Intervention(s)
The intervention evaluates the demand for subsidies as a commitment device and the relative effectiveness of subsidies versus cash transfers in supporting educational investment. The study takes place in 30 government-run primary schools in Jinja District, Uganda, with a sample of 2,000 pupils entering Primary 5 and Primary 7.
At baseline, caregivers complete an incentive-compatible multiple price list (MPL) in which they make repeated choices between a direct subsidy (UGX 35,000, approximately equal to Term 1 school dues) and varying amounts of cash. For a randomly selected subset of households, one choice from the MPL is implemented to ensure truthful preference elicitation.
Following preference elicitation, pupils are randomly assigned to one of four groups:
(a) Subsidy (Treatment 1): A direct payment to the school covering Term 1 dues.
(b) Cash at Term 1 (Treatment 2): An unconditional transfer to the caregiver of equivalent value, disbursed at the start of Term 1.
(c) Cash Today (Treatment 3): An unconditional transfer of equivalent value to the caregiver, disbursed immediately at the time of the survey.
(d) Control: No transfer.
This design is motivated by a pilot conducted in January 2025 with approximately 450 pupils across 9 schools in Jinja District. In the pilot, subsidies were offered directly to schools, and caregiver preferences between subsidies and cash were elicited through an MPL exercise. While the pilot documented strong stated demand for subsidies, it did not experimentally compare subsidies to cash. The larger trial therefore expands on the pilot by directly randomizing between subsidies, cash at fee time, and immediate cash, allowing for causal comparisons across financial instruments as well as measurement of the underlying demand for commitment.