2003                                 |                                         |                                 |
| (after 5.5 years)                                       |                                         |                                 |
| Boys 19-21 years old                                    | -0.02                                   | Percentage                      |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| NS                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| 3                                                       | Berhman et                              |                                 |
| al. (2012)                                              |                                         |                                 |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) Employed for pay (after 2 years) | Boys 12-14 years old (urban)            |                                 |
| -0.124                                                  |                                         |                                 |
| Percentage                                              |                                         |                                 |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| 5%                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) Employed for pay (after 2 years) | Boys 15-18 years old (urban)            | -0.051                          |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| NS                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) Employed for pay (after 2 years) | Boys 19-20 years old (urban)            | -0.154                          |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| NS                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) Employed for pay (after 2 years) | Boys 6-20 years old (urban)             |                                 |
| -0.103                                                  |                                         |                                 |
| Percentage                                              |                                         |                                 |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| 5%                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) Employed for pay (after 2 years) | Girls 12-14 years old (urban)           | -0.01                           |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| NS                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) Employed for pay (after 2 years) | Girls 15-18 years old (urban)           | 0.004                           |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| NS                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) Employed for pay (after 2 years) | Girls 19-20 years old (urban)           | 0.087                           |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| NS                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) Employed for pay (after 2 years) | Girls 6-20 years old (urban)            | 0.002                           |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| NS                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| 4                                                       | Bustelo                                 |                                 |
| (2011)                                                  |                                         |                                 |
| RPS (Nicaragua                                          | Whether working                         | Girls 7-13 years old (with non- |
| targeted siblings)                                      |                                         |                                 |
| -0.075                                                  | Percentage                              |                                 |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| NS                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| RPS (Nicaragua                                          | Whether working                         | Boys 7-13 years old (with non-  |
| targeted siblings)                                      |                                         |                                 |
| -0.074                                                  | Percentage                              |                                 |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| NS                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| 5                                                       | Cheema et al                            |                                 |
| (2014)                                                  |                                         |                                 |
| BISP (Pakistan)                                         | Proportion of boys aged 5-14 years      |                                 |
| engaged in child labour                                 |                                         |                                 |
| Boys 5-14 years old                                     |                                         |                                 |
| -0.04538                                                |                                         |                                 |
| Percentage                                              |                                         |                                 |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| 5%                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| Proportion of girls aged 5-14                           |                                         |                                 |
| engaged in child labour                                 |                                         |                                 |
| Girls 5-14 years old                                    | -0.01066                                | Percentage                      |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| NS                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| 6                                                       | Daidone et                              |                                 |
| al. (2014a)                                             |                                         |                                 |
| LCGP (Lesotho)                                          | Participation in any labour activity in |                                 |
| past 12 months                                          |                                         |                                 |
| Boys                                                    | -0.016                                  | Percentage                      |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| NS                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| LCGP (Lesotho)                                          | Participation in any labour activity in |                                 |
| past 12 months                                          |                                         |                                 |
| Girls                                                   | -0.012                                  | Percentage                      |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| NS                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| 7                                                       | Daidone et                              |                                 |
| al. (2014b)                                             |                                         |                                 |
| ZCGP (Zambia)                                           | Total child labour supply (share)       | Boys                            |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| NS                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| ZCGP (Zambia)                                           | Total child labour supply (share)       | Girl                            |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| NS                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| 8                                                       | Dammert                                 |                                 |
| (2008)                                                  |                                         |                                 |
| Atención a Crisis                                       |                                         |                                 |
| (Nicaragua)                                             |                                         |                                 |
| Participation in labour activities                      |                                         |                                 |
| (2002)                                                  |                                         |                                 |
| Boys 7-13 years old (at baseline)                       |                                         |                                 |
| -0.138                                                  |                                         |                                 |
| Percentage                                              |                                         |                                 |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| 5%                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| Atención a Crisis                                       |                                         |                                 |
| (Nicaragua)                                             |                                         |                                 |
| Participation in labour activities                      |                                         |                                 |
| (2002)                                                  |                                         |                                 |
| Girls 7-13 years old (at baseline)                      | -0.014                                  | Percentage                      |
| point                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| NS                                                      |                                         |                                 |
| Atención a Crisis                                       |                                         |                                 |
| (Nicaragua)                                             |                                         |                                 |
| Participation in labour activities                      |                                         |                                 |
| (2001)                                                  |                                         |                                 |
| Children 7-13 at baseline (male-                        |                                         |                                 |
| headed households)                                      |                                         |                                 |
| 0.076                                                   |                                         |                                 |
| Percentage                                              |                                         |                                 |
| points                                                  |                                         |                                 |
| 10%                                                     |                                         |                                 |
| Contents                                                |                                         |                                 |
| Annex 1                                                 |                                         |                                 |
| Overview of                                             |                                         |                                 |
| existing cash                                           |                                         |                                 |
| transfers reviews                                       |                                         |                                 |
| Annex 2                                                 |                                         |                                 |
| Detailed search                                         |                                         |                                 |
| protocols and study                                     |                                         |                                 |
| assessment tools                                        |                                         |                                 |
| Annex 3                                                 |                                         |                                 |
| Summary table                                           |                                         |                                 |
| of searches                                             |                                         |                                 |
| and reasons for                                         |                                         |                                 |
| exclusion and flow                                      |                                         |                                 |
| diagrams                                                |                                         |                                 |
| Annex 4                                                 |                                         |                                 |
| Summary of the                                          |                                         |                                 |
| evidence base                                           |                                         |                                 |

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Table A5.5.5 Summary Of Results For Overall Cash Transfer Effect On Child Labour Participation - By Gender Continued

| #                                  | Study                            | Programme and                   |
|------------------------------------|----------------------------------|---------------------------------|
| country                            |                                  |                                 |
| Outcome variable                   | Treatment population             | Effect                          |
| of change                          |                                  |                                 |
| Significance                       |                                  |                                 |
| 8                                  | Dammert                          |                                 |
| (2008)                             |                                  |                                 |
| Atención a Crisis                  |                                  |                                 |
| (Nicaragua)                        |                                  |                                 |
| Participation in labour activities |                                  |                                 |
| (2001)                             |                                  |                                 |
| Children 7-13 at baseline (female- |                                  |                                 |
| headed households)                 |                                  |                                 |
| -0.131                             |                                  |                                 |
| Percentage                         |                                  |                                 |
| points                             |                                  |                                 |
| 5%                                 |                                  |                                 |
| Atención a Crisis                  |                                  |                                 |
| (Nicaragua)                        |                                  |                                 |
| Participation in labour activities |                                  |                                 |
| (2002)                             |                                  |                                 |
| Children 7-13 at baseline (male-   |                                  |                                 |
| headed households)                 |                                  |                                 |
| 0.005                              | Percentage                       |                                 |
| points                             |                                  |                                 |
| NS                                 |                                  |                                 |
| Atención a Crisis                  |                                  |                                 |
| (Nicaragua)                        |                                  |                                 |
| Participation in labour activities |                                  |                                 |
| (2002)                             |                                  |                                 |
| Children 7-13 at baseline (female- |                                  |                                 |
| headed households)                 |                                  |                                 |
| -0.082                             | Percentage                       |                                 |
| points                             |                                  |                                 |
| NS                                 |                                  |                                 |
| BDH (Ecuador)                      | Working for pay                  | Girls                           |
| point                              |                                  |                                 |
| NS                                 |                                  |                                 |
| 9                                  | Edmonds                          |                                 |
| and Schady                         |                                  |                                 |
| (2008)                             |                                  |                                 |
| BDH (Ecuador)                      | Working for pay                  | Boys                            |
| point                              |                                  |                                 |
| NS                                 |                                  |                                 |
| Bolsa Escola / Bolsa               |                                  |                                 |
| Familia (Brazil)                   |                                  |                                 |
| Whether working                    | Girls 6-10 years old (urban)     |                                 |
| -0.006                             |                                  |                                 |
| Percentage                         |                                  |                                 |
| point                              |                                  |                                 |
| 1%                                 |                                  |                                 |
| 10                                 | Ferro and                        |                                 |
| Nicolella                          |                                  |                                 |
| (2007)                             |                                  |                                 |
| Bolsa Escola / Bolsa               |                                  |                                 |
| Familia (Brazil)                   |                                  |                                 |
| Whether working                    | Girls 6-10 years old (rural)     |                                 |
| -0.04                              |                                  |                                 |
| Percentage                         |                                  |                                 |
| point                              |                                  |                                 |
| 5%                                 |                                  |                                 |
| Bolsa Escola / Bolsa               |                                  |                                 |
| Familia (Brazil)                   |                                  |                                 |
| Whether working                    | Girls 11-15 years old (urban)    | -0.016                          |
| point                              |                                  |                                 |
| NS                                 |                                  |                                 |
| Bolsa Escola / Bolsa               |                                  |                                 |
| Familia (Brazil)                   |                                  |                                 |
| Whether working                    | Girls 11-15 years old (rural)    |                                 |
| -0.129                             |                                  |                                 |
| Percentage                         |                                  |                                 |
| point                              |                                  |                                 |
| 1%                                 |                                  |                                 |
| Bolsa Escola / Bolsa               |                                  |                                 |
| Familia (Brazil)                   |                                  |                                 |
| Whether working                    | Boys 6-10 years old (urban)      | -0.003                          |
| point                              |                                  |                                 |
| NS                                 |                                  |                                 |
| Bolsa Escola / Bolsa               |                                  |                                 |
| Familia (Brazil)                   |                                  |                                 |
| Whether working                    | Boys 6-10 years old (rural)      | -0.032                          |
| point                              |                                  |                                 |
| NS                                 |                                  |                                 |
| Bolsa Escola / Bolsa               |                                  |                                 |
| Familia (Brazil)                   |                                  |                                 |
| Whether working                    | Boys 11-15 years old (urban)     |                                 |
| -0.048                             |                                  |                                 |
| Percentage                         |                                  |                                 |
| point                              |                                  |                                 |
| 1%                                 |                                  |                                 |
| Bolsa Escola / Bolsa               |                                  |                                 |
| Familia (Brazil)                   |                                  |                                 |
| Whether working                    | Boys 11-15 years old (rural)     | -0.06                           |
| point                              |                                  |                                 |
| NS                                 |                                  |                                 |
| PRAF (Honduras)                    | Works outside the home           | Girls                           |
| point                              |                                  |                                 |
| NS                                 |                                  |                                 |
| 11                                 | Galiani and                      |                                 |
| McEwan                             |                                  |                                 |
| (2013)                             |                                  |                                 |
| PRAF (Honduras)                    | Works outside the home           | Boys                            |
| point                              |                                  |                                 |
| NS                                 |                                  |                                 |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                    | Work participation               | Boys 6-11 years old (always     |
| eligible)                          |                                  |                                 |
| -0.05                              | Percentage                       |                                 |
| point                              |                                  |                                 |
| NS                                 |                                  |                                 |
| 12                                 | Lincove                          |                                 |
| and Parker                         |                                  |                                 |
| (2015)                             |                                  |                                 |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                    | Work participation               | Boys 12-13 years old (sometimes |
| eligible)                          |                                  |                                 |
| -0.198                             |                                  |                                 |
| Percentage                         |                                  |                                 |
| point                              |                                  |                                 |
| 1%                                 |                                  |                                 |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                    | Work participation               | Girls 6-11 years old (always    |
| eligible)                          |                                  |                                 |
| -0.027                             | Percentage                       |                                 |
| point                              |                                  |                                 |
| NS                                 |                                  |                                 |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                    | Work participation               | Girls 12-13 years old           |
| (sometimes eligible)               |                                  |                                 |
| -0.046                             | Percentage                       |                                 |
| point                              |                                  |                                 |
| NS                                 |                                  |                                 |
| 13                                 | Maluccio                         |                                 |
| (2005)                             |                                  |                                 |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                    | Working (2 years after baseline) | Girls 7-12 years old            |
| 0.0553                             |                                  |                                 |
| Percentage                         |                                  |                                 |
| point                              |                                  |                                 |
| 10%                                |                                  |                                 |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                    | Working (2 years after baseline) | Boys 7-12 years old             |
| point                              |                                  |                                 |
| NS                                 |                                  |                                 |
| 14                                 | Merttens et                      |                                 |
| al. (2015)                         |                                  |                                 |
| SAGE Senior Citizen                |                                  |                                 |
| Grant (Uganda)                     |                                  |                                 |
| Proportion engaged in labour       | Boys 6-17 years old              | -0.07                           |
| SAGE Senior Citizen                |                                  |                                 |
| Grant (Uganda)                     |                                  |                                 |
| Proportion engaged in labour       | Girls 6-17 years old             | 0                               |
| SAGE Vulnerable Family             |                                  |                                 |
| Support Grant (Uganda)             |                                  |                                 |
| Proportion engaged in labour       | Boys 6-17 years old              | 0.03                            |
| SAGE Vulnerable Family             |                                  |                                 |
| Support Grant (Uganda)             |                                  |                                 |
| Proportion engaged in labour       | Girls 6-17 years old             | -0.02                           |
| 15                                 | Miller et al.                    |                                 |
| (2011)                             |                                  |                                 |
| SCTP (Malawi)                      | Doing any income-generating      |                                 |
| activity                           |                                  |                                 |
| Girls                              |                                  |                                 |
| -0.1                               |                                  |                                 |
| Percentage                         |                                  |                                 |
| point                              |                                  |                                 |
| 1%                                 |                                  |                                 |
| SCTP (Malawi)                      | Doing any income-generating      |                                 |
| activity                           |                                  |                                 |
| Boys                               |                                  |                                 |
| -0.12                              |                                  |                                 |
| Percentage                         |                                  |                                 |
| point                              |                                  |                                 |
| 1%                                 |                                  |                                 |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                  | Whether working                  | Girls 8-17 years old            |
| -0.013                             |                                  |                                 |
| Percentage                         |                                  |                                 |
| points                             |                                  |                                 |
| 10%                                |                                  |                                 |
| 16                                 | Parker and                       |                                 |
| Skoufias                           |                                  |                                 |
| (2000)                             |                                  |                                 |
| Contents                           |                                  |                                 |
| Annex 1                            |                                  |                                 |
| Overview of                        |                                  |                                 |
| existing cash                      |                                  |                                 |
| transfers reviews                  |                                  |                                 |
| Annex 2                            |                                  |                                 |
| Detailed search                    |                                  |                                 |
| protocols and study                |                                  |                                 |
| assessment tools                   |                                  |                                 |
| Annex 3                            |                                  |                                 |
| Summary table                      |                                  |                                 |
| of searches                        |                                  |                                 |
| and reasons for                    |                                  |                                 |
| exclusion and flow                 |                                  |                                 |
| diagrams                           |                                  |                                 |
| Annex 4                            |                                  |                                 |
| Summary of the                     |                                  |                                 |
| evidence base                      |                                  |                                 |

## Annex 5 Evidence: Results Tables For Overall Effects Disaggregated By Gender, And Cash Transfer Design And Implementation Effects

Contents

## Table A5.5.5 Summary Of Results For Overall Cash Transfer Effect On Child Labour Participation - By Gender Continued

| #                                                | Study                           | Programme and                      |
|--------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------|------------------------------------|
| country                                          |                                 |                                    |
| Outcome variable                                 | Treatment population            | Effect                             |
| of change                                        |                                 |                                    |
| Significance                                     |                                 |                                    |
| Annex 1                                          |                                 |                                    |
| Overview of                                      |                                 |                                    |
| existing cash                                    |                                 |                                    |
| transfers reviews                                |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Whether working                 | Girls 12-13 years old              |
| points                                           |                                 |                                    |
| NS                                               |                                 |                                    |
| 16                                               | Parker and                      |                                    |
| Skoufias                                         |                                 |                                    |
| (2000)                                           |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Whether working                 | Girls 14-15 years old              |
| -0.039                                           |                                 |                                    |
| Percentage                                       |                                 |                                    |
| points                                           |                                 |                                    |
| 5%                                               |                                 |                                    |
| Annex 2                                          |                                 |                                    |
| Detailed search                                  |                                 |                                    |
| protocols and study                              |                                 |                                    |
| assessment tools                                 |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Whether working                 | Girls 16-17 years old              |
| points                                           |                                 |                                    |
| NS                                               |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Whether working                 | Boys 8-17 years old                |
| -0.031                                           |                                 |                                    |
| Percentage                                       |                                 |                                    |
| points                                           |                                 |                                    |
| 5%                                               |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Whether working                 | Boys 12-13 years old               |
| -0.041                                           |                                 |                                    |
| Percentage                                       |                                 |                                    |
| points                                           |                                 |                                    |
| 5%                                               |                                 |                                    |
| Annex 3                                          |                                 |                                    |
| Summary table                                    |                                 |                                    |
| of searches                                      |                                 |                                    |
| and reasons for                                  |                                 |                                    |
| exclusion and flow                               |                                 |                                    |
| diagrams                                         |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Whether working                 | Boys 14-15 years old               |
| -0.054                                           |                                 |                                    |
| Percentage                                       |                                 |                                    |
| points                                           |                                 |                                    |
| 10%                                              |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Whether working                 | Boys 16-17 years old               |
| points                                           |                                 |                                    |
| NS                                               |                                 |                                    |
| Annex 4                                          |                                 |                                    |
| Summary of the                                   |                                 |                                    |
| evidence base                                    |                                 |                                    |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) Participation in all work | Girls                           | -0.015                             |
| point                                            |                                 |                                    |
| NS                                               |                                 |                                    |
| 17                                               | Rubio-                          |                                    |
| Codina                                           |                                 |                                    |
| (2009)                                           |                                 |                                    |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) Participation in all work | Boys                            | -0.014                             |
| point                                            |                                 |                                    |
| NS                                               |                                 |                                    |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) Participation in all work | Girls 9-11 years old            | 0.001                              |
| point                                            |                                 |                                    |
| NS                                               |                                 |                                    |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) Participation in all work | Girls 12-17 years old           | -0.028                             |
| point                                            |                                 |                                    |
| NS                                               |                                 |                                    |
| 18                                               | Sadoulet et                     |                                    |
| al. (2004)                                       |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Whether worked in previous week | Girls 11 years old at baseline     |
| -0.04                                            |                                 |                                    |
| Percentage                                       |                                 |                                    |
| points                                           |                                 |                                    |
| 1%                                               |                                 |                                    |
| Annex 5                                          |                                 |                                    |
| Evidence:                                        |                                 |                                    |
| results tables for                               |                                 |                                    |
| overall effects                                  |                                 |                                    |
| disaggregated by                                 |                                 |                                    |
| gender, and cash                                 |                                 |                                    |
| transfer design and                              |                                 |                                    |
| implementation                                   |                                 |                                    |
| effects                                          |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Whether worked in previous week | Girls 12 -14 years old at baseline |
| -0.066                                           |                                 |                                    |
| Percentage                                       |                                 |                                    |
| points                                           |                                 |                                    |
| 1%                                               |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Whether worked in previous week | Girls 15-17 years old at baseline  |
| points                                           |                                 |                                    |
| NS                                               |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Whether worked in previous week | Boys 11 years old at baseline      |
| -0.05                                            |                                 |                                    |
| Percentage                                       |                                 |                                    |
| points                                           |                                 |                                    |
| 1%                                               |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Whether worked in previous week | Boys 12 -14 years old at baseline  |
| -0.073                                           |                                 |                                    |
| Percentage                                       |                                 |                                    |
| points                                           |                                 |                                    |
| 1%                                               |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Whether worked in previous week | Boys 15-17 years old at baseline   |
| points                                           |                                 |                                    |
| NS                                               |                                 |                                    |
| 19                                               | Schultz                         |                                    |
| (2004)                                           |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Participation in paid work      | Girls (primary school age)         |
| -0.004                                           |                                 |                                    |
| Percentage                                       |                                 |                                    |
| point                                            |                                 |                                    |
| 5%                                               |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Participation in paid work      | Boys (primary school age)          |
| -0.0179                                          |                                 |                                    |
| Percentage                                       |                                 |                                    |
| point                                            |                                 |                                    |
| 5%                                               |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Participation in paid work      | Girls (secondary school age)       |
| -0.0527                                          |                                 |                                    |
| Percentage                                       |                                 |                                    |
| point                                            |                                 |                                    |
| 5%                                               |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Participation in paid work      | Boys (secondary school age)        |
| -0.101                                           |                                 |                                    |
| Percentage                                       |                                 |                                    |
| point                                            |                                 |                                    |
| 5%                                               |                                 |                                    |
| 20                                               | Siaplay                         |                                    |
| (2012)                                           |                                 |                                    |
| SA-OAP (South Africa)                            | Whether employed or not         | Female 14-20 years old             |
| point                                            |                                 |                                    |
| NS                                               |                                 |                                    |
| SA-OAP (South Africa)                            | Whether employed or not         | Male 14-20 years old               |
| point                                            |                                 |                                    |
| NS                                               |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Whether working                 | Girls 8-11 years old               |
| point                                            |                                 |                                    |
| NS                                               |                                 |                                    |
| 21                                               | Skoufias                        |                                    |
| and Parker                                       |                                 |                                    |
| (2001)                                           |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Whether working                 | Girls 12-17 years old              |
| -0.023                                           |                                 |                                    |
| Percentage                                       |                                 |                                    |
| point                                            |                                 |                                    |
| 10%                                              |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Whether working                 | Boys 8-11 years old                |
| point                                            |                                 |                                    |
| NS                                               |                                 |                                    |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)                                | Whether working                 | Boys 12-17 years old               |
| -0.047                                           |                                 |                                    |
| Percentage                                       |                                 |                                    |
| point                                            |                                 |                                    |
| 5%                                               |                                 |                                    |

