# Table (D2) Impacts of the Program on Household Consumption and Expenditure

|**Outcomes**|**Treatment**|**(se)**|**FDR**<br>**q-values**|**Control**<br>**mean**|**(sd)**|**N**|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Food consumption (aid) USD PPP|-53.05**|(22.40)|[0.02]|218.51|(201.68)|1,569|
|Food consumption (aid) USD PPP (_Per capita_)|-9.73***|(3.44)|[0.01]|35.88|(29.19)|1,569|
|Number of meals consumed the day prior|-0.08|(0.09)|[0.13]|2.05|(0.59)|1,610|

**_Notes_** :

- The table shows the regression results on pre-specified consumption outcomes using the phone survey midline data. Each row is its own dependent variable.

- The independent variable of interest is the TOT treatment indicator, which is the predicted value from a first-stage regression of treatment implementation on treatment assignment.

- The outcomes that require definitions are: Food consumption measures are self-reported and are in USD PPP and are winsorized at the top 1% of values in order to limit the influence of outliers.

- The regressions also have assessment month-by-year fixed effects, enumerator fixed effects, community-level controls (Irbid/Mafraq governorate and population quartile), and household-level controls (vulnerability-assessment quartile, shelter program, baseline number of children, baseline number of children plus adults, respondent gender, and respondent age).

- In the parentheses are robust standard errors clustered at the locality level. Regressions are weighted by the number of people interviewed in each household. Statistical significance represented by * (10%), ** (5%), and *** (1%). Q-values are calculated per Anderson (2008) and correspond to Family 2 in the pre-analysis plan.

# Table (D3) Impacts of the Program on Migration

|**Outcomes**|**Treatment**|**(se)**|**FDR**<br>**q-values**|**Control**<br>**mean**|**(sd)**|**N**|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Respondent moved since October 2019 (=1)|0.07|(0.06)|[0.28]|0.10|(0.30)|1,609|
|Number of times the subject moved|0.19**|(0.10)|[0.11]|0.13|(0.48)|1,609|
|Respondent networks (s.d. units)|0.35**|(0.15)|[0.10]|0.00|(1.00)|1,610|
|Camp resident (=1)|-0.02|(0.02)|[0.30]|0.02|(0.15)|1,609|
|Moving plans (Scale 1-4)|0.14|(0.16)|[0.32]|3.67|(0.71)|862|

**_Notes_** :

- The table shows the regression results on pre-specified migration outcomes using the phone survey midline data. Each row is its own dependent variable.

- The independent variable of interest is the TOT treatment indicator, which is the predicted value from a first-stage regression of treatment implementation on treatment assignment.

- The outcomes that require definitions are: Respondent moved is asked about since October 2019 because October 2019 represents the earliest date of the shelter program implementation. Respondent networks corresponds to people (excl. household members) that the respondent knew who were already in their current neighborhood when they moved to their current residence and is coded as 1 if “0”, 2 if “1-5”, 3 if “6-10”, 4 if “11-20”, and 5 if “More than 20”. Moving plans is coded as 1 if moving on a specific date, 2 if looked for other residences, 3 if have not started looking for other residences, and 4 if do not have plans to change residences.

- The regressions also have assessment month-by-year fixed effects, enumerator fixed effects, community-level controls (Irbid/Mafraq governorate and population quartile), and household-level controls (vulnerability-assessment quartile, shelter program, baseline number of children, baseline number of children plus adults, respondent gender, and respondent age).

- In the parentheses are robust standard errors clustered at the locality level. Regressions are weighted by the number of people interviewed in each household. Statistical significance represented by * (10%), ** (5%), and *** (1%). Q-values are calculated per Anderson (2008) and correspond to Family 5 in the pre-analysis plan.

6