Of the commonly used methods fordirecting transfers to the poor, there is little consensusabout which is best. Policymakers need to know how effectivedifferent targeting mechanisms are, how the effectivenessdiffers by method and type of program, and the implications.Targeting success can be partially captured by one outcomeindicator, the share of benefits going to the bottom 40 percent of the population. For example, if a program delivers60 per cent of its benefits to this group, the outcomeindicator is (60 divided by 40 =) 1.5. The higher theindicator - i.e., the greater the percentage of benefitsgoing to the poor relative to their population share - themore progressive is the targeting. The authors calculatetheir indicator for 85 of the programs in the database. Thefull study provides information on the use of targetingtechniques, summary statistics on comparative programperformance, and regression analysis to examine thecorrelations between methods and outcomes. The study drewbroad conclusions, subject to the limitations describedbeforehand, suggesting that "Targeting can work, but itdoesn't always. There is no clearly preferred methodfor all types of programs, or all country contexts. A weakranking of outcomes achieved by different mechanisms waspossible. And, implementation matters tremendously tooutcomes". Targeting performance improved with countryincome levels, the extent to which governments are heldaccountable for their actions, and the degree of inequality.