Notes: results represent all overall results reported and do not include those disaggregated by gender or showing the effect of variations in design features. Figures in bold indicate statistically significant. NS means the study did not find a statistically significant result, typically up to the 10% significance level

## Table A5.5.6 Summary Of Results For Overall Cash Transfer Effect On Intensity Of Child Labour - By Gender

| #                                          | Study                               | Programme and                 |
|--------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------|-------------------------------|
| country                                    |                                     |                               |
| Outcome variable                           | Treatment population                | Effect                        |
| change                                     |                                     |                               |
| Significance                               |                                     |                               |
| 1                                          | Alam et al.                         |                               |
| (2011)                                     |                                     |                               |
| PFSSP (Pakistan)                           | Days per month                      | Girls 12-19 years old         |
| PFSSP (Pakistan)                           | Days per month                      | Girls 15 -16 years old        |
| -6.137                                     |                                     |                               |
| Days per month                             | 10%                                 |                               |
| 2                                          | Barrera-Osorio                      |                               |
| et al. (2008)                              |                                     |                               |
| SCAE (Colombia)                            | No. of hours worked last week       | Girls                         |
| -0.378                                     |                                     |                               |
| Hours per week                             | 5%                                  |                               |
| SCAE (Colombia)                            | No. of hours worked last week       | Boys                          |
| -0.619                                     |                                     |                               |
| Hours per week                             | 5%                                  |                               |
| 3                                          | Dammert                             |                               |
| (2008)                                     |                                     |                               |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                     |                               |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                     |                               |
| Hours worked (2001)                        | Boys 7-13 years old (at             |                               |
| baseline)                                  |                                     |                               |
| -20.42                                     | 'Hours worked'                      | NS                            |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                     |                               |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                     |                               |
| Hours worked (2001)                        | Girls 7-13 years old (at            |                               |
| baseline)                                  |                                     |                               |
| -12.335                                    | 'Hours worked'                      | NS                            |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                     |                               |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                     |                               |
| Hours worked (2002)                        | Boys 7-13 years old (at             |                               |
| baseline)                                  |                                     |                               |
| -19.11                                     | 'Hours worked'                      | NS                            |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                     |                               |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                     |                               |
| Hours worked (2002)                        | Girls 7-13 years old (at            |                               |
| baseline)                                  |                                     |                               |
| -11.778                                    | 'Hours worked'                      | NS                            |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                     |                               |
| (Nicaragua)                                | Hours worked (2001)                 |                               |
| Children 7-13 at baseline                  |                                     |                               |
| (male headed)                              |                                     |                               |
| 35.752                                     |                                     |                               |
| Hours                                      | 5%                                  |                               |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                     |                               |
| (Nicaragua)                                | Hours worked (2001)                 |                               |
| Children 7-13 at baseline                  |                                     |                               |
| (female headed)                            |                                     |                               |
| -51.84                                     |                                     |                               |
| Hours                                      | 10%                                 |                               |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                     |                               |
| (Nicaragua)                                | Hours worked (2002)                 |                               |
| Children 7-13 at baseline                  |                                     |                               |
| (male headed)                              |                                     |                               |
| -1.361                                     | Hours                               | NS                            |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                     |                               |
| (Nicaragua)                                | Hours worked (2002)                 |                               |
| Children 7-13 at baseline                  |                                     |                               |
| (female headed)                            |                                     |                               |
| -16.191                                    | Hours                               | NS                            |
| No. of hours worked per week (all work)    | Girls 6-15 years old                | -0.747                        |
| 4                                          | Del Carpio                          |                               |
| and Macours                                |                                     |                               |
| (2009)                                     |                                     |                               |
| Atención a Crisis -                        |                                     |                               |
| cash transfer only                         |                                     |                               |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                     |                               |
| No. of hours worked per week (all work)    |                                     |                               |
| (difference compared to beneficiary girls) |                                     |                               |
| Boys 6-15 years old                        |                                     |                               |
| -0.1478                                    |                                     |                               |
| Hours per week                             | 5%                                  |                               |
| No. of hours worked per week (all work)    | Girls 6-9 years old                 |                               |
| -1.208                                     |                                     |                               |
| Hours per week                             | 5%                                  |                               |
| Girls 10-15 years old                      | 0.805                               | Hours per week                |
| No. of hours worked per week (all          |                                     |                               |
| work) (difference compared to younger      |                                     |                               |
| beneficiary girls)                         |                                     |                               |
| No. of hours worked per week (all work)    | Boys 6-9 years old                  | -0.489                        |
| Boys 10-15 years old                       |                                     |                               |
| -3.011                                     |                                     |                               |
| Hours per week                             | 1%                                  |                               |
| No. of hours worked per week (all          |                                     |                               |
| work) (difference compared to younger      |                                     |                               |
| beneficiary boys)                          |                                     |                               |
| No. of hours worked per week (all work)    | Girls 6 -15 years old               | -0.595                        |
| No. of hours worked per week (all work)    | Boys 6 -15 years old                | -1.186                        |
| No. of hours worked per week (all work)    | Girls 6-9 years old                 |                               |
| -1.631                                     |                                     |                               |
| Hours per week                             | 5%                                  |                               |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                     |                               |
| - cash transfer                            |                                     |                               |
| plus                                       | productive                          |                               |
| investment package                         |                                     |                               |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                     |                               |
| No. of hours worked per week (all work)    |                                     |                               |
| (compared to younger girls)                |                                     |                               |
| Girls 10-15 years old                      |                                     |                               |
| 1.748                                      |                                     |                               |
| Hours per week                             | 5%                                  |                               |
| No. of hours worked per week (all work)    | Boys 6-9 years old                  | 0.241                         |
| No. of hours worked per week (all work)    |                                     |                               |
| (compared to younger boys)                 |                                     |                               |
| Boys 10-15 years old                       |                                     |                               |
| -3.503                                     |                                     |                               |
| Hours per week                             | 1%                                  |                               |
| Attencion a Crisis                         |                                     |                               |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                     |                               |
| No. of hours worked per child in the past  |                                     |                               |
| week                                       |                                     |                               |
| Boys                                       |                                     |                               |
| -1.773                                     |                                     |                               |
| Hours per week                             | 1%                                  |                               |
| 5                                          | Del Carpio                          |                               |
| and Loayza                                 |                                     |                               |
| (2012)                                     |                                     |                               |
| Attencion a Crisis                         |                                     |                               |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                     |                               |
| No. of hours worked per child in the past  |                                     |                               |
| week                                       |                                     |                               |
| Girls                                      |                                     |                               |
| -1.212                                     |                                     |                               |
| Hours per week                             | 1%                                  |                               |
| No. of hours spent on work per week        | Girls 6-10 years old (urban)        | -0.582                        |
| 6                                          | Ferro and                           |                               |
| Nicolella                                  |                                     |                               |
| (2007)                                     |                                     |                               |
| Conditional                                |                                     |                               |
| educational                                |                                     |                               |
| transfers, principally                     |                                     |                               |
| Bolsa Escola (Brazil)                      |                                     |                               |
| As above                                   | No. of hours spent on work per week | Girls 6-10 years old (rural)  |
| As above                                   | No. of hours spent on work per week | Girls 11-15 years old (urban) |
| As above                                   | No. of hours spent on work per week | Girls 11-15 years old (rural) |
| As above                                   | No. of hours spent on work per week | Boys 6-10 years old (urban)   |
| As above                                   | No. of hours spent on work per week | Boys 6-10 years old (rural)   |
| Contents                                   |                                     |                               |
| Annex 1                                    |                                     |                               |
| Overview of                                |                                     |                               |
| existing cash                              |                                     |                               |
| transfers reviews                          |                                     |                               |
| Annex 2                                    |                                     |                               |
| Detailed search                            |                                     |                               |
| protocols and study                        |                                     |                               |
| assessment tools                           |                                     |                               |
| Annex 3                                    |                                     |                               |
| Summary table                              |                                     |                               |
| of searches                                |                                     |                               |
| and reasons for                            |                                     |                               |
| exclusion and flow                         |                                     |                               |
| diagrams                                   |                                     |                               |
| Annex 4                                    |                                     |                               |
| Summary of the                             |                                     |                               |
| evidence base                              |                                     |                               |

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

Contents

## Table A5.5.6 Summary Of Results For Overall Cash Transfer Effect On Intensity Of Child Labour - By Gender Continued

| #                              | Study                                | Programme and                |
|--------------------------------|--------------------------------------|------------------------------|
| country                        |                                      |                              |
| Outcome variable               | Treatment population                 | Effect                       |
| change                         |                                      |                              |
| Significance                   |                                      |                              |
| Annex 1                        |                                      |                              |
| Overview of                    |                                      |                              |
| existing cash                  |                                      |                              |
| transfers reviews              |                                      |                              |
| As above                       | No. of hours spent on work per week  | Boys 11-15 years old (urban) |
| -2.359                         |                                      |                              |
| Hours per week                 | 10%                                  |                              |
| As above                       | No. of hours spent on work per week  | Boys 11-15 years old (rural) |
| 6                              | Ferro and                            |                              |
| Nicolella                      |                                      |                              |
| (2007)                         |                                      |                              |
| 7                              | Lincove and                          |                              |
| Parker (2015)                  |                                      |                              |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                | No. of hours worked (paid or unpaid) | Boys 6-11 years old (always  |
| eligible)                      |                                      |                              |
| -2.771                         |                                      |                              |
| Hours per week                 | 1%                                   |                              |
| Annex 2                        |                                      |                              |
| Detailed search                |                                      |                              |
| protocols and study            |                                      |                              |
| assessment tools               |                                      |                              |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                | No. of hours worked (paid or unpaid) | Boys 12-13 years             |
| (sometimes eligible)           |                                      |                              |
| -8.734                         |                                      |                              |
| Hours per week                 | 1%                                   |                              |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                | No. of hours worked (paid or unpaid) | Girls 6-11 years old (always |
| eligible)                      |                                      |                              |
| -0.486                         |                                      |                              |
| Hours per week                 | 1%                                   |                              |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                | No. of hours worked (paid or unpaid) | Girls 12-13 years old        |
| (sometimes eligible)           |                                      |                              |
| -1.855                         | Hours per week                       | NS                           |
| Annex 3                        |                                      |                              |
| Summary table                  |                                      |                              |
| of searches                    |                                      |                              |
| and reasons for                |                                      |                              |
| exclusion and flow             |                                      |                              |
| diagrams                       |                                      |                              |
| 8                              | Rubio-Codina                         |                              |
| (2009)                         |                                      |                              |
| Oportunidades                  |                                      |                              |
| (Mexico)                       |                                      |                              |
| No. of hours worked (all work) | Boys                                 |                              |
| -0.104                         |                                      |                              |
| Hours per day                  | 10%                                  |                              |
| Oportunidades                  |                                      |                              |
| (Mexico)                       |                                      |                              |
| No. of hours worked (all work) | Girls                                |                              |
| -0.084                         |                                      |                              |
| Hours per day                  | 10%                                  |                              |
| Annex 4                        |                                      |                              |
| Summary of the                 |                                      |                              |
| evidence base                  |                                      |                              |
| Oportunidades                  |                                      |                              |
| (Mexico)                       |                                      |                              |
| No. of hours worked (all work) | Girls 9-11 years old                 | 0.01                         |
| Oportunidades                  |                                      |                              |
| (Mexico)                       |                                      |                              |
| No. of hours worked (all work) | Girls 12-17 years old                |                              |
| -0.145                         |                                      |                              |
| Hours per day                  | 5%                                   |                              |

Notes: results represent all overall results reported and do not include those disaggregated by gender or showing the effect of variations in design features. Figures in bold indicate statistically significant. NS means the study did not find a statistically significant result, typically up to the 10% significance level.

