Following the baseline survey, a registry census was implemented in treatment villages to collect data to calculate a proxy-means score for each eligible household. The application of the proxy-means test sought to identify the poorest households to be selected as beneficiaries for the cash transfer program. A selection threshold was set for each commune, so that approximately the 40% poorest households would be selected to participate in the cash transfer program. Premand and Schnitzer (forthcoming) provide a detailed analysis of the implementation of proxy-means targeting in a subsequent phase of the program.

After the baseline survey was completed, targeting data collected, and the second public lottery implemented, the baseline survey data were merged with administrative data from the cash transfer program to identify which households from the baseline sample were selected as beneficiaries. In treatment villages, we can thus identify households that are actual program beneficiaries, and households that are actual non-beneficiaries.

The registry census to calculate PMT scores could only be collected in treatment villages. The collection of the registry census to calculate PMT scores did not take place in control villages. However, the baseline survey was designed so that it would also allow calculating PMT scores in both treatment and control villages. As such, we can “predict” potential beneficiary status of all households in the baseline sample. We do so by applying the PMT formula used to select beneficiaries to the baseline data collected in the treatment and control groups. Note that in practice the prediction of beneficiary status based on the baseline survey is imperfect. The groups of actual beneficiaries and “predicted beneficiaries” do not fully overlap in treatment villages. Still, we can identify these “predicted” (or potential) beneficiary households in the control and treatment groups. We use this “predicted beneficiary status” to estimate intent-totreat impacts of the cash transfers. We discuss this approach in more detail in Section 4, where we present the estimation strategy and the composition of the follow-up sample.

The interventions were implemented between February 2013 and April 2015. Program implementation was closely monitored. The delivery of the monthly cash transfers started in February 2013 in the Dosso region and in March 2013 in the Maradi region. Cash transfers were delivered monthly until the final payments took place (in March 2015 in Dosso and April 2015 in Maradi). More than 98% of households selected for the cash transfer program received benefits. The accompanying measures were rolled out

> for all children identified by the household survey team. Data collection for the child survey took place in the household through interviews with the main caregiver for each child. The anthropometric measurements and cognitive test took place in presence of the caregiver. Thorough quality control procedures were put in place, with systematic verifications of questionnaires by enumerators and supervisors. Additional verifications, including random back-checks, were undertaken by the coordination and quality control teams throughout the survey.

11