was expanded as a response to the 2009 crisis (after having been reduced significantly over 20002006). In 2011 it covered 1.1 million beneficiaries with a total budget of 2.9 billion pesos (average monthly transfer per beneficiary in 2011 of 224 pesos, or US$17). The analysis also covers three broader transfer categories reported in the ENIGH survey without identifying specific programs: a) other non-contributory pensions, b) other public scholarships, and c) other public transfers. It also includes two additional programs with a very low incidence of beneficiaries, as shown below: (1) the _Opciones Productivas_ program, aimed at supporting productive projects among rural population in poverty through the development of technical and productive skills; and (2) the _Crédito a la Palabra_ scheme, aimed at providing economic resources to farmers in order to diversify economic activities in areas of low productivity and/or with high occurrence of natural shocks.

Using the data set generated by Lopez-Calva and Ortiz-Juarez (2014), we divide the vulnerable population between those extremely vulnerable if they face a probability of falling into poverty of 30% or more, and those moderate vulnerable if their probabilities are between 10% and 29%. In monetary terms, the former group lives on $4-5.50 a day, while the latter on $5.50-10 a day. The incidence and benefits of programs is then analyzed for these groups. As a comparison, we also include results for the population in poverty, according to the $4 a day poverty line, the middle class ($10-50), and the residual or upper class (more than $50).

The poverty line of $4 a day is equivalent in 2012 to the urban/rural weighted national income poverty level defined officially as food-based poverty ($3.99 a day) by the National Council for Evaluation of Social Development Policy in Mexico (CONEVAL), and it is close to the capabilitiesbased poverty ($4.8 a day). A household is considered food poor if its member’s income falls below the lowest income necessary to afford a minimum basket of food. On the other hand, it is considered to be in capabilities-based poverty if its members cannot afford their basic expenses on food, health and education. The objective population for the _Oportunidades_ and PAL programs, for instance, is comprised by individuals in food-based poverty, so that the use of the international standard of $4 a day is a good proxy for the analysis of both programs’ coverage. There is a third, higher official standard that identifies as asset-based poor those individuals who cannot cover their expenses of food, health, education, dressing, home and public transportation. Its value is equivalent to US$7.8 a day, falling into the vulnerable segment.

# **Social Programs Largely Cover the Poor but Barely Reach the Vulnerable**

The 2010 Module on Social Programs identifies at least 15 types of cash transfers (by destination of resources) that can be grouped into scholarships, purchase of food, non-contributory pensions, and training and incentives transfers aimed at starting up productive projects. Figure 5 shows the incidence and average monthly amount of such transfers across socioeconomic groups: While coverage among the poor population is the highest, only about 17 percent of the vulnerable population receives such transfers (almost 22 percent of those in extreme vulnerability, and almost 15 percent of those in moderate vulnerability). Yet, the vulnerable group has the second highest incidence of cash transfers of all sorts (Figure 6). For those groups in the middle and upper classes, 19