<mark>In practice, this would require knowing the type of information available in both the data sets. The</mark> questionnaire of the household survey, which forms the basis for the national PMT, is readily available, but what indicators can be constructed using the humanitarian database in not public information. Although, there is no need for sharing the micro-data, concerns related to data sharing and running into data privacy infringement are a possibility.

How many MoLSA beneficiaries could come from the humanitarian database will depend on circumstances. The displaced households, by all descriptions, are likely to be severely vulnerable. Thus, depending on the availability of budget, political will, and the technical and administrative capacity, referral may, even, rely on non-PMT approaches such as group/geographical targeting or combination of the two. Moreover, perceived ISIS affiliation, fear of persecution and other grievances may mean not all eligible households will be willing to be referred. The possible transitional pathways, thus, will differ depending on these circumstances.

Following the completion of the MCNA survey in 2018, humanitarian agencies updated the vulnerability assessment criteria for CLCI program with separate models for each region, namely: Kurdistan (comprising three governorates in Kurdistan), North (comprising five Northern governorates), and rest of the country (Center and South) corresponding to the World Bank’s regional definition for PMT formula. To be consistent with the new targeting and to assess eligibility into the government’s CT program (SSN) of both the previous and the potential future CLCI beneficiaries we formulate two sets of regional pseudo-PMTs:

1. Three regional models based on common set of indicators between the SWIFT and the 2016 VM model that was devised on the Vulnerability Assessment data (hereafter VM);

2. Three regional models based on common set of indicators from the SWIFT and the updated VM model (SEVAT) that was devised on the 2018 MCNA survey (hereafter SEVAT).

Means and standard deviations of the variables common to the national model and the old VM model are reported in Table 1. A single national VM model was devised in 2016, hence, the variables for all three regional models are the same. In total, 5 variables are in common between the two sources: household employment rate, dependency ratio, indicator for female headed household, household size, and a dummy to indicate households with IDP member/s. Table 2 reports the indicators selected for the new CLCI eligibility criteria, SEVAT, that were also considered for the SSN formula. Only 3 variables, home ownership, household size and employment rate, from the new Kurdistan and Center-South MCNA models can be duplicated in the national model. However, an additional variable, access to public network water tap, can be reproduced from the northern SEVAT model.

_Table 1. Common variables between the SWIFT and the 2016 VM model_

||(1)|(2)|(3)|(4)|
|---|---|---|---|---|
||**Iraq**|**Kurdistan**|**North**|**Center-**<br>**South**|
||Mean [SD]|Mean [SD]|Mean [SD]|Mean [SD]|
|Employment rate (emp/hhsize)|0.22|0.21|0.21|0.23|
||[0.15]|[0.15]|[0.14]|[0.15]|
|Dependency ratio|0.42|0.40|0.43|0.43|

8