PEP Research Programs 

Among the several peerless features of PEP is the breadth of analytical perspectives, tools and techniques in which PEP resource persons specialize, and that granted researchers can choose to apply and be trained in via PEP support - also referred to as the "PEP Toolbox".

Below is a brief description of the four main categories of methodologies applied in the context of PEP research. The categorization has led to the identification of four distinct (although tightly linked) research programs, coordinated by different teams of international experts, and under which PEP-supported projects are usually regrouped and supervised. See also the related links for CBMS, MPIA, PIERI, PMMA

CBMS

Community-based Monitoring Systems
Developing and implementing local poverty monitoring systems to track a variety of welfare indicators at the household level, collecting data that will provide detailed measurement of poverty in a multidimensional sense.

Often implemented in collaboration with local government units, community-based monitoring systems help to address existing data gaps in national statistical databases for assessing the extent of multidimensional poverty and identifying the poor.

The resulting “poverty maps” or profiles help in guiding use of local budgets and targeting beneficiaries of pro-poor intervention programs, while empowering local communities to participate in the process. The censuses are also used to monitor the poverty impacts of such programs, or that of economic shocks and crises, at the household level. Find out more about the CBMS program...

PIERI

Policy Impact Evaluation Research Initiative
Providing rigorous assessments of the impacts - both expected benefits and unintended effects - of programs and policies, using either experimental or non-experimental approaches.

Randomized controlled trials, for instance, (from the experimental approach) enable researchers to directly construct a valid “counterfactual” of what program participants would have experienced had they not participated. This counterfactual is then compared to outcomes actually experienced by participants in the program or policy in question.

These assessments provide sound empirical evidence to inform program managers, donors, policy-makers and civil society on program effectiveness and ways to improve the design of future programs. Find out more about the PIERI program...