these potential biases in enrollment by constructing an alternative indicator of enrollment using administrative data based on attendance the day of the application of the ENLACE tests.

There are very few quantitative studies of Prospera on achievement test impacts, mainly because achievement tests were not part of the main data collection in the initial experimental evaluation. In 2003, a version of the Woodcock Johnson tests in mathematics and Spanish was applied. Comparing the test scores of the original treatment and control groups, Behrman, Parker and Todd (2009) find no impacts on achievement tests, despite significant impacts on increasing schooling attainment between the two groups.

Several reviews examine the evidence on how other CCT programs impact school achievement. An early study by Schady and Fizbein (2009) summarizes the effects of CCTs on achievement tests and argues that results have been disappointingly small. Since then, several additional studies show mixed effects. Baird et al. (2014) review education effects of both conditional and unconditional transfers and find that effect on achievement are “small, at best.” Snilstveit et al. 2015 carry out a meta-analysis review of educational interventions, studying both conditional and unconditional cash transfer programs. They conclude that, while cash transfers have been effective at increasing school enrollment, overall, they have low effects on achievement.

One caveat to these conclusions is there are far fewer studies on the effects on achievement as there are on the effects on enrollment. Snilstveit et al. note the number of studies of achievement is much lower than that for enrollment, in particular they review studies from 38 programs of the effects of transfers on enrollment, but only 11 programs have evaluation studies of their achievement impacts. Within these studies, however, there are examples of transfer programs that significantly affect attendance. For instance, Baird, McIntosh, and Ozler (2010) show significant impacts of 0.14 standard deviations on English achievement tests and 0.12 on math achievement tests after two years of operation of a CCT program in Malawi.

Our study builds on two recent studies which use the ENLACE data to study impacts of PROSPERA. Acevedo, Ortega and Székely (2018) use several sources of variation to estimate impact of PROSPERA on achievement tests, including comparing beneficiaries with nonbeneficiaries and comparing beneficiaries with less time in the program to beneficiaries with more time in the program. Depending on the method used, they find varying sizes of impacts, ranging from effects on the order of 0.3 SD to insignificant effects. Our study uses different methodologies to estimate impact as well as combining socio-economic characteristics and school characteristics as conditioning variables and as potential sources of program impact heterogeneity.

De Hoyos, Estrada, and Vargas (2018) analyze a longitudinal panel of ENLACE data for a group of students that took the test in sixth grade in 2007 and then again in grade 9 and in grade 12. They also merge the grade 12 test scores with a special module of the Mexican labor force survey (ENOE) applied to individuals aged 18 to 20 years old in 2010. They find that the ENLACE test scores have strong predictive power for future education and labor market outcomes. They show that grade 6 learning outcomes are an important predictor of lower- and 8