Contents

## Table A5.5.7 Summary Of Results For Cash Transfer Effect On Child Labour Participation - By Sector And Gender

| #                         | Study                            | Programme and                  |
|---------------------------|----------------------------------|--------------------------------|
| country                   |                                  |                                |
| Child age                 | Female/                          |                                |
| Male                      |                                  |                                |
| Outcome variable          | Effect                           | Measure of                     |
| change                    |                                  |                                |
| Significance              |                                  |                                |
| Annex 1                   |                                  |                                |
| Overview of               |                                  |                                |
| existing cash             |                                  |                                |
| transfers reviews         |                                  |                                |
| 1                         | Asfaw et al. (2014)              | OVC-CT (Kenya)                 |
| by children               |                                  |                                |
| -0.120                    |                                  |                                |
| percentage                |                                  |                                |
| points                    |                                  |                                |
| 5%                        |                                  |                                |
| OVC-CT (Kenya)            | 10 to 15                         | Girls                          |
| by children               |                                  |                                |
| -0.072                    | percentage                       |                                |
| points                    |                                  |                                |
| NS                        |                                  |                                |
| Annex 2                   |                                  |                                |
| Detailed search           |                                  |                                |
| protocols and study       |                                  |                                |
| assessment tools          |                                  |                                |
| 2                         | Behrman et al. (2011) PROGRESA / |                                |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)    |                                  |                                |
| 15-16 in                  |                                  |                                |
| 2003                      |                                  |                                |
| Female                    | Whether participating in         |                                |
| agricultural work in 2003 |                                  |                                |
| -0.004                    | % point                          | NS                             |
| PROGRESA /                |                                  |                                |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)    |                                  |                                |
| 17-18 in                  |                                  |                                |
| 2003                      |                                  |                                |
| Female                    | Whether participating in         |                                |
| agricultural work in 2004 |                                  |                                |
| -0.02                     | % point                          | NS                             |
| PROGRESA /                |                                  |                                |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)    |                                  |                                |
| 19-21 in                  |                                  |                                |
| 2003                      |                                  |                                |
| Female                    | Whether participating in         |                                |
| agricultural work in 2005 |                                  |                                |
| 0.01                      | % point                          | NS                             |
| Annex 3                   |                                  |                                |
| Summary table             |                                  |                                |
| of searches               |                                  |                                |
| and reasons for           |                                  |                                |
| exclusion and flow        |                                  |                                |
| diagrams                  |                                  |                                |
| 3                         | Daidone et al. (2014a)           | LCGP (Lesotho)                 |
| non-farm business         |                                  |                                |
| -0.003                    | Percentage                       |                                |
| point                     |                                  |                                |
| NS                        |                                  |                                |
| LCGP (Lesotho)            | Boys                             | Participation last 12m own     |
| agricultural activities   |                                  |                                |
| -0.029                    | Percentage                       |                                |
| point                     |                                  |                                |
| NS                        |                                  |                                |
| Annex 4                   |                                  |                                |
| Summary of the            |                                  |                                |
| evidence base             |                                  |                                |
| LCGP (Lesotho)            | Boys                             | Participation last 12m paid    |
| work outside household    |                                  |                                |
| -0.011                    | Percentage                       |                                |
| point                     |                                  |                                |
| NS                        |                                  |                                |
| LCGP (Lesotho)            | Girls                            | Participation last 12m own     |
| non-farm business         |                                  |                                |
| 0.001                     | Percentage                       |                                |
| point                     |                                  |                                |
| NS                        |                                  |                                |
| LCGP (Lesotho)            | Girls                            | Participation last 12m own     |
| agricultural activities   |                                  |                                |
| 0.008                     | Percentage                       |                                |
| point                     |                                  |                                |
| NS                        |                                  |                                |
| LCGP (Lesotho)            | Girls                            | Participation last 12m paid    |
| work outside household    |                                  |                                |
| 0.011                     | Percentage                       |                                |
| point                     |                                  |                                |
| NS                        |                                  |                                |
| Annex 5                   |                                  |                                |
| Evidence:                 |                                  |                                |
| results tables for        |                                  |                                |
| overall effects           |                                  |                                |
| disaggregated by          |                                  |                                |
| gender, and cash          |                                  |                                |
| transfer design and       |                                  |                                |
| implementation            |                                  |                                |
| effects                   |                                  |                                |
| 4                         | Daidone et al. (2014b)           | ZCGP (Zambia)                  |
| point                     |                                  |                                |
| NS                        |                                  |                                |
| ZCGP (Zambia)             | 5-18                             | Boys                           |
| point                     |                                  |                                |
| NS                        |                                  |                                |
| ZCGP (Zambia)             | 5-18                             | Girls                          |
| point                     |                                  |                                |
| NS                        |                                  |                                |
| ZCGP (Zambia)             | 5-18                             | Girls                          |
| point                     |                                  |                                |
| NS                        |                                  |                                |
| 5                         | Edmonds and Schady               |                                |
| (2008)                    |                                  |                                |
| BDH (Ecuador)             | 10 and older                     | Girls                          |
| for pay                   |                                  |                                |
| -0.0910                   | Percent point                    |                                |
| change                    |                                  |                                |
| NS                        |                                  |                                |
| BDH (Ecuador)             | 10 and older                     | Girls                          |
| market work               |                                  |                                |
| ‐0.191                    |                                  |                                |
| Percent point             |                                  |                                |
| change                    |                                  |                                |
| 5%                        |                                  |                                |
| BDH (Ecuador)             | 10 and older                     | Girls                          |
| market work               |                                  |                                |
| ‐0.159                    |                                  |                                |
| Percent point             |                                  |                                |
| change                    |                                  |                                |
| 10%                       |                                  |                                |
| BDH (Ecuador)             | 10 and older                     | Girls                          |
| domestic work             |                                  |                                |
| 0.0569                    | Percent point                    |                                |
| change                    |                                  |                                |
| NS                        |                                  |                                |
| BDH (Ecuador)             | 10 and older                     | Boys                           |
| for pay                   |                                  |                                |
| -0.0140                   | Percent point                    |                                |
| change                    |                                  |                                |
| NS                        |                                  |                                |
| BDH (Ecuador)             | 10 and older                     | Boys                           |
| market work               |                                  |                                |
| ‐0.0941                   |                                  |                                |
| Percent point             |                                  |                                |
| change                    |                                  |                                |
| 5%                        |                                  |                                |
| BDH (Ecuador)             | 10 and older                     | Boys                           |
| market work               |                                  |                                |
| 0.0778                    |                                  |                                |
| Percent point             |                                  |                                |
| change                    |                                  |                                |
| 1.05                      |                                  |                                |
| BDH (Ecuador)             | 10 and older                     | Boys                           |
| domestic work             |                                  |                                |
| 0.0161                    | Percent point                    |                                |
| change                    |                                  |                                |
| NS                        |                                  |                                |
| 6                         | Galiani and McEwan               |                                |
| (2013)                    |                                  |                                |
| PRAF (Honduras)           | Girls                            | Only works inside the home     |
| change                    |                                  |                                |
| NS                        |                                  |                                |
| PRAF (Honduras)           | Boys                             | Only works inside the home     |
| change                    |                                  |                                |
| NS                        |                                  |                                |
| 7                         | Miller et al. (2011)             | SCTP (Malawi)                  |
| 0.11                      |                                  |                                |
| Percent point             |                                  |                                |
| change                    |                                  |                                |
| 1%                        |                                  |                                |
| SCTP (Malawi)             | Boys                             | Doing any work on chores       |
| 0.08                      |                                  |                                |
| Percent point             |                                  |                                |
| change                    |                                  |                                |
| 10%                       |                                  |                                |
| SCTP (Malawi)             | Girls                            | Doing any work on family farm/ |
| business                  |                                  |                                |
| 0.01                      | Percent point                    |                                |
| change                    |                                  |                                |
| NS                        |                                  |                                |
Contents
Table A5.5.7 Summary of results for cash transfer effect on child labour participation - by sector and 
gender continued
#
Study 
Programme and country
Child age
Female/ Male
Outcome variable
Effect
Measure of 
change
Significance
Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews
7
Miller et al. (2011)
SCTP (Malawi)
Boys
doing any work on family farm/ business
0.09
Percent point 
change
NS
NS
8
Parker and Skoufias (2000)
PROGRESA (Mexico)
age 8-17
female 
Impact of PROGRESA on the probability of working in - SALARIED WORK 
-0.003
% point from 
pre-programme 
level
Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools
10%
PROGRESA (Mexico)
age 12-13
female 
Impact of PROGRESA on the probability of working in - SALARIED WORK 
-0.007
% point from 
pre-programme 
level
NS
PROGRESA (Mexico)
age 14-15
female 
Impact of PROGRESA on the probability of working in - SALARIED WORK 
-0.016
% point from 
pre-programme 
level
Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
NS
PROGRESA (Mexico)
age 16-17
female 
Impact of PROGRESA on the probability of working in - SALARIED WORK 
-0.002
% point from 
pre-programme 
level
NS
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base
-0.007
% point from 
pre-programme 
level
PROGRESA (Mexico)
age 8-17
female 
The impact of PROGRESA on the probability of working in - SELF-EMPLOYED/FAMILY BUSINESS
NS
-0.002
% point from 
pre-programme 
level
PROGRESA (Mexico)
age 12-13
female 
The impact of PROGRESA on the probability of working in - SELF-EMPLOYED/FAMILY BUSINESS
1%
-0.02
% point from 
pre-programme 
level
Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects
PROGRESA (Mexico)
age 14-15
female 
The impact of PROGRESA on the probability of working in - SELF-EMPLOYED/FAMILY BUSINESS
NS
-0.007
% point from 
pre-programme 
level
PROGRESA (Mexico)
age 16-17
female 
The impact of PROGRESA on the probability of working in - SELF-EMPLOYED/FAMILY BUSINESS
9
Schultz (2004) 
PROGRESA (Mexico)
Primary school girls
Female
Work market and household
-0.148
Percent point 
change
5%
PROGRESA (Mexico)
Primary school boys
Male
Work market and household
-0.188
Percent point 
change
5%
PROGRESA (Mexico)
Secondary school girls
Female
Work market and household
-0.463
Percent point 
change
10%
PROGRESA (Mexico)
Secondary school boys
Male
Work market and household
-0.389
Percent point 
change
NS
PROGRESA (Mexico)
Primary school girls
Female 
Work market
-0.0258
Percent point 
change
10%
PROGRESA (Mexico)
Primary school boys
Male 
Work market
-0.12
Percent point 
change
5%
PROGRESA (Mexico)
Secondary school girls
Female
Work market
-0.128
Percent point 
change
5%
PROGRESA (Mexico)
Secondary school boys
Male
Work market
-0.28
Percent point 
change
5%
10
Skoufias and Parker (2001)
PROGRESA (Mexico)
8 to 17
Female 
PARTICIPATION in MARKET - GIRLS 8-17
0
NS
PROGRESA (Mexico)
12 to 17
Female 
PARTICIPATION in MARKET - GIRLS 12-17
0
NS
PROGRESA (Mexico)
8 to 17
Female 
PARTICIPATION in DOMESTIC - GIRLS 8-17
-0.04
1%
PROGRESA (Mexico)
12 to 17
Female 
PARTICIPATION in DOMESTIC - GIRLS 12-17
-0.43
1%
PROGRESA (Mexico)
8 to 17
Female 
PARTICIPATION in FARM - GIRLS 8-17
0
NS
PROGRESA (Mexico)
12 to 17 
Female 
PARTICIPATION in FARM - GIRLS 12-17
-0.004
NS

## Table A5.5.8 Summary Of Results For Cash Transfer Effect On Child Labour Intensity - By Sector And Gender

| #                                          | Study                                              | Programme and                              |
|--------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|
| country                                    |                                                    |                                            |
| Child                                      |                                                    |                                            |
| age                                        |                                                    |                                            |
| Female/                                    |                                                    |                                            |
| Male                                       |                                                    |                                            |
| Outcome variable                           | Effect                                             | Measure of                                 |
| change                                     |                                                    |                                            |
| Significance                               |                                                    |                                            |
| 1                                          | Daidone et al.                                     |                                            |
| (2014a)                                    |                                                    |                                            |
| LCGP (Lesotho)                             | Boys                                               | hours worked last week own non farm        |
| enterprise                                 |                                                    |                                            |
| 0.1                                        | hours                                              | NS                                         |
| LCGP (Lesotho)                             | Boys                                               | hours worked last week Own crop &          |
| livestock                                  |                                                    |                                            |
| -2.7                                       | hours                                              | NS                                         |
| LCGP (Lesotho)                             | Boys                                               | hours worked last week Paid labour         |
| LCGP (Lesotho)                             | Girls                                              | hours worked last week own non farm        |
| enterprise                                 |                                                    |                                            |
| 0                                          | hours                                              | NS                                         |
| LCGP (Lesotho)                             | Girls                                              | hours worked last week Own crop &          |
| livestock                                  |                                                    |                                            |
| -0.4                                       | hours                                              | NS                                         |
| LCGP (Lesotho)                             | Girls                                              | hours worked last week Paid labour         |
| 2                                          | Del Carpio and                                     |                                            |
| Macours (2009)                             |                                                    |                                            |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                                    |                                            |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                                    |                                            |
| All                                        | Female                                             |                                            |
| (Cash transfer only group) Number of       |                                                    |                                            |
| hours per week child worked in non-        |                                                    |                                            |
| agricultural                               |                                                    |                                            |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                                    |                                            |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                                    |                                            |
| All                                        | Male                                               |                                            |
| (Cash transfer only group) Number of       |                                                    |                                            |
| hours per week child worked in non-        |                                                    |                                            |
| agricultural                               |                                                    |                                            |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                                    |                                            |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                                    |                                            |
| All                                        | Female                                             |                                            |
| (Cash transfer only worked in agricultural |                                                    |                                            |
| -0.269                                     |                                                    |                                            |
| Hours per                                  |                                                    |                                            |
| week                                       |                                                    |                                            |
| 1%                                         |                                                    |                                            |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                                    |                                            |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                                    |                                            |
| All                                        | Male                                               |                                            |
| (Cash transfer only worked in agricultural | 0.0591                                             | Hours per                                  |
| week                                       |                                                    |                                            |
| NS                                         |                                                    |                                            |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                                    |                                            |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                                    |                                            |
| All                                        | Female                                             |                                            |
| (Cash transfer only group) Number of       |                                                    |                                            |
| hours per week child worked in domestic    |                                                    |                                            |
| work                                       |                                                    |                                            |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                                    |                                            |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                                    |                                            |
| All                                        | Male                                               |                                            |
| (Cash transfer only group) Number of       |                                                    |                                            |
| hours per week child worked in domestic    |                                                    |                                            |
| work                                       |                                                    |                                            |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                                    |                                            |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                                    |                                            |
| 10 to 15                                   | Female                                             |                                            |
| (Cash transfer only group) Number of       |                                                    |                                            |
| hours per week child worked in non-        |                                                    |                                            |
| agricultural                               |                                                    |                                            |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                                    |                                            |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                                    |                                            |
| 6 to 15                                    | Female                                             | (Cash transfer only worked in agricultural |
| -0.288                                     |                                                    |                                            |
| Hours per                                  |                                                    |                                            |
| week                                       |                                                    |                                            |
| 5%                                         |                                                    |                                            |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                                    |                                            |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                                    |                                            |
| 6 to 15                                    | Female                                             |                                            |
| (Cash transfer only group) Number of       |                                                    |                                            |
| hours per week child worked in non-        |                                                    |                                            |
| agricultural                               |                                                    |                                            |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                                    |                                            |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                                    |                                            |
| 10 to 15 Female                            | (Cash transfer only worked in agricultural -0.0295 | Hours per                                  |
| week                                       |                                                    |                                            |
| NS                                         |                                                    |                                            |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                                    |                                            |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                                    |                                            |
| 6 to 15                                    | Female                                             | 0.0735                                     |
| week                                       |                                                    |                                            |
| NS                                         |                                                    |                                            |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                                    |                                            |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                                    |                                            |
| 10 to 15                                   | Female                                             |                                            |
| -0.399                                     |                                                    |                                            |
| Hours per                                  |                                                    |                                            |
| week                                       |                                                    |                                            |
| 10%                                        |                                                    |                                            |
| 3                                          | Del Carpio, X.                                     |                                            |
| and Loayza, N. V.                          |                                                    |                                            |
| (2012)                                     |                                                    |                                            |
| Atención a Crisis                          |                                                    |                                            |
| (Nicaragua)                                |                                                    |                                            |
| Female                                     | Number of hrs worked per child in                  |                                            |
| the week previous to the survey -          |                                                    |                                            |
| HOUSEHOLD CHORES                           |                                                    |                                            |
| 4                                          | Ospina (2010)                                      | Famílias en Acción                         |
| (Colombia)                                 |                                                    |                                            |
| 10 to 13                                   | Boys                                               | Hours spent on paid work                   |
| Famílias en Acción                         |                                                    |                                            |
| (Colombia)                                 |                                                    |                                            |
| 14 to 17 Boys                              | Hours spent on paid work                           |                                            |
| -1.408                                     |                                                    |                                            |
| 10%                                        |                                                    |                                            |
| Famílias en Acción                         |                                                    |                                            |
| (Colombia)                                 |                                                    |                                            |
| 10 to 13                                   | Boys                                               | Hours spent on domestic work               |
| -0.545                                     |                                                    |                                            |
| 1%                                         |                                                    |                                            |
| Famílias en Acción                         |                                                    |                                            |
| (Colombia)                                 |                                                    |                                            |
| 14 to 17 Boys                              | Hours spent on domestic work                       |                                            |
| -0.524                                     |                                                    |                                            |
| 10%                                        |                                                    |                                            |
| Famílias en Acción                         |                                                    |                                            |
| (Colombia)                                 |                                                    |                                            |
| 10 to 13                                   | Girls                                              | Hours spent on paid work                   |
| Famílias en Acción                         |                                                    |                                            |
| (Colombia)                                 |                                                    |                                            |
| 14 to 17 Girls                             | Hours spent on paid work                           | -0.799                                     |
| Famílias en Acción                         |                                                    |                                            |
| (Colombia)                                 |                                                    |                                            |
| 10 to 13                                   | Girls                                              | Hours spent on domestic work               |
| -0.355                                     |                                                    |                                            |
| 5%                                         |                                                    |                                            |
| Famílias en Acción                         |                                                    |                                            |
| (Colombia)                                 |                                                    |                                            |
| 14 to 17 Girls                             | Hours spent on domestic work                       | 0.195                                      |
| Contents                                   |                                                    |                                            |
| Annex 1                                    |                                                    |                                            |
| Overview of                                |                                                    |                                            |
| existing cash                              |                                                    |                                            |
| transfers reviews                          |                                                    |                                            |
| Annex 2                                    |                                                    |                                            |
| Detailed search                            |                                                    |                                            |
| protocols and study                        |                                                    |                                            |
| assessment tools                           |                                                    |                                            |
| Annex 3                                    |                                                    |                                            |
| Summary table                              |                                                    |                                            |
| of searches                                |                                                    |                                            |
| and reasons for                            |                                                    |                                            |
| exclusion and flow                         |                                                    |                                            |
| diagrams                                   |                                                    |                                            |
| 0.0864                                     |                                                    |                                            |
| Hours per                                  |                                                    |                                            |
| week                                       |                                                    |                                            |
| 5%                                         |                                                    |                                            |
| 0.106                                      |                                                    |                                            |
| Hours per                                  |                                                    |                                            |
| week                                       |                                                    |                                            |
| 1%                                         |                                                    |                                            |
| Annex 4                                    |                                                    |                                            |
| Summary of the                             |                                                    |                                            |
| evidence base                              |                                                    |                                            |
| -0.399                                     |                                                    |                                            |
| Hours per                                  |                                                    |                                            |
| week                                       |                                                    |                                            |
| 10%                                        |                                                    |                                            |
| -0.161                                     |                                                    |                                            |
| Hours per                                  |                                                    |                                            |
| week                                       |                                                    |                                            |
| 10%                                        |                                                    |                                            |
| Annex 5                                    |                                                    |                                            |
| Evidence:                                  |                                                    |                                            |
| results tables for                         |                                                    |                                            |
| overall effects                            |                                                    |                                            |
| disaggregated by                           |                                                    |                                            |
| gender, and cash                           |                                                    |                                            |
| transfer design and                        |                                                    |                                            |
| implementation                             |                                                    |                                            |
| effects                                    |                                                    |                                            |
| 0.181                                      | Hours per                                          |                                            |
| week                                       |                                                    |                                            |
| NS                                         |                                                    |                                            |
| 0.192                                      |                                                    |                                            |
| Hours per                                  |                                                    |                                            |
| week                                       |                                                    |                                            |
| 5%                                         |                                                    |                                            |
| -1.085                                     |                                                    |                                            |
| hours                                      | 1%                                                 |                                            |
Contents

