In 2007 PAM was designed (only implicitly) for the elderly poor, using geographical targeting, e.g. elderly in rural villages of up to 2,500 inhabitants, where contributory pensions are extremely limited.<sup>7</sup> In 2008, changes were made to indicate that while priority was still given to the rural villages of up to 2,500 inhabitants, the program could extend its coverage to other villages of up to 10,000 inhabitants and, if budget allowed, the program could expand to villages of up to 20,000 inhabitants prioritizing those villages with higher marginality. In 2009, the program expanded its coverage to localities of up to 30,000 inhabitants. As we will see and as part of the important reform of 2013, the program’s coverage was extended to the national level.

Regarding the definition of PAM’s target population, it was until 2012 that the program included explicitly the exclusion of adults that received contributory pensions or retirement payments. Since 2014, the program modified its operating rules to allow people with a contributory pension to receive the program if their contributory pension is equal to or less than $1,092 pesos per month. This contributory pension threshold is equivalent to 31.5% of the average current per capita income of 2014.

From its initial implementation to date, the Operating Rules of PAM have clearly stated that the program cannot be combined with the elderly’s Component of PROSPERA or any other federal program “similar” to PAM. According to ENIGH 2014, only about 8.4% of PAM beneficiaries are also members of a household that is a beneficiary of PROSPERA. However, even though there are multiple state-level social pension programs that coexist with the federal social pension program PAM, the Government of Mexico does not have an explicit policy on the eligibility of the elderly to receive more than one social pension program from different government levels.<sup>8</sup> The average PAM benefit level from 2007 to 2014 was around 15% of the average monthly current per capita income of 2014. From 2007 to 2012, the benefit level of PAM was maintained at $500 pesos per beneficiary per month. In 2013, the benefit level was revised and increased to $525 pesos per beneficiary per month, and in 2014, the benefit changed to $580 pesos per beneficiary per month which is the current benefit level. In 2010, the program added a lump-sum payment of $1,000 pesos to be paid to another beneficiary of the program chosen by each beneficiary as their representative when they die.<sup>9</sup> Finally, regarding the program’s objective, in 2008 the program included in its specific objectives to support the personal development of the elderly and their incorporation to the family and community life through actions of promotion and social participation. In 2011, the program included in its objectives to ameliorate the deterioration of the elderly’s mental and physical health. It is worth noting that it was only until 2015, that the program’s objective was changed to explicitly include that

> 7In 2010, only 8.5% of the population 65 years old or older living in rural villages had a contributory pension, and less than 5% of elderly women did.

> 8One of the main reasons why we argue this is the case, is that there is a lack of evidence about the most effective and efficient policy choice for the interaction of federal and state level programs. Even though, the same could be argued for the interaction between PAM and the PROSPERA Elderly Component, the operation rules of both programs clearly establish that they cannot be combined. The lack of empirical evidence can partially be attributed to the limited data from federal and state-level governments on potential and actual beneficiaries. SEDESOL is currently developing the Integrated Social Information System (SIS), which may allow further research to soon be conducted in order to gauge what is the most effective and efficient policy choice for different government level programs coordination.

> 9Currently, the benefit level is not indexed to inflation. Thus, it has decreased in real terms during periods when its nominal level has remained constant.

9