_Table 7: Example of key research questions and recommended research approach_

|**Researchquestion**|**Suggested method(s) or tool(s)**|
|---|---|
|1. How does bundling facilitation with cash<br>transfers (at the community or household<br>level) affect economic welfare, public<br>infrastructure, and social sustainability<br>outcomes?|•<br>RCT with multiple treatment arms that introduce<br>randomized variation in i) the presence or mode (e.g.,<br>to household vs. livelihood group) of cash transfers<br>and ii) the presence or type of facilitation.|
|2. Do CDD institutions persist after project<br>completion, and do they generate spillover<br>impacts (e.g., on service delivery or resilience<br>outcomes)?<br>What<br>elements<br>of<br>design,<br>implementation, and context contribute to<br>these institutional impacts?|•<br>Longitudinal analysis that combines quantitative and<br>qualitative data collection from CDD communities<br>across multiple projects/countries<sup>46</sup>during the project<br>period and 5+ years after project completion.<br>•<br>Utilize<br>phone<br>surveys<br>with<br>community<br>members/leaders for high frequency and longitudinal<br>feedback.<br>•<br>Where feasible, consider natural or quasi-experiments<br>or equivalence trial method(Burde et al 2023).|
|3. In what type of contexts can CDD approaches<br>enhance social cohesion? Which types of social<br>cohesion (linking, bridging, and bonding)?<br>What core design adjustments are necessary<br>in CDD approaches to create or improve<br>impacts on social cohesion?|•<br>Qualitative (KIIs, FGDs, ethnography) data collection<br>across multiple projects/countries before and during<br>CDD implementation.<sup>47</sup>|
|4. What approaches to hiring, training, and<br>supervising facilitators are adequate/effective<br>i) to achieve project outcomes, and ii) to<br>create spillovers on other activities that<br>promote local development? How do<br>contextual factors affect successful<br>implementation of this facilitation? How can<br>small changes to design and implementation<br>contribute to consistent facilitation?|•<br>Systematic review of current and past CDD project<br>implementation<br>documents,<br>including<br>Implementation Status and Results Reports (ISR), Mid<br>Term Reviews (MTR), and Implementation and<br>Completion Results Reports (ICR).<br>•<br>Use of phone surveys or other digital tools to monitor<br>and assess facilitation at high frequencies over time.<br>•<br>Anthropological process studies.<br>•<br>HR records for basic demographics<br>•<br>RCTs|

Importantly, the learning agenda requires not only impact evaluations but in-depth studies to understand processes, contexts, and the _mechanisms_ that link project inputs to changes in outcomes. Ideally, such work on understanding the contexts in which CDD projects will work will be conducted _before_ CDD projects are implemented (i.e., as part of the project preparation phase). Knowledge of how local institutions (formal and informal) function; where power lies within communities – the extent to which it is concentrated, and what sources of countervailing power preside; the extent of social cohesion and nature of cleavages; the groups that are marginalized within communities and in what ways. Forging a grounded understanding of each is foundational for the development of a project design that fits with the

> 46 This approach of looking at similar research questions across several projects/countries would help improve the external validity of results and could draw on lessons from the Metaketa Initiatives.

> 47 The joint World Bank – Mercy Corps toolkit on social capital and social cohesion provides a qualitative research guide on how to measure social cohesion in CDD projects. See Kim, Sheely, and Schmidt (2020).

32