## Table A5.5.8 Summary Of Results For Cash Transfer Effect On Child Labour Intensity - By Sector And Gender Continued

| #                      | Study                                 | Programme and                         |
|------------------------|---------------------------------------|---------------------------------------|
| country                |                                       |                                       |
| Child                  |                                       |                                       |
| age                    |                                       |                                       |
| Female/                |                                       |                                       |
| Male                   |                                       |                                       |
| Outcome variable       | Effect                                | Measure of                            |
| change                 |                                       |                                       |
| Significance           |                                       |                                       |
| Annex 1                |                                       |                                       |
| Overview of            |                                       |                                       |
| existing cash          |                                       |                                       |
| transfers reviews      |                                       |                                       |
| 5                      | Rubio-Codina                          |                                       |
| (2009)                 |                                       |                                       |
| PROGRESA /             |                                       |                                       |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                                       |                                       |
| Girls                  | Girls                                 | Number of hours worked in market work |
| effect                 |                                       |                                       |
| NS                     |                                       |                                       |
| PROGRESA /             |                                       |                                       |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                                       |                                       |
| Boys                   | Boys                                  | Number of hours worked in market work |
| -0.15                  |                                       |                                       |
| Marginal               |                                       |                                       |
| effect                 |                                       |                                       |
| 10%                    |                                       |                                       |
| Annex 2                |                                       |                                       |
| Detailed search        |                                       |                                       |
| protocols and study    |                                       |                                       |
| assessment tools       |                                       |                                       |
| PROGRESA /             |                                       |                                       |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                                       |                                       |
| Aged                   |                                       |                                       |
| 9-11                   |                                       |                                       |
| Girls                  | Number of hours worked in market work | 0.03                                  |
| effect                 |                                       |                                       |
| NS                     |                                       |                                       |
| PROGRESA /             |                                       |                                       |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                                       |                                       |
| Aged                   |                                       |                                       |
| 12-17                  |                                       |                                       |
| Girls                  | Number of hours worked in market work | -0.121                                |
| effect                 |                                       |                                       |
| NS                     |                                       |                                       |
| PROGRESA /             |                                       |                                       |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                                       |                                       |
| Girls                  | Girls                                 | Number of hours worked in farm work   |
| effect                 |                                       |                                       |
| NS                     |                                       |                                       |
| Annex 3                |                                       |                                       |
| Summary table          |                                       |                                       |
| of searches            |                                       |                                       |
| and reasons for        |                                       |                                       |
| exclusion and flow     |                                       |                                       |
| diagrams               |                                       |                                       |
| PROGRESA /             |                                       |                                       |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                                       |                                       |
| Boys                   | Boys                                  | Number of hours worked in farm work   |
| effect                 |                                       |                                       |
| NS                     |                                       |                                       |
| PROGRESA /             |                                       |                                       |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                                       |                                       |
| Aged                   |                                       |                                       |
| 9-11                   |                                       |                                       |
| Girls                  | Number of hours worked in farm work   | 0.085                                 |
| effect                 |                                       |                                       |
| NS                     |                                       |                                       |
| Annex 4                |                                       |                                       |
| Summary of the         |                                       |                                       |
| evidence base          |                                       |                                       |
| PROGRESA /             |                                       |                                       |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                                       |                                       |
| Aged                   |                                       |                                       |
| 12-17                  |                                       |                                       |
| Girls                  | Number of hours worked in farm work   | 0.014                                 |
| effect                 |                                       |                                       |
| NS                     |                                       |                                       |
| PROGRESA /             |                                       |                                       |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                                       |                                       |
| Girls                  | Girls                                 | Number of hours worked in domestic    |
| work                   |                                       |                                       |
| -0.097                 |                                       |                                       |
| Marginal               |                                       |                                       |
| effect                 |                                       |                                       |
| 5%                     |                                       |                                       |
| PROGRESA /             |                                       |                                       |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                                       |                                       |
| Boys                   | Boys                                  | Number of hours worked in domestic    |
| work                   |                                       |                                       |
| -0.02                  | Marginal                              |                                       |
| effect                 |                                       |                                       |
| NS                     |                                       |                                       |
| PROGRESA /             |                                       |                                       |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                                       |                                       |
| Aged                   |                                       |                                       |
| 9-11                   |                                       |                                       |
| Girls                  | Number of hours worked in domestic    |                                       |
| work                   |                                       |                                       |
| -0.028                 | Marginal                              |                                       |
| effect                 |                                       |                                       |
| NS                     |                                       |                                       |
| Annex 5                |                                       |                                       |
| Evidence:              |                                       |                                       |
| results tables for     |                                       |                                       |
| overall effects        |                                       |                                       |
| disaggregated by       |                                       |                                       |
| gender, and cash       |                                       |                                       |
| transfer design and    |                                       |                                       |
| implementation         |                                       |                                       |
| effects                |                                       |                                       |
| PROGRESA /             |                                       |                                       |
| Oportunidades (Mexico) |                                       |                                       |
| Aged                   |                                       |                                       |
| 12-17                  |                                       |                                       |
| Girls                  | Number of hours worked in domestic    |                                       |
| work                   |                                       |                                       |
| -0.139                 |                                       |                                       |
| Marginal               |                                       |                                       |
| effect                 |                                       |                                       |
| 1%                     |                                       |                                       |
| 6                      | World Bank (2011)                     | PKH (Indonesia)                       |
| PKH (Indonesia)        | 13 to 15 Boys                         | Family enterprise work last week      |
| 3.03                   |                                       |                                       |
| Hours                  | 1%                                    |                                       |
| PKH (Indonesia)        | 7 to 12                               | Girls                                 |
| 4.77                   |                                       |                                       |
| Hours                  | 1%                                    |                                       |
| PKH (Indonesia)        | 13 to 15 Girls                        | Family enterprise work last week      |

## Table A5.5.9 Summary Of Results For Overall Cash Transfer Effect On Migration - By Gender

| #                                                  | Study                                                |
|----------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------|
| change                                             |                                                      |
| Significance                                       |                                                      |
| 1                                                  | Ardington et al.                                     |
| (2009)                                             |                                                      |
| SA-OAP (South Africa)                              | Migrating internally (female members)                |
| 0.051                                              |                                                      |
| Percentage points                                  | 5%                                                   |
| SA-OAP (South Africa)                              | Migrating internally (male members)                  |
| 0.034                                              |                                                      |
| Percentage points                                  | 5%                                                   |
| 2                                                  | Behrman et al.                                       |
| (2009)                                             |                                                      |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)                             | Having migrated internally by 2003 compared to those |
| started receiving programme two years later (girls |                                                      |
| 9-15 in 1997)                                      |                                                      |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)                             | Having migrated internally by 2003 compared to those |
| started receiving programme two years later (Boys  |                                                      |
| 9-15 in 1997)                                      |                                                      |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)                             | Having migrated internally by 2003 compared to those |
| started receiving programme two years later (Girls |                                                      |
| 9-10 in 1997)                                      |                                                      |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)                             | Having migrated internally by 2003 compared to those |
| started receiving programme two years later (Girls |                                                      |
| 11-12 in 1998)                                     |                                                      |

Notes: results represent all overall results reported and do not include those disaggregated by gender or showing the effect of variations in design features. Figures in bold indicate statistically significant. NS means the study did not find a statistically significant result, typically up to the 10% significance level.

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews
-0.09
Percent point  
change
NS
Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools
0.02
Percent point  
change
10%
-0.035
Percent point  
change
10%
Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
0.021
Percent point  
change
NS
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Table A5.5.10 Effect Of Design And Implementation Features On Adult Employment Outcomes

| #                                         | Study                        | Programme and    |
|-------------------------------------------|------------------------------|------------------|
| country                                   |                              |                  |
| Effect of [design / implementation        |                              |                  |
| feature]                                  |                              |                  |
| Outcome variable and                      |                              |                  |
| treatment population                      |                              |                  |
| Effect                                    | Measure of                   |                  |
| change                                    |                              |                  |
| Significance                              |                              |                  |
| Official recipient                        |                              |                  |
| 1                                         | Siaplay (2012) SA-OAP (South |                  |
| Africa)                                   |                              |                  |
| Official recipient                        |                              |                  |
| (only female                              |                              |                  |
| household member is receiving OAP)        |                              |                  |
| Whether employed or not                   |                              |                  |
| (female 21-26)                            |                              |                  |
| 0.103                                     | Percentage                   |                  |
| points                                    |                              |                  |
| NS                                        |                              |                  |
| SA-OAP (South                             |                              |                  |
| Africa)                                   |                              |                  |
| Official recipient                        |                              |                  |
| (only male                                |                              |                  |
| household member is receiving OAP)        |                              |                  |
| Whether employed or not                   |                              |                  |
| (female 21-26)                            |                              |                  |
| -0.124                                    | Percentage                   |                  |
| points                                    |                              |                  |
| NS                                        |                              |                  |
| SA-OAP (South                             |                              |                  |
| Africa)                                   |                              |                  |
| Official recipient                        |                              |                  |
| (only female                              |                              |                  |
| household member is receiving OAP)        |                              |                  |
| Whether employed or not                   |                              |                  |
| (male 21-26)                              |                              |                  |
| -0.187                                    |                              |                  |
| Percentage                                |                              |                  |
| points                                    |                              |                  |
| 5%                                        |                              |                  |
| SA-OAP (South                             |                              |                  |
| Africa)                                   |                              |                  |
| Official recipient                        |                              |                  |
| (only male                                |                              |                  |
| household member is receiving OAP)        |                              |                  |
| Whether employed or not                   |                              |                  |
| (male 21-26)                              |                              |                  |
| 0.143                                     |                              |                  |
| Percentage                                |                              |                  |
| points                                    |                              |                  |
| 5%                                        |                              |                  |
| Transfer timing                           |                              |                  |
| 1                                         | Bazzi et al.                 |                  |
| (2012)                                    |                              |                  |
| Temporary UCT                             |                              |                  |
| (Indonesia)                               |                              |                  |
| No. of hours worked per week per adult    |                              |                  |
| - 2006 follow up                          |                              |                  |
| (after one disbursement)                  |                              |                  |
| -1.838                                    |                              |                  |
| Hours per                                 |                              |                  |
| week                                      |                              |                  |
| 5%                                        |                              |                  |
| Temporary UCT                             |                              |                  |
| (Indonesia)                               |                              |                  |
| No. of hours worked per week per adult    |                              |                  |
| - 2006 follow up                          |                              |                  |
| (after two disbursements)                 | -0.427                       | Hours per        |
| week                                      |                              |                  |
| NS                                        |                              |                  |
| Temporary UCT                             |                              |                  |
| (Indonesia)                               |                              |                  |
| No. of hours worked per week per adult    |                              |                  |
| - 2007 follow up                          |                              |                  |
| (after one disbursement)                  |                              |                  |
| -2.285                                    |                              |                  |
| Hours per                                 |                              |                  |
| week                                      |                              |                  |
| 5%                                        |                              |                  |
| Temporary UCT                             |                              |                  |
| (Indonesia)                               |                              |                  |
| No. of hours worked per week per adult    |                              |                  |
| - 2007 follow up                          |                              |                  |
| (after two disbursements)                 | -0.173                       | Hours per        |
| week                                      |                              |                  |
| NS                                        |                              |                  |
| Conditionalities                          |                              |                  |
| Migration to US 1998                      |                              |                  |
| (household level)                         |                              |                  |
| 0.0025                                    | Percentage                   |                  |
| points                                    |                              |                  |
| NS                                        |                              |                  |
| 1                                         | Angelucci                    |                  |
| (2004)                                    |                              |                  |
| PROGRESA                                  |                              |                  |
| (Mexico)                                  |                              |                  |
| Behavioural requirement                   |                              |                  |
|                                           |                              |                  |
| (households with at least one             |                              |                  |
| secondary school eligible male (i.e. part |                              |                  |
| of grant conditional on attendance) vs.   |                              |                  |
| where all transfers unconditional)        |                              |                  |
| Migration to US 1999                      |                              |                  |
| (household level)                         |                              |                  |
| -0.0086                                   |                              |                  |
| Percentage                                |                              |                  |
| points                                    |                              |                  |
| 1%                                        |                              |                  |
| PROGRESA                                  |                              |                  |
| (Mexico)                                  |                              |                  |
| Behavioural requirement                   |                              |                  |
|                                           |                              |                  |
| (households with at least one             |                              |                  |
| secondary school eligible male (i.e. part |                              |                  |
| of grant conditional on attendance) vs.   |                              |                  |
| where all transfers unconditional)        |                              |                  |
| Migration in Mexico 1998                  |                              |                  |
| (household level)                         |                              |                  |
| 0.0174                                    | Percentage                   |                  |
| points                                    |                              |                  |
| NS                                        |                              |                  |
| PROGRESA                                  |                              |                  |
| (Mexico)                                  |                              |                  |
| Behavioural requirement                   |                              |                  |
|                                           |                              |                  |
| (households with at least one             |                              |                  |
| secondary school eligible male (i.e. part |                              |                  |
| of grant conditional on attendance) vs.   |                              |                  |
| where all transfers unconditional)        |                              |                  |
| Migration in Mexico 1999                  |                              |                  |
| (household level)                         |                              |                  |
| 0.0155                                    | Percentage                   |                  |
| points                                    |                              |                  |
| NS                                        |                              |                  |
| PROGRESA                                  |                              |                  |
| (Mexico)                                  |                              |                  |
| Behavioural requirement                   |                              |                  |
|                                           |                              |                  |
| (households with at least one             |                              |                  |
| secondary school eligible male (i.e. part |                              |                  |
| of grant conditional on attendance) vs.   |                              |                  |
| where all transfers unconditional)        |                              |                  |
| All migration 1998 (household             |                              |                  |
| level)                                    |                              |                  |
| 0.0205                                    | Percentage                   |                  |
| points                                    |                              |                  |
| NS                                        |                              |                  |
| PROGRESA                                  |                              |                  |
| (Mexico)                                  |                              |                  |
| Behavioural requirement                   |                              |                  |
|                                           |                              |                  |
| (households with at least one             |                              |                  |
| secondary school eligible male (i.e. part |                              |                  |
| of grant conditional on attendance) vs.   |                              |                  |
| where all transfers unconditional)        |                              |                  |
| All migration 1999 (household             |                              |                  |
| level)                                    |                              |                  |
| -0.0015                                   | Percentage                   |                  |
| points                                    |                              |                  |
| NS                                        |                              |                  |
| PROGRESA                                  |                              |                  |
| (Mexico)                                  |                              |                  |
| Behavioural requirement                   |                              |                  |
|                                           |                              |                  |
| (households with at least one             |                              |                  |
| secondary school eligible male (i.e. part |                              |                  |
| of grant conditional on attendance) vs.   |                              |                  |
| where all transfers unconditional)        |                              |                  |
| Duration of exposure                      |                              |                  |
| 1                                         | Bazzi et al.                 |                  |
| (2012)                                    |                              |                  |
| Temporary UCT                             |                              |                  |
| (Indonesia)                               |                              |                  |
| Duration                                  |                              |                  |
| - 2006 follow-up and after 1              |                              |                  |
| disbursement                              |                              |                  |
| Hours worked per week per                 |                              |                  |
| adult                                     |                              |                  |
| -1.838                                    |                              |                  |
| Hours per                                 |                              |                  |
| week                                      |                              |                  |
| 5%                                        |                              |                  |
| Temporary UCT                             |                              |                  |
| (Indonesia)                               |                              |                  |
| Duration                                  |                              |                  |
| - 2007 follow-up and after 1              |                              |                  |
| disbursement                              |                              |                  |
| Hours worked per week per                 |                              |                  |
| adult                                     |                              |                  |
| -2.285                                    |                              |                  |
| Hours per                                 |                              |                  |
| week                                      |                              |                  |
| 5%                                        |                              |                  |
| Temporary UCT                             |                              |                  |
| (Indonesia)                               |                              |                  |
| Duration                                  |                              |                  |
| - 2006 follow-up and after 2              |                              |                  |
| disbursements                             |                              |                  |
| Hours worked per week per                 |                              |                  |
| adult                                     |                              |                  |
| -0.427                                    | Hours per                    |                  |
| week                                      |                              |                  |
| NS                                        |                              |                  |
| Temporary UCT                             |                              |                  |
| (Indonesia)                               |                              |                  |
| Duration                                  |                              |                  |
| - 2007 follow-up and after 2              |                              |                  |
| disbursements                             |                              |                  |
| Hours worked per week per                 |                              |                  |
| adult                                     |                              |                  |
| -0.173                                    | Hours per                    |                  |
| week                                      |                              |                  |
| NS                                        |                              |                  |
| Contents                                  |                              |                  |
| Annex 1                                   |                              |                  |
| Overview of                               |                              |                  |
| existing cash                             |                              |                  |
| transfers reviews                         |                              |                  |
| Annex 2                                   |                              |                  |
| Detailed search                           |                              |                  |
| protocols and study                       |                              |                  |
| assessment tools                          |                              |                  |
| Annex 3                                   |                              |                  |
| Summary table                             |                              |                  |
| of searches                               |                              |                  |
| and reasons for                           |                              |                  |
| exclusion and flow                        |                              |                  |
| diagrams                                  |                              |                  |
| Annex 4                                   |                              |                  |
| Summary of the                            |                              |                  |
| evidence base                             |                              |                  |

