their earnings on household expenses than men. Most of these studies have focused on adult women, specifically married women with children. It is not known whether the same holds true for young women, who may have other spending priorities, have less experience in managing households, and have younger children. Given the large increases in employment and earnings documented above, the EPAG program serves as a good setting to examine these types of spillovers.

The evaluation included detailed interviews with the heads of the household in which EPAG participants were residing. The purpose of the household questionnaires was precisely to examine the hypothesis that investing in young girls would benefit her household. A secondary hypothesis was that EPAG participation may change gender-related attitudes in the participants’ households. Household data was collected for 1601 out of the 1622 individuals who were interviewed at both baseline and midline; this same sample of 1601 individuals serves as the basis for both the individual and household level analysis in this paper.

The estimated impact of the program on a broad range of household outcomes is summarized in Tables 8 and 9. Panel A of Table 8 examines the household size. The household and family dynamics in Liberia, as in other African settings, can be complex, with families often sending their children to live with relatives who are more able to provide for their schooling and basic needs. Young parents, in particular, often leave home to migrate for work, leaving their children back home with relatives until they are able to establish themselves and send for their children. If the economic success of the EPAG participant allowed her to bring non-resident family members into her household (including but not limited to her own children), then overall household size may have been expected to increase as a result of the program. This does not appear to have happened, at least in the short term. The results in Table 8 show that overall household size was not affected by the program. It is possible that the increase in earnings due to EPAG was too small, or too short-lived, to have induced the kinds of migrations described above.

Other measures of household well-being, including food security and asset ownership, reflect shorterterm investments that might be influenced by the economic success of EPAG participants. Panel B of Table 8 shows the impact of EPAG on a broad range of food security measures. Household food security was measured using two methods: dietary frequency of high-value protein-rich foods, and two subjective questions on food shortages adapted from USAID’s FANTA questions (Coates 2007). On two of the four of the dietary frequency questions and on both of the food shortage questions, the treatment groups’ dietary situation improved as a result of the EPAG program. Weekly consumption of fish and meat rose significantly by four percentage points in treatment households (from a high baseline value of 84% for meat/chicken and 90% for fish), and weekly consumption of dairy and eggs did not change significantly. Household heads report worrying less about insufficiency of household food supplies, and the reported incidence of household members going to bed hungry also decreased in treatment households relative to control. Combined, the impacts across these indicators portray a situation of improved food security and dietary composition, consistent with the hypothesis that the increased earnings of the EPAG participants were spent in part on food.

20