Group versus individual coaching for rural social protection programs: evidence from Uganda, Philippines, and Bangladesh

Abstract

Multifaceted social protection programs in low-income countries often include both capital grants and informational and behavioral support on the premise that households face simultaneous and multiple frictions. To tackle informational and behavioral constraints, programs typically deploy either individual or group coaching visits from field agents. The relative efficacy of individual versus group coaching could provide insights into the underlying mechanism through which information and behavioral support change household decisions. However, in three similar randomized evaluations in Uganda, the Philippines, and Bangladesh, we find no differences in efficacy. Given its 15–20% lower costs, group coaching is more cost-effective.