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

continued on next page

## Table A5.5.10 Effect Of Design And Implementation Features On Adult Employment Outcomes Continued

| #                                       | Study           |
|-----------------------------------------|-----------------|
| country                                 |                 |
| Effect of  [design /                    |                 |
| implementation feature]                 |                 |
| Outcome variable and                    |                 |
| treatment population                    |                 |
| Effect                                  | Measure of      |
| change                                  |                 |
| Significance                            |                 |
| 2                                       | Behrman and     |
| Parker (2013)                           |                 |
| PROGRESA/                               |                 |
| Oportunidades                           |                 |
| (Mexico)                                |                 |
| Additional 1.5 years exposure to        |                 |
| programme                               |                 |
| Proportion working in the               |                 |
| previous week in activity               |                 |
| contributing to family income           |                 |
| (Women aged 50 or older)                |                 |
| PROGRESA/                               |                 |
| Oportunidades                           |                 |
| (Mexico)                                |                 |
| Additional 1.5 years exposure to        |                 |
| programme                               |                 |
| Proportion working in the               |                 |
| previous week in activity               |                 |
| contributing to family income           |                 |
| (Men aged 50 or older)                  |                 |
| Number of hours worked                  |                 |
| (mothers)                               |                 |
| 8.42                                    |                 |
| 'Hours'                                 | 10%             |
| 3                                       | Buser et al.    |
| (2014)                                  |                 |
| BDH (Ecuador)                           |                 |
| Duration of exposure                    |                 |
| (long-term                              |                 |
| transfer recipients vs. those that lost |                 |
| them around 2 years ago)                |                 |
| 4                                       | Maluccio        |
| (2005)                                  |                 |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                         |                 |
| Duration of exposure                    |                 |
| (1 year after                           |                 |
| baseline)                               |                 |
| Total hours worked last week            |                 |
| by household members                    |                 |
| -3.9191                                 | Hours per       |
| week                                    |                 |
| NS                                      |                 |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                         |                 |
| Duration of exposure                    |                 |
| (2 years after                          |                 |
| baseline)                               |                 |
| Total hours worked last week            |                 |
| by household members                    |                 |
| 0.3406                                  | Hours per       |
| week                                    |                 |
| NS                                      |                 |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                         |                 |
| Duration of exposure                    |                 |
| (1 year after                           |                 |
| baseline)                               |                 |
| Average hours per worker                |                 |
| worked last week                        |                 |
| -0.4825                                 | Hours per       |
| week                                    |                 |
| NS                                      |                 |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                         |                 |
| Duration of exposure                    |                 |
| (2 years after                          |                 |
| baseline)                               |                 |
| Average hours per worker                |                 |
| worked last week                        |                 |
| 0.7732                                  | Hours per       |
| week                                    |                 |
| NS                                      |                 |
| Transfer level                          |                 |
| 1                                       | Bertrand et al. |
| (2003)                                  |                 |
| SA-OAP (South                           |                 |
| Africa                                  |                 |
| Level of transfer                       |                 |
| (effect of 1000 rand                    |                 |
| change in individual income)            |                 |
| Individual is working (prime            |                 |
| aged adults living with eligible        |                 |
| elderly)                                |                 |
| -0.099                                  |                 |
| Percent point                           | 5%              |
| SA-OAP (South                           |                 |
| Africa                                  |                 |
| Level of transfer                       |                 |
| (effect of 1000 rand                    |                 |
| change in individual income)            |                 |
| Employed (female 16-50 year             |                 |
| olds who live with age-eligible         |                 |
| elderly)                                |                 |
| SA-OAP (South                           |                 |
| Africa                                  |                 |
| Level of transfer                       |                 |
| (effect of 1000 rand                    |                 |
| change in individual income)            |                 |
| Employed (male 16-50 year               |                 |
| olds who live with age-eligible         |                 |
| elderly)                                |                 |
| SA-OAP (South                           |                 |
| Africa                                  |                 |
| Level of transfer                       |                 |
| (effect of 1000 rand                    |                 |
| change in individual income)            |                 |
| No. of hours worked (16-50              |                 |
| year olds who live with age-            |                 |
| eligible elderly)                       |                 |
| SA-OAP (South                           |                 |
| Africa                                  |                 |
| Level of transfer                       |                 |
| (effect of 1000 rand                    |                 |
| change in individual income)            |                 |
| No. of hours worked (female             |                 |
| 16-50 year olds who live with           |                 |
| age-eligible elderly)                   |                 |
| SA-OAP (South                           |                 |
| Africa                                  |                 |
| Level of transfer                       |                 |
| (effect of 1000 rand                    |                 |
| change in individual income)            |                 |
| No. of hours worked (male               |                 |
| 16-50 year olds who live with           |                 |
| age-eligible elderly)                   |                 |
| 2                                       | Angelucci       |
| (2004)                                  |                 |
| PROGRESA                                |                 |
| (Mexico)                                |                 |
| Transfer level                          |                 |
| (receiving high grant                   |                 |
| vs. low grant)                          |                 |
| US migration 1998 (household            |                 |
| level)                                  |                 |
| 0.012                                   |                 |
| Percentage                              |                 |
| point                                   |                 |
| 5%                                      |                 |
| PROGRESA                                |                 |
| (Mexico)                                |                 |
| Transfer level                          |                 |
| (receiving high grant                   |                 |
| vs. low grant)                          |                 |
| US migration 1999                       |                 |
| (household level)                       |                 |
| 0.0243                                  |                 |
| Percentage                              |                 |
| point                                   |                 |
| 1%                                      |                 |
| PROGRESA                                |                 |
| (Mexico)                                |                 |
| Transfer level                          |                 |
| (receiving high grant                   |                 |
| vs. low grant)                          |                 |
| Mexican migration 1998                  |                 |
| (household level)                       |                 |
| -0.0088                                 |                 |
| Percentage                              |                 |
| point                                   |                 |
| 5%                                      |                 |
| PROGRESA                                |                 |
| (Mexico)                                |                 |
| Transfer level                          |                 |
| (receiving high grant                   |                 |
| vs. low grant)                          |                 |
| Mexican migration 1999                  |                 |
| (household level)                       |                 |
| -0.0096                                 |                 |
| Percentage                              |                 |
| point                                   |                 |
| 10%                                     |                 |
| PROGRESA                                |                 |
| (Mexico)                                |                 |
| Transfer level                          |                 |
| (receiving high grant                   |                 |
| vs. low grant)                          |                 |
| All migration 1998                      |                 |
| (household level)                       |                 |
| -.0009                                  | Percentage      |
| point                                   |                 |
| NS                                      |                 |
| PROGRESA                                |                 |
| (Mexico)                                |                 |
| Transfer level                          |                 |
| (receiving high grant                   |                 |
| vs. low grant)                          |                 |
| All migration 1999                      |                 |
| (household level)                       |                 |
| .0030                                   | Percentage      |
| point                                   |                 |
| NS                                      |                 |
| 3                                       | Bazzi et al.    |
| (2012)                                  |                 |
| Temporary UCT                           |                 |
| (Indonesia)                             |                 |
| Transfer level                          |                 |
| (transfers per capita in                |                 |
| 000,000s Rupiah)                        |                 |
| Change in weekly hours                  |                 |
| worked per adult, between               |                 |
| 2005 and 2006                           |                 |
| Temporary UCT                           |                 |
| (Indonesia)                             |                 |
| Transfer level                          |                 |
| (transfers per capita in                |                 |
| 000,000s Rupiah)                        |                 |
| Change in weekly hours                  |                 |
| worked per adult, between               |                 |
| 2005 and 2007 (Total hours /            |                 |
| no. of adult members)                   |                 |
| Contents                                |                 |
| Annex 1                                 |                 |
| Overview of                             |                 |
| existing cash                           |                 |
| transfers reviews                       |                 |
| 0.05                                    |                 |
| Percentage                              |                 |
| point                                   |                 |
| 10%                                     |                 |
| -0.034                                  | Percentage      |
| point                                   |                 |
| NS                                      |                 |
| Annex 2                                 |                 |
| Detailed search                         |                 |
| protocols and study                     |                 |
| assessment tools                        |                 |
| Annex 3                                 |                 |
| Summary table                           |                 |
| of searches                             |                 |
| and reasons for                         |                 |
| exclusion and flow                      |                 |
| diagrams                                |                 |
| Annex 4                                 |                 |
| Summary of the                          |                 |
| evidence base                           |                 |
| Annex 5                                 |                 |
| Evidence:                               |                 |
| results tables for                      |                 |
| overall effects                         |                 |
| disaggregated by                        |                 |
| gender, and cash                        |                 |
| transfer design and                     |                 |
| implementation                          |                 |
| effects                                 |                 |
| -0.023                                  | Percentage      |
| point                                   |                 |
| NS                                      |                 |
| -0.201                                  |                 |
| Percentage                              |                 |
| point                                   |                 |
| 5%                                      |                 |
| -17.07                                  |                 |
| Hours per                               |                 |
| week                                    |                 |
| 5%                                      |                 |
| -13.27                                  |                 |
| Hours per                               |                 |
| week                                    |                 |
| 5%                                      |                 |
| -22.48                                  |                 |
| Hours per                               |                 |
| week                                    |                 |
| 5%                                      |                 |
| -0.391                                  | Hours per       |
| week                                    |                 |
| NS                                      |                 |
| NS                                      |                 |
| -0.256                                  | Hours per       |
| week (in                                |                 |
| response to                             |                 |
| 000,                                    |                 |
| continued on next page                  |                 |

## Table A5.5.10 Effect Of Design And Implementation Features On Adult Employment Outcomes Continued

| #                                                    | Study                              | Programme and    |
|------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------|------------------|
| country                                              |                                    |                  |
| Effect of  [design /                                 |                                    |                  |
| implementation feature]                              |                                    |                  |
| Outcome variable and                                 |                                    |                  |
| treatment population                                 |                                    |                  |
| Effect                                               | Measure of                         |                  |
| change                                               |                                    |                  |
| Significance                                         |                                    |                  |
| 4                                                    | Dabalen et al.                     |                  |
| (2008)                                               |                                    |                  |
| NE (Albania)                                         |                                    |                  |
| Transfer level                                       |                                    |                  |
| (transfers per                                       |                                    |                  |
| household in 100s of Lek)                            |                                    |                  |
| Hours worked last week (all                          |                                    |                  |
| adults)                                              |                                    |                  |
| -0.0667                                              |                                    |                  |
| Hours per                                            |                                    |                  |
| week                                                 |                                    |                  |
| 5%                                                   |                                    |                  |
| NE (Albania)                                         |                                    |                  |
| Transfer level                                       |                                    |                  |
| (transfers per                                       |                                    |                  |
| household in 100s of Lek)                            |                                    |                  |
| Hours worked last week                               |                                    |                  |
| (females adults)                                     |                                    |                  |
| -0.0783                                              |                                    |                  |
| Hours per                                            |                                    |                  |
| week                                                 |                                    |                  |
| 5%                                                   |                                    |                  |
| NE (Albania)                                         |                                    |                  |
| Transfer level                                       |                                    |                  |
| (transfers per                                       |                                    |                  |
| household in 100s of Lek)                            |                                    |                  |
| Hours worked last week (male                         |                                    |                  |
| adults)                                              |                                    |                  |
| -0.0163                                              | Hours per                          |                  |
| week                                                 |                                    |                  |
| NS                                                   |                                    |                  |
| NE (Albania)                                         |                                    |                  |
| Transfer level                                       |                                    |                  |
| (transfers per                                       |                                    |                  |
| household in 100s of Lek)                            | Decision to work (all adults)      |                  |
| -0.0021                                              |                                    |                  |
| Percentage                                           |                                    |                  |
| point                                                |                                    |                  |
| 1%                                                   |                                    |                  |
| NE (Albania)                                         |                                    |                  |
| Transfer level                                       |                                    |                  |
| (transfers per                                       |                                    |                  |
| household in 100s of Lek)                            |                                    |                  |
| Decision to work (females                            |                                    |                  |
| adults)                                              |                                    |                  |
| -0.0023                                              | Percentage                         |                  |
| point                                                |                                    |                  |
| NS                                                   |                                    |                  |
| NE (Albania)                                         |                                    |                  |
| Transfer level                                       |                                    |                  |
| (transfers per                                       |                                    |                  |
| household in 100s of Lek)                            | Decision to work (male adults)     |                  |
| 0.0016                                               |                                    |                  |
| Percentage                                           |                                    |                  |
| point                                                |                                    |                  |
| 1%                                                   |                                    |                  |
| NE (Albania)                                         |                                    |                  |
| Transfer level                                       |                                    |                  |
| (transfers per                                       |                                    |                  |
| household in 100s of Lek)                            |                                    |                  |
| Whether working or not (Male)                        | -0.0016                            | Fixed effects    |
| coefficient                                          |                                    |                  |
| NS                                                   |                                    |                  |
| NE (Albania)                                         |                                    |                  |
| Transfer level                                       |                                    |                  |
| (transfers per                                       |                                    |                  |
| household in 100s of Lek)                            |                                    |                  |
| Whether working or not                               |                                    |                  |
| (Female)                                             |                                    |                  |
| -0.0023                                              |                                    |                  |
| Fixed effects                                        |                                    |                  |
| coefficient                                          |                                    |                  |
| 1%                                                   |                                    |                  |
| Targeting                                            |                                    |                  |
| 1                                                    | Merttens et al.                    |                  |
| (2015)                                               |                                    |                  |
| SAGE (Uganda)                                        | Among households targeted through  |                  |
| the Senior Citizens Grant                            |                                    |                  |
| Proportion of working-age                            |                                    |                  |
| adults (18-64) engaged                               |                                    |                  |
| in any economically                                  |                                    |                  |
| productive activities                                |                                    |                  |
| SAGE (Uganda)                                        | Among households targeted through  |                  |
| the Vulnerable Family Support Grant                  |                                    |                  |
| Proportion of working-age                            |                                    |                  |
| adults (18-64) engaged                               |                                    |                  |
| in any economically                                  |                                    |                  |
| productive activities                                |                                    |                  |
| SAGE (Uganda)                                        | Among households targeted through  |                  |
| the Senior Citizens Grant                            |                                    |                  |
| Mean number of hours                                 |                                    |                  |
| spent working per                                    |                                    |                  |
| week (all occupations)                               |                                    |                  |
| SAGE (Uganda)                                        | Among households targeted through  |                  |
| the Vulnerable Family Support Grant                  |                                    |                  |
| Mean number of hours                                 |                                    |                  |
| spent working per                                    |                                    |                  |
| week (all occupations)                               |                                    |                  |
| SAGE (Uganda)                                        | Among households targeted through  |                  |
| the Senior Citizens Grant                            |                                    |                  |
| Mean number of months spent                          |                                    |                  |
| working in main occupation in                        |                                    |                  |
| last year                                            |                                    |                  |
| SAGE (Uganda)                                        | Among households targeted through  |                  |
| the Vulnerable Family Support Grant                  |                                    |                  |
| Mean number of months spent                          |                                    |                  |
| working in main occupation in                        |                                    |                  |
| last year                                            |                                    |                  |
| SAGE (Uganda)                                        | Among households targeted through  |                  |
| the Senior Citizens Grant                            |                                    |                  |
| Proportion of individuals                            |                                    |                  |
| engaged in casual labour as                          |                                    |                  |
| main or secondary activity                           |                                    |                  |
| SAGE (Uganda)                                        | Among households targeted through  |                  |
| the Vulnerable Family Support Grant                  |                                    |                  |
| Proportion of individuals                            |                                    |                  |
| engaged in casual labour as                          |                                    |                  |
| main or secondary activity                           |                                    |                  |
| Complementary interventions and supply side services |                                    |                  |
| Involved in any non-farm                             |                                    |                  |
| self-employment (16 m after                          |                                    |                  |
| grants)                                              |                                    |                  |
| 1                                                    | Blattman et al.                    |                  |
| (2015)                                               |                                    |                  |
| WINGS (Uganda)                                       | Difference between those receiving |                  |
| no group training and those receiving                |                                    |                  |
| group training (organisational                       |                                    |                  |
| development, decision-making,                        |                                    |                  |
| leadership and savings and credit                    |                                    |                  |
| group formation)                                     |                                    |                  |
| Started enterprise since                             |                                    |                  |
| baseline (16m after grant)                           |                                    |                  |
| -0.002                                               | Percentage                         |                  |
| point                                                |                                    |                  |
| NS                                                   |                                    |                  |
| WINGS (Uganda)                                       | Difference between those receiving |                  |
| no group training and those receiving                |                                    |                  |
| group training                                       |                                    |                  |
| Average work hours per week                          |                                    |                  |
| (16m after grant)                                    |                                    |                  |
| 0.486                                                | Percentage                         |                  |
| point                                                |                                    |                  |
| NS                                                   |                                    |                  |
| WINGS (Uganda)                                       | Difference between those receiving |                  |
| no group training and those receiving                |                                    |                  |
| group training                                       |                                    |                  |
| Average agricultural hours per                       |                                    |                  |
| week (16m after grant)                               |                                    |                  |
| 0.506                                                | Hours                              | NS               |
| WINGS (Uganda)                                       | Difference between those receiving |                  |
| no group training and those receiving                |                                    |                  |
| group training                                       |                                    |                  |
| Contents                                             |                                    |                  |
| Annex 1                                              |                                    |                  |
| Overview of                                          |                                    |                  |
| existing cash                                        |                                    |                  |
| transfers reviews                                    |                                    |                  |
| Annex 2                                              |                                    |                  |
| Detailed search                                      |                                    |                  |
| protocols and study                                  |                                    |                  |
| assessment tools                                     |                                    |                  |
| Annex 3                                              |                                    |                  |
| Summary table                                        |                                    |                  |
| of searches                                          |                                    |                  |
| and reasons for                                      |                                    |                  |
| exclusion and flow                                   |                                    |                  |
| diagrams                                             |                                    |                  |
| Annex 4                                              |                                    |                  |
| Summary of the                                       |                                    |                  |
| evidence base                                        |                                    |                  |
| 0.0062                                               | Percentage                         |                  |
| point                                                |                                    |                  |
| NS                                                   |                                    |                  |
| -0.012                                               | Percentage                         |                  |
| point                                                |                                    |                  |
| NS                                                   |                                    |                  |

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

| -0.02   | Hours      | NS   |
|---------|------------|------|
| 0.48    | Hours      | NS   |
| 0.16    | Months     | NS   |
| 0.45    |            |      |
| Months  | 10%        |      |
| -0.0002 | Percentage |      |
| point   |            |      |
| NS      |            |      |
| -0.0002 | Percentage |      |
| point   |            |      |
| NS      |            |      |
| 0.008   | Percentage |      |
| point   |            |      |
| NS      |            |      |

## Table A5.5.10 Effect Of Design And Implementation Features On Adult Employment Outcomes Continued

| #                                        | Study                              | Programme and                      |
|------------------------------------------|------------------------------------|------------------------------------|
| country                                  |                                    |                                    |
| Effect of  [design /                     |                                    |                                    |
| implementation feature]                  |                                    |                                    |
| Outcome variable and                     |                                    |                                    |
| treatment population                     |                                    |                                    |
| Effect                                   | Measure of                         |                                    |
| change                                   |                                    |                                    |
| Significance                             |                                    |                                    |
| Average non-agricultural hours           |                                    |                                    |
| per week (16m after grant)               |                                    |                                    |
| -0.020                                   | Hours                              | NS                                 |
| 1                                        | WINGS (Uganda)                     | Difference between those receiving |
| no group training and those receiving    |                                    |                                    |
| group training                           |                                    |                                    |
| Any non-farm self-employment             |                                    |                                    |
| (12m after grants)                       |                                    |                                    |
| 0.042                                    | Percentage                         |                                    |
| point                                    |                                    |                                    |
| NS                                       |                                    |                                    |
| WINGS (Uganda)                           | Difference between those getting 2 |                                    |
| supervisory visits (no advice) and those |                                    |                                    |
| getting 5 (extended advice)              |                                    |                                    |
| Started enterprise since                 |                                    |                                    |
| baseline (12m after grant)               |                                    |                                    |
| 0.016                                    | Percentage                         |                                    |
| point                                    |                                    |                                    |
| NS                                       |                                    |                                    |
| WINGS (Uganda)                           | Difference between those getting 2 |                                    |
| supervisory visits (no advice) and those |                                    |                                    |
| getting 5 (extended advice)              |                                    |                                    |
| Average work hours per week              |                                    |                                    |
| (12m after grant)                        |                                    |                                    |
| 3.659                                    | Percentage                         |                                    |
| point                                    |                                    |                                    |
| NS                                       |                                    |                                    |
| WINGS (Uganda)                           | Difference between those getting 2 |                                    |
| supervisory visits (no advice) and those |                                    |                                    |
| getting 5 (extended advice)              |                                    |                                    |
| Agricultural work hours per              |                                    |                                    |
| week (12m after grant)                   |                                    |                                    |
| 2.757                                    | Hours                              | NS                                 |
| WINGS (Uganda)                           | Difference between those getting 2 |                                    |
| supervisory visits (no advice) and those |                                    |                                    |
| getting 5 (extended advice)              |                                    |                                    |
| Non-agricultural work hours              |                                    |                                    |
| per week (12m after grant)               |                                    |                                    |
| 0.902                                    | Hours                              | NS                                 |
| WINGS (Uganda)                           | Difference between those getting 2 |                                    |
| supervisory visits (no advice) and those |                                    |                                    |
| getting 5 (extended advice)              |                                    |                                    |
| Average (non-agricultural)               |                                    |                                    |
| work hours per week among                |                                    |                                    |
| women                                    |                                    |                                    |
| 2                                        | Green et al.                       |                                    |
| (2015)                                   |                                    |                                    |
| WINGS (Uganda)                           | Women who were joined as           |                                    |
| beneficiaries by their partner (or       |                                    |                                    |
| someone from their household who         |                                    |                                    |
| makes financial decisions), and          |                                    |                                    |
| received basic training in couples'      |                                    |                                    |
| communication and problem solving        |                                    |                                    |
| (relative to regular beneficiaries who   |                                    |                                    |
| participated alone).                     |                                    |                                    |
| 3                                        | Macours and                        |                                    |
| Vakis (2012)                             |                                    |                                    |
| Atención a Crisis                        |                                    |                                    |
| (Nicaragua)                              |                                    |                                    |
| Basic CCT                                | Non-agricultural wage              |                                    |
| employment                               |                                    |                                    |
| 0.0221                                   | Percent point                      |                                    |
| change                                   |                                    |                                    |
| NS                                       |                                    |                                    |
| Atención a Crisis                        |                                    |                                    |
| (Nicaragua)                              |                                    |                                    |
| Basic CCT plus a scholarship for a       |                                    |                                    |
| vocational training                      |                                    |                                    |
| Non-agricultural wage                    |                                    |                                    |
| employment                               |                                    |                                    |
| 0.0177                                   | Percent point                      |                                    |
| change                                   |                                    |                                    |
| NS                                       |                                    |                                    |
| Atención a Crisis                        |                                    |                                    |
| (Nicaragua)                              |                                    |                                    |
| Basic CCT plus a productive investment   |                                    |                                    |
| grant                                    |                                    |                                    |
| Non-agricultural wage                    |                                    |                                    |
| employment                               |                                    |                                    |
| -0.0211                                  | Percent point                      |                                    |
| change                                   |                                    |                                    |
| NS                                       |                                    |                                    |
| Atención a Crisis                        |                                    |                                    |
| (Nicaragua)                              |                                    |                                    |
| Basic CCT                                | Non-agricultural self-             |                                    |
| employment                               |                                    |                                    |
| 0.0396                                   |                                    |                                    |
| Percent point                            |                                    |                                    |
| change                                   |                                    |                                    |
| 10%                                      |                                    |                                    |
| Atención a Crisis                        |                                    |                                    |
| (Nicaragua)                              |                                    |                                    |
| Basic CCT plus a scholarship for a       |                                    |                                    |
| vocational training                      |                                    |                                    |
| Non-agricultural self-                   |                                    |                                    |
| employment                               |                                    |                                    |
| 0.0383                                   |                                    |                                    |
| Percent point                            |                                    |                                    |
| change                                   |                                    |                                    |
| 10%                                      |                                    |                                    |
| Atención a Crisis                        |                                    |                                    |
| (Nicaragua)                              |                                    |                                    |
| Basic CCT plus a productive investment   |                                    |                                    |
| grant                                    |                                    |                                    |
| Non-agricultural self-                   |                                    |                                    |
| employment                               |                                    |                                    |
| 0.126                                    |                                    |                                    |
| Percent point                            |                                    |                                    |
| change                                   |                                    |                                    |
| 1%                                       |                                    |                                    |
| Contents                                 |                                    |                                    |
| Annex 1                                  |                                    |                                    |
| Overview of                              |                                    |                                    |
| existing cash                            |                                    |                                    |
| transfers reviews                        |                                    |                                    |
| Annex 2                                  |                                    |                                    |
| Detailed search                          |                                    |                                    |
| protocols and study                      |                                    |                                    |
| assessment tools                         |                                    |                                    |
| Annex 3                                  |                                    |                                    |
| Summary table                            |                                    |                                    |
| of searches                              |                                    |                                    |
| and reasons for                          |                                    |                                    |
| exclusion and flow                       |                                    |                                    |
| diagrams                                 |                                    |                                    |
| Annex 4                                  |                                    |                                    |
| Summary of the                           |                                    |                                    |
| evidence base                            |                                    |                                    |
| -1.23                                    | Hours per                          |                                    |
| week                                     |                                    |                                    |
| NS                                       |                                    |                                    |
| Annex 5                                  |                                    |                                    |
| Evidence:                                |                                    |                                    |
| results tables for                       |                                    |                                    |
| overall effects                          |                                    |                                    |
| disaggregated by                         |                                    |                                    |
| gender, and cash                         |                                    |                                    |
| transfer design and                      |                                    |                                    |
| implementation                           |                                    |                                    |
| effects                                  |                                    |                                    |
Contents

## Table A5.5.11 Effect Of Design And Implementation Features On Child Labour Outcomes

| #                                        | Study          | Programme and        |
|------------------------------------------|----------------|----------------------|
| country                                  |                |                      |
| Effect of                                |                |                      |
| [design / implementation feature]        |                |                      |
| Outcome variable and                     |                |                      |
| treatment population                     |                |                      |
| Effect                                   | Measure        |                      |
| of change                                |                |                      |
| Significance                             |                |                      |
| Official recipient                       |                |                      |
| Annex 1                                  |                |                      |
| Overview of                              |                |                      |
| existing cash                            |                |                      |
| transfers reviews                        |                |                      |
| 1                                        | Siaplay (2012) | SA-OAP (South Africa |
| Official recipient                       |                |                      |
| (only female                             |                |                      |
| household member is receiving OAP)       |                |                      |
| Whether employed or not                  |                |                      |
| (female 14-20)                           |                |                      |
| -0.018                                   | Percentage     |                      |
| points                                   |                |                      |
| NS                                       |                |                      |
| SA-OAP (South Africa                     |                |                      |
| Official recipient                       |                |                      |
| (only male                               |                |                      |
| household member is receiving OAP)       |                |                      |
| Whether employed or not                  |                |                      |
| (female 14-20)                           |                |                      |
| -0.003                                   | Percentage     |                      |
| points                                   |                |                      |
| NS                                       |                |                      |
| Annex 2                                  |                |                      |
| Detailed search                          |                |                      |
| protocols and study                      |                |                      |
| assessment tools                         |                |                      |
| SA-OAP (South Africa                     |                |                      |
| Official recipient                       |                |                      |
| (only female                             |                |                      |
| household member is receiving OAP)       |                |                      |
| Whether employed or not (male            |                |                      |
| 14-20)                                   |                |                      |
| 0.023                                    | Percentage     |                      |
| points                                   |                |                      |
| NS                                       |                |                      |
| SA-OAP (South Africa                     |                |                      |
| Official recipient                       |                |                      |
| (only male                               |                |                      |
| household member is receiving OAP)       |                |                      |
| Whether employed or not (male            |                |                      |
| 14-20)                                   |                |                      |
| -0.065                                   | Percentage     |                      |
| points                                   |                |                      |
| NS                                       |                |                      |
| Conditionalities                         |                |                      |
| Annex 3                                  |                |                      |
| Summary table                            |                |                      |
| of searches                              |                |                      |
| and reasons for                          |                |                      |
| exclusion and flow                       |                |                      |
| diagrams                                 |                |                      |
| primary activity is work                 |                |                      |
| (children grade 6-10)                    |                |                      |
| -0.002                                   | Percent        |                      |
| point change                             |                |                      |
| NS                                       |                |                      |
| 1                                        | Barrera-Osorio |                      |
| et al. (2011)                            |                |                      |
| SCAE (Colombia)                          |                |                      |
| Behavioural requirement                  |                |                      |
| (basic                                   |                |                      |
| transfer conditional on school           |                |                      |
| attendance)                              |                |                      |
| primary activity is work                 |                |                      |
| (children grade 6-10)                    |                |                      |
| -0.001                                   | Percent        |                      |
| point change                             |                |                      |
| NS                                       |                |                      |
| Annex 4                                  |                |                      |
| Summary of the                           |                |                      |
| evidence base                            |                |                      |
| SCAE (Colombia)                          |                |                      |
| Behavioural requirement                  |                |                      |
| (savings                                 |                |                      |
| treatment that postpones a bulk of the   |                |                      |
| transfer due to good attendance to       |                |                      |
| just before children have to re-enrol)   |                |                      |
| primary activity is work                 |                |                      |
| (children grade 6-10)                    |                |                      |
| -0.008                                   |                |                      |
| Percent                                  |                |                      |
| point change                             |                |                      |
| 10%                                      |                |                      |
| SCAE (Colombia)                          |                |                      |
| Behavioural requirement                  |                |                      |
| (some of                                 |                |                      |
| the transfer is conditional on students' |                |                      |
| graduation and tertiary enrolment        |                |                      |
| rather than attendance)                  |                |                      |
| Hours worked last week                   |                |                      |
| (children grade 6-10)                    |                |                      |
| -0.371                                   |                |                      |
| Hours per                                |                |                      |
| week                                     |                |                      |
| 5%                                       |                |                      |
| SCAE (Colombia)                          |                |                      |
| Behavioural requirement                  |                |                      |
| (basic                                   |                |                      |
| transfer conditional on school           |                |                      |
| attendance)                              |                |                      |

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

Hours worked last week (children grade 6-10)
-0.248
Hours per 
week
10%
SCAE (Colombia)
Behavioural requirement (savings 
treatment that postpones a bulk of the cash transfer due to good attendance to just before children have to re-enrol) 
Hours worked last week (children grade 6-10)
-0.804
Hours per 
week
5%
SCAE (Colombia)
Behavioural requirement (some of 
the transfer is conditional on students' graduation and tertiary enrolment rather than attendance)
primary activity is work (children grade 11)
-0.004
Percent 
point change
NS
SCAE (Colombia)
Behavioural requirement (basic 
transfer conditional on school attendance)
primary activity is work 
(children grade 11)
0.031
Percent 
point change
NS
SCAE (Colombia)
Behavioural requirement (savings 
treatment that postpones a bulk of the cash transfer due to good attendance to just before children have to re-enrol)
primary activity is work (children grade 11)
-0.153
Percent 
point change
1%
SCAE (Colombia)
Behavioural requirement (some of 
the transfer is conditional on students' graduation and tertiary enrolment rather than attendance)
Hours worked last week (children grade 11)
0.683
Hours per 
week
NS
SCAE (Colombia)
Behavioural requirement (basic 
conditional cash transfer treatment based on school attendance)
Hours worked last week (children grade 11)
0.092
Level 
change
NS
SCAE (Colombia)
Behavioural requirement (savings 
treatment that postpones a bulk of the cash transfer due to good attendance to just before children have to re-enrol)
Hours worked last week (children grade 11)
-7.349
Hours per 
week
1%
SCAE (Colombia)
Behavioural requirement (some of 
the transfer is conditional on students' graduation and tertiary enrolment rather than attendance)
continued on next page

## Table A5.5.11 Effect Of Design And Implementation Features On Child Labour Outcomes Continued

| #                                     | Study            | Programme and    |
|---------------------------------------|------------------|------------------|
| country                               |                  |                  |
| Effect of                             |                  |                  |
| [design / implementation feature]     |                  |                  |
| Outcome variable and                  |                  |                  |
| treatment population                  |                  |                  |
| Effect                                | Measure          |                  |
| of change                             |                  |                  |
| Significance                          |                  |                  |
| Child is working in follow-up         |                  |                  |
| survey                                |                  |                  |
| -0.081                                | Percentage       |                  |
| points                                |                  |                  |
| NS                                    |                  |                  |
| 2                                     | Schady and       |                  |
| Araujo (2006)                         |                  |                  |
| BDH (Ecuador)                         |                  |                  |
| Behavioural monitoring                |                  |                  |
| (Household                            |                  |                  |
| perception that continued receipt     |                  |                  |
| of transfer conditional on school     |                  |                  |
| enrolment)                            |                  |                  |
| Child is working in follow-up         |                  |                  |
| survey                                |                  |                  |
| -0.055                                | Percentage       |                  |
| points                                |                  |                  |
| NS                                    |                  |                  |
| BDH (Ecuador)                         |                  |                  |
| Behavioural monitoring                |                  |                  |
| (Household                            |                  |                  |
| perception that transfers are         |                  |                  |
| not                                   |                  |                  |
|                                       |                  |                  |
| conditional on any behaviour)         |                  |                  |
| Child is working full-time            |                  |                  |
| (40+ hours)                           |                  |                  |
| -0.078                                |                  |                  |
| Percentage                            |                  |                  |
| points                                |                  |                  |
| 5%                                    |                  |                  |
| BDH (Ecuador)                         |                  |                  |
| Behavioural monitoring                |                  |                  |
| (Household                            |                  |                  |
| perception that continued receipt     |                  |                  |
| of transfer conditional on school     |                  |                  |
| enrolment)                            |                  |                  |
| Child is working full-time            |                  |                  |
| (40+ hours)                           |                  |                  |
| 0.009                                 | Percentage       |                  |
| points                                |                  |                  |
| NS                                    |                  |                  |
| BDH (Ecuador)                         |                  |                  |
| Behavioural monitoring                |                  |                  |
| (Household                            |                  |                  |
| perception that transfers are         |                  |                  |
| not                                   |                  |                  |
|                                       |                  |                  |
| conditional on any behaviour)         |                  |                  |
| Hours worked in past week             |                  |                  |
| -5.92                                 |                  |                  |
| Hours                                 |                  |                  |
| worked                                |                  |                  |
| 1%                                    |                  |                  |
| BDH (Ecuador)                         |                  |                  |
| Behavioural monitoring                |                  |                  |
|                                       |                  |                  |
| (Households perceiving there to be    |                  |                  |
| a condition of school enrolment for   |                  |                  |
| continuing to receive transfers)      |                  |                  |
| Hours worked in past week             | -0.024           | Hours            |
| worked                                |                  |                  |
| NS                                    |                  |                  |
| BDH (Ecuador)                         |                  |                  |
| Behavioural monitoring                |                  |                  |
|                                       |                  |                  |
| (Households perceiving there to be no |                  |                  |
| conditions attached to the transfers) |                  |                  |
| Worked for more than one hour         |                  |                  |
| -0.062                                |                  |                  |
| Percentage                            |                  |                  |
| point                                 |                  |                  |
| 5%                                    |                  |                  |
| 3                                     | Benedetti et al. |                  |
| (2015)                                |                  |                  |
| Bono 10,000                           |                  |                  |
| (Honduas)                             |                  |                  |
| Treatment household with just one     |                  |                  |
| eligible child (school enrolment      |                  |                  |
| conditions only apply to one child)   |                  |                  |
| Worked for more than one hour         | Various          | Percentage       |
| point                                 |                  |                  |
| No results                            |                  |                  |
| significant                           |                  |                  |
| Bono 10,000                           |                  |                  |
| (Honduas)                             |                  |                  |
| Treatment households with more than   |                  |                  |
| one eligible child (school enrolment  |                  |                  |
| conditions only apply to one child)   |                  |                  |

## Duration Of Exposure

Whether working in 2003 (boys 9-15 in 1997)
-4.1
Percent
10%
1
Berhman et al. (2011)
PROGRESA/ Oportunidades (Mexico)
Duration of exposure (benefitting 
from transfers for approx. 5.5 years versus 4)
Whether working in 2003 (girls 9-15 in 1997)14 
-5
Percent
NS
PROGRESA/ Oportunidades (Mexico)
Duration of exposure (benefitting 
from transfers for approx. 5.5 years versus 4)
2
Perova and Vakis (2012)
Juntos (Peru)
Duration of exposure (12 to 23 
months in Juntos)
Worked in previous week (6-14 year olds)
0
Percentage 
points
NS
Juntos (Peru)
Duration of exposure (24 to 36 
months in Juntos)
Worked in previous week  
(6-14 year olds)
0.03
Percentage 
points
10%
Juntos (Peru)
Duration of exposure (Over 36 
months in Juntos)
Worked in previous week (6-14 year olds)
0.13
Percentage 
points
1%
Whether working in 2003 (girls 9-15 in 1997)
-0.013
Percent 
point change
NS
3
Behrman et al. (2009)
PROGRESA/ Oportunidades (Mexico)
Duration of exposure (beneficiary 
households that started receiving transfers in 1998 vs. 2000)
Whether working in 2003 (boys 9-15 in 1997)
-0.027
Percent 
point change
10%
PROGRESA/ Oportunidades (Mexico)
Duration of exposure (beneficiary 
households that started receiving transfers in 1998 vs. 2000)
Whether working in 2003 (Girls 9-10 in 1997)
-0.008
Percent 
point change
NS
PROGRESA/ Oportunidades (Mexico)
Duration of exposure (beneficiary 
households that started receiving transfers in 1998 vs. 2000)
Whether working in 2003 (Girls 11-12 in 1998)
-0.01
Percent 
point change
NS
PROGRESA/ Oportunidades (Mexico)
Duration of exposure (beneficiary 
households that started receiving transfers in 1998 vs. 2000)
Whether working in 2003 (Girls 13-15 in 1999)
0.02
Percent 
point change
NS
PROGRESA/ Oportunidades (Mexico)
Duration of exposure (beneficiary 
households that started receiving transfers in 1998 vs. 2000)
Proportion of girls 9-15 in 1997 having migrated by 2003
-0.09
Percent 
point change
NS
PROGRESA/ Oportunidades (Mexico)
Duration of exposure (beneficiary 
households that started receiving transfers in 1998 vs. 2000)
Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base

Annex 5 
Evidence: 
results tables for 
overall effects 
disaggregated by 
gender, and cash 
transfer design and 
implementation 
effects

continued on next page

Contents

## Table A5.5.11 Effect Of Design And Implementation Features On Child Labour Outcomes Continued

| #                                            | Study                        |
|----------------------------------------------|------------------------------|
| country                                      |                              |
| Effect of                                    |                              |
| [design / implementation feature]            |                              |
| Outcome variable and                         |                              |
| treatment population                         |                              |
| Effect                                       | Measure                      |
| of change                                    |                              |
| Significance                                 |                              |
| Annex 1                                      |                              |
| Overview of                                  |                              |
| existing cash                                |                              |
| transfers reviews                            |                              |
| Proportion of boys 9-15 in                   |                              |
| 1997 having migrated by 2003                 |                              |
| 0.02                                         |                              |
| Percent                                      |                              |
| point change                                 |                              |
| 10%                                          |                              |
| 3                                            | Behrman et al.               |
| (2009)                                       |                              |
| PROGRESA/                                    |                              |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)                       |                              |
| Duration of exposure                         |                              |
| (beneficiary                                 |                              |
| households that started receiving            |                              |
| transfers in 1998 vs. 2000)                  |                              |
| Proportion of girls 9-10 in 1997             |                              |
| having migrated by 2003                      |                              |
| -0.035                                       |                              |
| Percent                                      |                              |
| point change                                 |                              |
| 10%                                          |                              |
| PROGRESA/                                    |                              |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)                       |                              |
| Duration of exposure                         |                              |
| (beneficiary                                 |                              |
| households that started receiving            |                              |
| transfers in 1998 vs. 2000)                  |                              |
| Annex 2                                      |                              |
| Detailed search                              |                              |
| protocols and study                          |                              |
| assessment tools                             |                              |
| Proportion of girls 11-12 in                 |                              |
| 1998 having migrated by 2003                 |                              |
| 0.021                                        | Percent                      |
| point change                                 |                              |
| NS                                           |                              |
| PROGRESA/                                    |                              |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)                       |                              |
| Duration of exposure                         |                              |
| (beneficiary                                 |                              |
| households that started receiving            |                              |
| transfers in 1998 vs. 2000)                  |                              |
| Proportion of girls 13-15 in                 |                              |
| 1999                                         |                              |
|                                              |                              |
| having migrated by 2003                      |                              |
| 0.014                                        | Percent                      |
| point change                                 |                              |
| NS                                           |                              |
| PROGRESA/                                    |                              |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)                       |                              |
| Duration of exposure                         |                              |
| (beneficiary                                 |                              |
| households that started receiving            |                              |
| transfers in 1998 vs. 2000)                  |                              |
| Annex 3                                      |                              |
| Summary table                                |                              |
| of searches                                  |                              |
| and reasons for                              |                              |
| exclusion and flow                           |                              |
| diagrams                                     |                              |
| 4                                            | Berhman et al.               |
| (2012)                                       |                              |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)                       |                              |
| Duration of exposure                         |                              |
| (after 1 year)                               | Employed for pay (urban boys |
| 12-14 years old)                             |                              |
| -0.077                                       |                              |
| Percentage                                   |                              |
| point                                        |                              |
| 5%                                           |                              |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)                       |                              |
| Duration of exposure                         |                              |
| (after 2 years) Employed for pay (urban boys |                              |
| 12-14 years old)                             |                              |
| -0.124                                       |                              |
| Percentage                                   |                              |
| point                                        |                              |
| 5%                                           |                              |
| Annex 4                                      |                              |
| Summary of the                               |                              |
| evidence base                                |                              |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)                       |                              |
| Duration of exposure                         |                              |
| (after 1 year)                               | Employed for pay (urban boys |
| 15-18 years old)                             |                              |
| 0.028                                        | Percentage                   |
| point                                        |                              |
| NS                                           |                              |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)                       |                              |
| Duration of exposure                         |                              |
| (after 2 years) Employed for pay (urban boys |                              |
| 15-18 years old)                             |                              |
| -0.051                                       |                              |
|                                              |                              |
| Percentage                                   |                              |
| point                                        |                              |
| NS                                           |                              |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)                       |                              |
| Duration of exposure                         |                              |
| (after 1 year)                               | Employed for pay (urban boys |
| 19-20 years old)                             |                              |
| -0.059                                       | Percentage                   |
| point                                        |                              |
| NS                                           |                              |
| Oportunidades (Mexico)                       |                              |
| Duration of exposure                         |                              |
| (after 2 years) Employed for pay (urban boys |                              |
| 19-20 years old)                             |                              |
| -0.154                                       | Percentage                   |
| point                                        |                              |
| NS                                           |                              |

Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

Oportunidades (Mexico) **Duration of exposure** (after 1 year)
Employed for pay (urban boys 6-20 years old)
-0.041
Percentage 
point
NS
Oportunidades (Mexico) **Duration of exposure** (after 2 years) Employed for pay (urban boys 
6-20 years old)
-0.103
Percentage 
point
5%
Oportunidades (Mexico) **Duration of exposure** (after 1 year)
Employed for pay (urban girls 12-14 years old)
0.007
Percentage 
point
NS
Oportunidades (Mexico) **Duration of exposure** (after 2 years) Employed for pay (urban girls 
12-14 years old)
-0.01
Percentage 
point
NS
Oportunidades (Mexico) **Duration of exposure** (after 1 year)
Employed for pay (urban girls 15-18 years old)
-0.0105
Percentage 
point
10%
Oportunidades (Mexico) **Duration of exposure** (after 2 years) Employed for pay (urban girls 
15-18 years old)
0.004
Percentage 
point
NS
Oportunidades (Mexico) **Duration of exposure** (after 1 year)
Employed for pay (urban girls 19-20 years old)
-0.05
Percentage 
point
NS
Oportunidades (Mexico) **Duration of exposure** (after 2 years) Employed for pay (urban girls 
19-20 years old)
0.087
Percentage 
point
NS
Oportunidades (Mexico) **Duration of exposure** (after 1 year)
Employed for pay (urban girls 6-20 years old)
-0.038
Percentage 
point
NS
Oportunidades (Mexico) **Duration of exposure** (after 2 years) Employed for pay (urban girls 
6-20 years old)
0.002
Percentage 
point
NS
-0.099
Percentage 
point
5%
5
Dammert (2008)
RPS (Nicaragua)
Duration of exposure (2001)
Participation in labour activities (boys 7-13 years old at baseline)
-0.124
Percentage 
point
5%
RPS (Nicaragua)
Duration of exposure (2002)
Participation in labour activities (boys 7-13 years old at baseline)
RPS (Nicaragua)
Duration of exposure (2001)
Participation in labour activities (girls 7-13 years old at baseline)
-0.012
Percentage 
point
NS
RPS (Nicaragua)
Duration of exposure (2002)
Participation in labour activities (girls 7-13 years old at baseline)
-0.014
Percentage 
point
NS
-0.076
Percentage 
points
10%
RPS (Nicaragua)
Duration of exposure (2001)
Participation in labour activities (children 7-13 years old at baseline - male headed)

## Table A5.5.11 Effect Of Design And Implementation Features On Child Labour Outcomes Continued

| #                                                    | Study                              | Programme and    |
|------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------|------------------|
| country                                              |                                    |                  |
| Effect of                                            |                                    |                  |
| [design / implementation feature]                    |                                    |                  |
| Outcome variable and                                 |                                    |                  |
| treatment population                                 |                                    |                  |
| Effect                                               | Measure                            |                  |
| of change                                            |                                    |                  |
| Significance                                         |                                    |                  |
| 5                                                    | Dammert                            |                  |
| (2008)                                               |                                    |                  |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                                      |                                    |                  |
| Duration of exposure                                 |                                    |                  |
| (2002)                                               | Participation in labour activities |                  |
| (children 7-13 years old at                          |                                    |                  |
| baseline - male headed)                              |                                    |                  |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                                      |                                    |                  |
| Duration of exposure                                 |                                    |                  |
| (2001)                                               | Participation in labour activities |                  |
| (children 7-13 years old at                          |                                    |                  |
| baseline - female headed)                            |                                    |                  |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                                      |                                    |                  |
| Duration of exposure                                 |                                    |                  |
| (2002)                                               | Participation in labour activities |                  |
| (children 7-13 years old at                          |                                    |                  |
| baseline - female headed)                            |                                    |                  |
| 6                                                    | Maluccio                           |                  |
| (2005)                                               |                                    |                  |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                                      |                                    |                  |
| Duration of exposure                                 |                                    |                  |
| (1 year after                                        |                                    |                  |
| baseline)                                            |                                    |                  |
| Working (girls 7-12 years)                           | -0.0077                            | Percentage       |
| point                                                |                                    |                  |
| NS                                                   |                                    |                  |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                                      |                                    |                  |
| Duration of exposure                                 |                                    |                  |
| (2 years after                                       |                                    |                  |
| baseline)                                            |                                    |                  |
| Working (girls 7-12 years)                           |                                    |                  |
| 0.0553                                               |                                    |                  |
| Percentage                                           |                                    |                  |
| point                                                |                                    |                  |
| 10%                                                  |                                    |                  |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                                      |                                    |                  |
| Duration of exposure                                 |                                    |                  |
| (1 year after                                        |                                    |                  |
| baseline)                                            |                                    |                  |
| Working (boys 7-12 years)                            | -0.0415                            | Percentage       |
| point                                                |                                    |                  |
| NS                                                   |                                    |                  |
| RPS (Nicaragua)                                      |                                    |                  |
| Duration of exposure                                 |                                    |                  |
| (2 years after                                       |                                    |                  |
| baseline)                                            |                                    |                  |
| Working (boys 7-12 years)                            | -0.0175                            | Percentage       |
| point                                                |                                    |                  |
| NS                                                   |                                    |                  |
| Targeting                                            |                                    |                  |
| 1                                                    | Merttens et al.                    |                  |
| (2015)                                               |                                    |                  |
| SAGE (Uganda)                                        | Among households targeted through  |                  |
| the Senior Citizens Grant                            |                                    |                  |
| Proportion of children                               |                                    |                  |
| aged 6-17 engaged in                                 |                                    |                  |
| child labour                                         |                                    |                  |
| SAGE (Uganda)                                        | Among households targeted through  |                  |
| the Vulnerable Family Support Grant                  |                                    |                  |
| Proportion of children                               |                                    |                  |
| aged 6-17 engaged in                                 |                                    |                  |
| child labour                                         |                                    |                  |
| Complementary interventions and supply-side services |                                    |                  |
| 1                                                    | Del Carpio                         |                  |
| (2008)                                               |                                    |                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                  |
| Complementary interventions                          |                                    |                  |
| (basic intervention)                                 |                                    |                  |
| Physical labour (ages 8-15)                          | -1.052                             | Hours per        |
| week                                                 |                                    |                  |
| NS                                                   |                                    |                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                  |
| Complementary interventions                          |                                    |                  |
| (training intervention)                              |                                    |                  |
| Physical labour (ages 8-15)                          |                                    |                  |
| -1.407                                               |                                    |                  |
| Hours per                                            |                                    |                  |
| week                                                 |                                    |                  |
| 5%                                                   |                                    |                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                  |
| Complementary interventions                          |                                    |                  |
| (business grant intervention)                        |                                    |                  |
| Physical labour (ages 8-15)                          | -1.013                             | Hours per        |
| week                                                 |                                    |                  |
| NS                                                   |                                    |                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                  |
| Complementary interventions                          |                                    |                  |
| (basic intervention)                                 |                                    |                  |
| Non-physical labour (ages                            |                                    |                  |
| 8-15)                                                |                                    |                  |
| 1.414                                                | Hours per                          |                  |
| week                                                 |                                    |                  |
| NS                                                   |                                    |                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                  |
| Complementary interventions                          |                                    |                  |
| (training intervention)                              |                                    |                  |
| Non-physical labour (ages                            |                                    |                  |
| 8-15)                                                |                                    |                  |
| 1.155                                                | Hours per                          |                  |
| week                                                 |                                    |                  |
| NS                                                   |                                    |                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                  |
| Complementary interventions                          |                                    |                  |
| (business grant intervention)                        |                                    |                  |
| Non-physical labour (ages                            |                                    |                  |
| 8-15)                                                |                                    |                  |
| 6.288                                                |                                    |                  |
| Hours per                                            |                                    |                  |
| week                                                 |                                    |                  |
| 1%                                                   |                                    |                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                  |
| Complementary interventions                          |                                    |                  |
| (basic intervention)                                 |                                    |                  |
| No. of hours worked (ages                            |                                    |                  |
| 8-15)                                                |                                    |                  |
| -1.143                                               | Hours per                          |                  |
| week                                                 |                                    |                  |
| NS                                                   |                                    |                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                  |
| Complementary interventions                          |                                    |                  |
| (training intervention)                              |                                    |                  |
| No. of hours worked (ages                            |                                    |                  |
| 8-15)                                                |                                    |                  |
| -1.62                                                |                                    |                  |
| Hours per                                            |                                    |                  |
| week                                                 |                                    |                  |
| 5%                                                   |                                    |                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                  |
| Complementary interventions                          |                                    |                  |
| (business grant intervention)                        |                                    |                  |
| No. of hours worked (ages                            |                                    |                  |
| 8-15)                                                |                                    |                  |
| -0.533                                               | Hours per                          |                  |
| week                                                 |                                    |                  |
| NS                                                   |                                    |                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                  |
| Complementary interventions                          |                                    |                  |
| (basic intervention)                                 |                                    |                  |
| No. of hours worked (girls                           |                                    |                  |
| ages 8-15)                                           |                                    |                  |
| -0.551                                               | Hours per                          |                  |
| week                                                 |                                    |                  |
| NS                                                   |                                    |                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                  |
| Complementary interventions                          |                                    |                  |
| (training intervention)                              |                                    |                  |
| No. of hours worked (girls                           |                                    |                  |
| ages 8-15)                                           |                                    |                  |
| -1.126                                               | Hours per                          |                  |
| week                                                 |                                    |                  |
| NS                                                   |                                    |                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                  |
| Complementary interventions                          |                                    |                  |
| (business grant intervention)                        |                                    |                  |
| No. of hours worked (girls                           |                                    |                  |
| ages 8-15)                                           |                                    |                  |
| -0.076                                               | Hours per                          |                  |
| week                                                 |                                    |                  |
| NS                                                   |                                    |                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                  |
| Complementary interventions                          |                                    |                  |
| (basic intervention)                                 |                                    |                  |
| No. of hours worked (boys                            |                                    |                  |
| ages 8-15)                                           |                                    |                  |
| -1.675                                               |                                    |                  |
| Hours per                                            |                                    |                  |
| week                                                 |                                    |                  |
| 10%                                                  |                                    |                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                  |
| Complementary interventions                          |                                    |                  |
| (training intervention)                              |                                    |                  |
| No. of hours worked (boys                            |                                    |                  |
| ages 8-15)                                           |                                    |                  |
| -2.073                                               |                                    |                  |
| Hours per                                            |                                    |                  |
| week                                                 |                                    |                  |
| 5%                                                   |                                    |                  |
| Atención a Crisis                                    |                                    |                  |
| (Nicaragua)                                          |                                    |                  |
| Complementary interventions                          |                                    |                  |
| (business grant intervention)                        |                                    |                  |
| No. of hours worked (boys                            |                                    |                  |
| ages 8-15)                                           |                                    |                  |
| -0.989                                               | Hours per                          |                  |
| week                                                 |                                    |                  |
| NS                                                   |                                    |                  |

14	 Definition of work excludes domestic work, which may underestimate impacts for girls, though Skoufias and Parker (2001) find evidence that in initial years the programme reduced time spent in domestic work for girls

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews
-0.05
Percentage 
points
NS
-0.131
Percentage 
points
5%
Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools
-0.082
Percentage 
points
NS
Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base
-0.0004
Percentage 
point
NS
0.0001
Percentage 
point
NS
Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

## Summary Results For Empowerment Table A5.6.1 Summary Of Results For The Role Of Cash Transfer Design And Implementation Parameters On Empowerment

| Paper                       | Specific variable   | Size of                   |
|-----------------------------|---------------------|---------------------------|
| effect                      |                     |                           |
| Unit of                     |                     |                           |
| change                      |                     |                           |
| Statistical                 |                     |                           |
| significance                |                     |                           |
| Gender of                   |                     |                           |
| individual                  |                     |                           |
| Disaggregation              | Programme           |                           |
| Main recipient              |                     |                           |
| 1                           | Siaplay (2012)      | Married at time of survey |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| NS                          |                     |                           |
| Female                      |                     |                           |
| Transfer (pension)          |                     |                           |
| recipient is female         |                     |                           |
| SA-OAP (South Africa)       |                     |                           |
| Married at time of survey   |                     |                           |
| 0.227                       |                     |                           |
| Percentage                  |                     |                           |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| 1%                          |                     |                           |
| Female                      |                     |                           |
| Transfer (pension)          |                     |                           |
| recipient is male           |                     |                           |
| SA-OAP (South Africa)       |                     |                           |
| Married at time of survey   |                     |                           |
| -0.269                      |                     |                           |
| Percentage                  |                     |                           |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| 1%                          |                     |                           |
| Male                        |                     |                           |
| Transfer (pension)          |                     |                           |
| recipient is female         |                     |                           |
| SA-OAP (South Africa)       |                     |                           |
| Married at time of survey   |                     |                           |
| 0.243                       |                     |                           |
| Percentage                  |                     |                           |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| 1%                          |                     |                           |
| Male                        |                     |                           |
| Transfer (pension)          |                     |                           |
| recipient is male           |                     |                           |
| SA-OAP (South Africa)       |                     |                           |
| Transfer level              |                     |                           |
| 1                           | Angelucci           |                           |
| (2008)                      |                     |                           |
| Male partner is             |                     |                           |
| aggressive when drinking    |                     |                           |
| -0.016                      |                     |                           |
| Percentage                  |                     |                           |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| 1%                          | Female              | PROGRESA (Mexico)         |
| Male partner is             |                     |                           |
| aggressive when drinking    |                     |                           |
| 0.051                       |                     |                           |
| Percentage                  |                     |                           |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| 5%                          | Female              | Transfer level (maximum   |
| transfer)                   |                     |                           |
| PROGRESA (Mexico)           |                     |                           |
| 2                           | Kohler and          |                           |
| Thornton (2012)             |                     |                           |
| Condom use (in last nine    |                     |                           |
| days)                       |                     |                           |
| 0.041                       | Percentage          |                           |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| NS                          | Male                | High transfer             |
| Condom use (in last nine    |                     |                           |
| days)                       |                     |                           |
| 0.063                       | Percentage          |                           |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| NS                          | Male                | Low transfer              |
| -0.092                      |                     |                           |
| Percentage                  |                     |                           |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| 5%                          | Male                | High transfer             |
| Safe sex (used a condom     |                     |                           |
| at last sex or did not have |                     |                           |
| sex in last nine days)      |                     |                           |
| -0.088                      |                     |                           |
| Percentage                  |                     |                           |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| 5%                          | Male                | Low transfer              |
| Safe sex (used a condom     |                     |                           |
| at last sex or did not have |                     |                           |
| sex in last nine days)      |                     |                           |
| Condom use (in last nine    |                     |                           |
| days)                       |                     |                           |
| -0.019                      | Percentage          |                           |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| NS                          | Female              | High transfer             |
| Condom use (in last nine    |                     |                           |
| days)                       |                     |                           |
| 0.02                        | Percentage          |                           |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| NS                          | Female              | Low transfer              |
| 0.087                       |                     |                           |
| Percentage                  |                     |                           |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| 10%                         | Female              | High transfer             |
| Safe sex (used a condom     |                     |                           |
| at last sex or did not have |                     |                           |
| sex in last nine days)      |                     |                           |
| 0.046                       | Percentage          |                           |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| NS                          | Female              | Low transfer              |
| Safe sex (used a condom     |                     |                           |
| at last sex or did not have |                     |                           |
| sex in last nine days)      |                     |                           |
| Duration of exposure        |                     |                           |
| 1                           | Baird et al.        |                           |
| (2011)                      |                     |                           |
| Ever pregnant               | -0.009              | Percentage                |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| NS                          | Female              | 12 months, UCT            |
| Ever pregnant               |                     |                           |
| -0.067                      |                     |                           |
| Percentage                  |                     |                           |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| 1%                          | Female              | 24 months, UCT            |
| Ever pregnant               | 0.013               | Percentage                |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| NS                          | Female              | 12 months, CCT            |
| Ever pregnant               | 0.029               | Percentage                |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| NS                          | Female              | 24 months, CCT            |
| Ever married                |                     |                           |
| -0.026                      |                     |                           |
| Percentage                  |                     |                           |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| 5%                          | Female              | 12 months, UCT            |
| Ever married                |                     |                           |
| -0.079                      |                     |                           |
| Percentage                  |                     |                           |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| 1%                          | Female              | 24 months, UCT            |
| Ever married                | 0.007               | Percentage                |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| NS                          | Female              | 12 months, CCT            |
| Ever married                | −0.012              | Percentage                |
| points                      |                     |                           |
| NS                          | Female              | 24 months, CCT            |
| Contents                    |                     |                           |
| Annex 1                     |                     |                           |
| Overview of                 |                     |                           |
| existing cash               |                     |                           |
| transfers reviews           |                     |                           |
| Annex 2                     |                     |                           |
| Detailed search             |                     |                           |
| protocols and study         |                     |                           |
| assessment tools            |                     |                           |
| Annex 3                     |                     |                           |
| Summary table               |                     |                           |
| of searches                 |                     |                           |
| and reasons for             |                     |                           |
| exclusion and flow          |                     |                           |
| diagrams                    |                     |                           |
| Annex 4                     |                     |                           |
| Summary of the              |                     |                           |
| evidence base               |                     |                           |
| Annex 5                     |                     |                           |
| Evidence:                   |                     |                           |
| results tables for          |                     |                           |
| overall effects             |                     |                           |
| disaggregated by            |                     |                           |
| gender, and cash            |                     |                           |
| transfer design and         |                     |                           |
| implementation              |                     |                           |
| effects                     |                     |                           |

## Table A5.6.1 Summary Of Results For The Role Of Cash Transfer Design And Implementation Parameters On Empowerment Continued

| Paper                     | Specific variable   | Size of                 |
|---------------------------|---------------------|-------------------------|
| effect                    |                     |                         |
| Unit of                   |                     |                         |
| change                    |                     |                         |
| Statistical               |                     |                         |
| significance              |                     |                         |
| Gender of                 |                     |                         |
| individual                |                     |                         |
| Disaggregation            | Programme           |                         |
| 2                         | Behrman et al.      |                         |
| (2005)*                   |                     |                         |
| Married at time of survey | -0.01               | Percentage              |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| NS                        | Female              | PROGRESA (Mexico)       |
| Married at time of survey | -0.006              | Percentage              |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| NS                        | Male                | PROGRESA (Mexico)       |
| Married at time of survey | -0.007              | Percentage              |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| NS                        | Female              | Aged 9-10 in 1997       |
| Married at time of survey | -0.008              | Percentage              |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| NS                        | Female              | Aged 11-12 in 1997      |
| Married at time of survey | -0.019              | Percentage              |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| NS                        | Female              | Aged 13-15 in 1997      |
| Married at time of survey | 0.008               | Percentage              |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| NS                        | Male                | Aged 9-10 in 1997       |
| Married at time of survey | -0.014              | Percentage              |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| NS                        | Male                | Aged 11-12 in 1997      |
| Married at time of survey | -0.013              | Percentage              |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| NS                        | Male                | Aged 13-15 in 1997      |
| 3                         | Perova and          |                         |
| Vakis (2012)              |                     |                         |
| Use of contraceptives     |                     |                         |
| 0.08                      |                     |                         |
| Percentage                |                     |                         |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| 1%                        | Female              | 12-23 months            |
| Use of contraceptives     |                     |                         |
| 0.12                      |                     |                         |
| Percentage                |                     |                         |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| 1%                        | Female              | 24 to 36 months         |
| Use of contraceptives     |                     |                         |
| 0.18                      |                     |                         |
| Percentage                |                     |                         |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| 1%                        | Female              | Over 36 months          |
| Conditionalities          |                     |                         |
| 1                         | Baird et al.        |                         |
| (2011)                    |                     |                         |
| Ever married              | 0.007               | Percentage              |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| NS                        | Female              | CCT treatment arm       |
| Ever married              |                     |                         |
| -0.026                    |                     |                         |
| Percentage                |                     |                         |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| 5%                        | Female              | UCT treatment arm       |
| Ever married              | 0.037               | Percentage              |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| NS                        | Female              | Aged over 15, CCT       |
| treatment arm             |                     |                         |
| ZCTP (Malawi)             |                     |                         |
| Ever married              |                     |                         |
| 0.007                     |                     |                         |
| Percentage                |                     |                         |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| 5%                        | Female              | Aged over 15, UCT       |
| treatment arm             |                     |                         |
| ZCTP (Malawi)             |                     |                         |
| Ever pregnant             | 0.013               | Percentage              |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| NS                        | Female              | CCT treatment arm       |
| Ever pregnant             | -0.009              | Percentage              |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| NS                        | Female              | UCT treatment arm       |
| Ever pregnant             |                     |                         |
| 0.104                     |                     |                         |
| Percentage                |                     |                         |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| 5%                        | Female              | Aged over 15, CCT       |
| treatment arm             |                     |                         |
| ZCTP (Malawi)             |                     |                         |
| Ever pregnant             | -0.032              | Percentage              |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| NS                        | Female              | Aged over 15, UCT       |
| treatment arm             |                     |                         |
| ZCTP (Malawi)             |                     |                         |
| 2                         | Baird et al.        |                         |
| (2012)                    |                     |                         |
| Ever married              | 0.93                | Odds ratio              |
| Ever married              | 0.36                | Odds ratio              |
| Payment mechanism         |                     |                         |
| -0.01                     | Percentage          |                         |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| NS                        | Female              | Zap (mobile payment)    |
| treatment arm             |                     |                         |
| Mobile money              |                     |                         |
| experiment (Niger)        |                     |                         |
| 1                         | Aker et al.         |                         |
| (2014)                    |                     |                         |
| Female recipient          |                     |                         |
| responsible for spending  |                     |                         |
| part of cash transfer     |                     |                         |
| Female recipient          |                     |                         |
| responsible for spending  |                     |                         |
| part of cash transfer     |                     |                         |
| 0.02                      | Percentage          |                         |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| NS                        | Female              | Cash treatment arm that |
| also received mobile      |                     |                         |
| phone                     |                     |                         |
| 0.01                      | Percentage          |                         |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| NS                        | Female              | Zap (mobile payment)    |
| treatment arm             |                     |                         |
| Mobile money              |                     |                         |
| experiment (Niger)        |                     |                         |
| Female recipient          |                     |                         |
| responsible for spending  |                     |                         |
| part of cash transfer     |                     |                         |
| 0.01                      | Percentage          |                         |
| points                    |                     |                         |
| NS                        | Female              | Zap (mobile payment)    |
| treatment arm             |                     |                         |
| Mobile money              |                     |                         |
| experiment (Niger)        |                     |                         |
| Female recipient involved |                     |                         |
| in deciding how transfer  |                     |                         |
| is spent                  |                     |                         |
| Contents                  |                     |                         |
| Annex 1                   |                     |                         |
| Overview of               |                     |                         |
| existing cash             |                     |                         |
| transfers reviews         |                     |                         |
| Annex 2                   |                     |                         |
| Detailed search           |                     |                         |
| protocols and study       |                     |                         |
| assessment tools          |                     |                         |
| Annex 3                   |                     |                         |
| Summary table             |                     |                         |
| of searches               |                     |                         |
| and reasons for           |                     |                         |
| exclusion and flow        |                     |                         |
| diagrams                  |                     |                         |
| Annex 4                   |                     |                         |
| Summary of the            |                     |                         |
| evidence base             |                     |                         |
| Annex 5                   |                     |                         |
| Evidence:                 |                     |                         |
| results tables for        |                     |                         |
| overall effects           |                     |                         |
| disaggregated by          |                     |                         |
| gender, and cash          |                     |                         |
| transfer design and       |                     |                         |
| implementation            |                     |                         |
| effects                   |                     |                         |
| Mobile money              |                     |                         |
| experiment (Niger)        |                     |                         |

## Table A5.6.1 Summary Of Results For The Role Of Cash Transfer Design And Implementation Parameters On Empowerment Continued

| Paper                                                | Specific variable   | Size of                 |
|------------------------------------------------------|---------------------|-------------------------|
| effect                                               |                     |                         |
| Unit of                                              |                     |                         |
| change                                               |                     |                         |
| Statistical                                          |                     |                         |
| significance                                         |                     |                         |
| Gender of                                            |                     |                         |
| individual                                           |                     |                         |
| Disaggregation                                       | Programme           |                         |
| 1                                                    | Aker et al.         |                         |
| (2014)                                               |                     |                         |
| Female recipient involved                            |                     |                         |
| in deciding how transfer                             |                     |                         |
| is spent                                             |                     |                         |
| 0.01                                                 | Percentage          |                         |
| points                                               |                     |                         |
| NS                                                   | Female              | Cash treatment arm that |
| also received mobile                                 |                     |                         |
| phone                                                |                     |                         |
| 0.00                                                 | Percentage          |                         |
| points                                               |                     |                         |
| NS                                                   | Female              | Zap (mobile payment)    |
| treatment arm                                        |                     |                         |
| Mobile money                                         |                     |                         |
| experiment (Niger)                                   |                     |                         |
| Female recipient involved                            |                     |                         |
| in deciding how transfer                             |                     |                         |
| is spent                                             |                     |                         |
| 0.00                                                 | Percentage          |                         |
| points                                               |                     |                         |
| NS                                                   | Female              | Zap (mobile payment)    |
| treatment arm                                        |                     |                         |
| Mobile money                                         |                     |                         |
| experiment (Niger)                                   |                     |                         |
| 2                                                    | Aker et al.         |                         |
| (2011)                                               |                     |                         |
| Respondent involved in                               |                     |                         |
| deciding how transfer is                             |                     |                         |
| spent (not entirely clear                            |                     |                         |
| that respondent is female                            |                     |                         |
| recipient)                                           |                     |                         |
| 0.01                                                 |                     |                         |
| Percentage                                           |                     |                         |
| points                                               |                     |                         |
| 10%                                                  | Female              | Zap (mobile payment)    |
| treatment arm                                        |                     |                         |
| Mobile money                                         |                     |                         |
| experiment (Niger)                                   |                     |                         |
| Respondent involved in                               |                     |                         |
| deciding how transfer                                |                     |                         |
| is spent                                             |                     |                         |
| Respondent involved in                               |                     |                         |
| deciding how transfer                                |                     |                         |
| is spent                                             |                     |                         |
| 0.01                                                 |                     |                         |
| Percentage                                           |                     |                         |
| points                                               |                     |                         |
| 10%                                                  | Female              | Cash treatment arm that |
| also received mobile                                 |                     |                         |
| phone                                                |                     |                         |
| 0.00                                                 | Percentage          |                         |
| points                                               |                     |                         |
| NS                                                   | Female              | Zap (mobile payment)    |
| treatment arm                                        |                     |                         |
| Mobile money                                         |                     |                         |
| experiment (Niger)                                   |                     |                         |
| Respondent involved in                               |                     |                         |
| deciding how transfer                                |                     |                         |
| is spent                                             |                     |                         |
| 0.01                                                 | Percentage          |                         |
| points                                               |                     |                         |
| NS                                                   | Female              | Zap (mobile payment)    |
| treatment arm                                        |                     |                         |
| Mobile money                                         |                     |                         |
| experiment (Niger)                                   |                     |                         |
| Respondent involved in                               |                     |                         |
| deciding how transfer                                |                     |                         |
| is spent                                             |                     |                         |
| Respondent involved in                               |                     |                         |
| deciding how transfer                                |                     |                         |
| is spent                                             |                     |                         |
| 0.08                                                 | Percentage          |                         |
| points                                               |                     |                         |
| NS                                                   | Female              | Zap (mobile payment)    |
| treatment arm - Fulani                               |                     |                         |
| and Touareg ethnic                                   |                     |                         |
| groups only                                          |                     |                         |
| Respondent involved in                               |                     |                         |
| deciding how transfer                                |                     |                         |
| is spent                                             |                     |                         |
| 0.01                                                 | Percentage          |                         |
| points                                               |                     |                         |
| NS                                                   | Female              | Zap (mobile payment)    |
| treatment arm - Hausa                                |                     |                         |
| ethnic group only                                    |                     |                         |
| Complementary interventions and supply-side services |                     |                         |
| 1                                                    | Blattman et al.     |                         |
| (2015)                                               |                     |                         |
| Physical and emotional                               |                     |                         |
| abuse (z-score)                                      |                     |                         |
| 0.066                                                | Z-score             | NS                      |
| Physical and emotional                               |                     |                         |
| abuse (z-score)                                      |                     |                         |
| -0.046                                               | Z-score             | NS                      |
| programmes                                           |                     |                         |
| WINGS (Uganda)                                       |                     |                         |
| Autonomy in purchases                                |                     |                         |
| (z-score)                                            |                     |                         |
| 0.082                                                | Z-score             | NS                      |
| Autonomy in purchases                                |                     |                         |
| (z-score)                                            |                     |                         |
| 0.089                                                | Z-score             | NS                      |
| programmes                                           |                     |                         |
| WINGS (Uganda)                                       |                     |                         |
| Degree of partner control                            | 0.17                | Percentage              |
| points                                               |                     |                         |
| NS                                                   | Female              | WINGS (Uganda)          |
| Degree of partner control                            |                     |                         |
| 0.129                                                |                     |                         |
| Percentage                                           |                     |                         |
| points                                               |                     |                         |
| 10%                                                  | Female              | Complementary           |
| programmes                                           |                     |                         |
| WINGS (Uganda)                                       |                     |                         |
| -0.11                                                |                     |                         |
| Z-score                                              | 10%                 | Female                  |
| beneficiaries                                        |                     |                         |
| WINGS (Uganda)                                       |                     |                         |
| 2                                                    | Green et al.        |                         |
| (2015)                                               |                     |                         |
| Self-reported autonomy/                              |                     |                         |
| influence in purchase                                |                     |                         |
| (z-score)                                            |                     |                         |
| Self-reported autonomy/                              |                     |                         |
| influence in purchase                                |                     |                         |
| (z-score)                                            |                     |                         |
| -0.07                                                | Z-score             | NS                      |
| an intimate partner at                               |                     |                         |
| baseline                                             |                     |                         |
| 15                                                   |                     |                         |
| Physical and emotional                               |                     |                         |
| abuse                                                |                     |                         |
| 0.01                                                 | Percentage          |                         |
| points                                               |                     |                         |
| NS                                                   | Female              | All female WINGS+       |
| beneficiaries                                        |                     |                         |
| WINGS (Uganda)                                       |                     |                         |
| Physical and emotional                               |                     |                         |
| abuse                                                |                     |                         |
| -0.08                                                | Percentage          |                         |
| points                                               |                     |                         |
| NS                                                   | Female              | Beneficiaries who had   |
| an intimate partner at                               |                     |                         |
| baseline                                             |                     |                         |
| Controlling behaviour                                | -0.01               | Percentage              |
| points                                               |                     |                         |
| NS                                                   | Female              | All female WINGS+       |
| beneficiaries                                        |                     |                         |
| WINGS (Uganda)                                       |                     |                         |
| Controlling behaviour                                | -0.07               | Percentage              |
| points                                               |                     |                         |
| NS                                                   | Female              | Beneficiaries who had   |
| an intimate partner at                               |                     |                         |
| baseline                                             |                     |                         |
| Contents                                             |                     |                         |
| Annex 1                                              |                     |                         |
| Overview of                                          |                     |                         |
| existing cash                                        |                     |                         |
| transfers reviews                                    |                     |                         |
| Mobile money                                         |                     |                         |
| experiment (Niger)                                   |                     |                         |
| Annex 2                                              |                     |                         |
| Detailed search                                      |                     |                         |
| protocols and study                                  |                     |                         |
| assessment tools                                     |                     |                         |
| Annex 3                                              |                     |                         |
| Summary table                                        |                     |                         |
| of searches                                          |                     |                         |
| and reasons for                                      |                     |                         |
| exclusion and flow                                   |                     |                         |
| diagrams                                             |                     |                         |
| Mobile money                                         |                     |                         |
| experiment (Niger)                                   |                     |                         |
| Annex 4                                              |                     |                         |
| Summary of the                                       |                     |                         |
| evidence base                                        |                     |                         |
| Mobile money                                         |                     |                         |
| experiment (Niger)                                   |                     |                         |
| Annex 5                                              |                     |                         |
| Evidence:                                            |                     |                         |
| results tables for                                   |                     |                         |
| overall effects                                      |                     |                         |
| disaggregated by                                     |                     |                         |
| gender, and cash                                     |                     |                         |
| transfer design and                                  |                     |                         |
| implementation                                       |                     |                         |
| effects                                              |                     |                         |
| Mobile money                                         |                     |                         |
| experiment (Niger)                                   |                     |                         |
| WINGS (Uganda)                                       |                     |                         |
| WINGS (Uganda)                                       |                     |                         |
| WINGS (Uganda)                                       |                     |                         |

## Table A5.6.1 Summary Of Results For The Role Of Cash Transfer Design And Implementation Parameters On Empowerment Continued

| Paper                    | Specific variable   | Size of    |
|--------------------------|---------------------|------------|
| effect                   |                     |            |
| Unit of                  |                     |            |
| change                   |                     |            |
| Statistical              |                     |            |
| significance             |                     |            |
| Gender of                |                     |            |
| individual               |                     |            |
| Disaggregation           | Programme           |            |
| Targeting mechanism      |                     |            |
| 0.032                    | Percentage          |            |
| points                   |                     |            |
| NS                       | Female              | SCG        |
| 1                        | Merttens et al.     |            |
| (2015)                   |                     |            |
| Female is decision maker |                     |            |
| on what to do about a    |                     |            |
| serious health problem   |                     |            |
| -0.0095                  | Percentage          |            |
| points                   |                     |            |
| NS                       | Female              | SCG        |
| Female is decision maker |                     |            |
| on what to do about a    |                     |            |
| serious health problem   |                     |            |
| Female is decision maker |                     |            |
| on children's education  |                     |            |
| 0.042                    | Percentage          |            |
| points                   |                     |            |
| NS                       | Female              | VFSG       |
| Female is decision maker |                     |            |
| on children's education  |                     |            |
| -0.002                   | Percentage          |            |
| points                   |                     |            |
| NS                       | Female              | VFSG       |
| Female is decision maker |                     |            |
| on how to invest money   |                     |            |
| 0.0081                   | Percentage          |            |
| points                   |                     |            |
| NS                       | Female              | SCG        |
| Female is decision maker |                     |            |
| on how to invest money   |                     |            |
| -0.0056                  | Percentage          |            |
| points                   |                     |            |
| NS                       | Female              | VFSG       |

Notes:*In Behrman et al. (2005) the treatment group were exposed to treatment for 1.5 years longer (4.5 years as opposed to 3 years). The full sample was aged 9-15 in 1997
15	 This sub-group is tested separately to try to strengthen the evidence that the programme's intended effects are not being achieved as a result of increased efforts by male partners to control transfer resources.

Contents Annex 1 
Overview of existing cash transfers reviews Annex 2 
Detailed search protocols and study assessment tools Annex 3 Summary table of searches and reasons for exclusion and flow diagrams
Annex 4 
Summary of the evidence base Annex 5 Evidence: results tables for overall effects disaggregated by gender, and cash transfer design and implementation effects

ODI is the UK's leading independent 
think tank on international 
development and humanitarian 
issues. 

Readers are encouraged to 
reproduce material from ODI 
Reports for their own publications, 
as long as they are not being sold 
commercially. As copyright holder, 
ODI requests due acknowledgement 
and a copy of the publication. For 
online use, we ask readers to link 
to the original resource on the 
ODI website. The views presented 
in this paper are those of the 
author(s) and do not necessarily 
represent the views of ODI.
© Overseas Development Institute 
2016. This work is licensed under 
a Creative Commons Attribution-
NonCommercial Licence  
(CC BY-NC 4.0).

All ODI Reports are available  
from www.odi.org

Overseas Development Institute
203 Blackfriars Road London SE1 8NJ Tel +44 (0)20 7922 0300 Fax +44 (0)20 7922 0399
odi.org