Verifying beneficiaries of a direct benefit scheme

What is shaping government

Government departments, PSUs and public programmes need independent evidence on citizen needs, service delivery and programme outcomes, often gathered across large and diverse geographies.

• Programmes are expected to show measurable outcomes
• Citizen feedback is shaping service delivery
• Large field surveys need rigorous quality control

A central government programme, working in Six states. Client identity is withheld to protect confidentiality.

Organisation

A central government programme

Sector

Government

Team engaged

Market Research

Services

Government research, Offline data collection (CATI & CAPI), Data processing & analytics

The programme needed to check whether benefits reached the right people. Reports of missed payments and ineligible beneficiaries had raised questions about the scheme. Officials were concerned that some benefits might not reach eligible households because of outdated records.

• Deliver on the brief: verifying beneficiaries of a direct benefit scheme.
• Understand the views, needs and behaviour of beneficiaries.
• Produce results that can be compared across groups and locations.
• Give the client evidence it can act on within 10 weeks.

The work focused on 20,000 beneficiaries.

• beneficiaries20,000

Audiences we typically reach in government

Citizens and householdsProgramme beneficiariesFrontline workersLocal officialsBusinesses using public services

Coverage: Six states. Market: India.

• India

A structured quantitative design, so results could be compared across groups, locations and time.

1. 1Brief
2. 2Telephone and field verification
3. 3Insight

We verified a random sample of beneficiaries by phone and in person, checking receipt and eligibility. The sample was drawn randomly from beneficiary lists in each state, and interviewers verified identity, eligibility and receipt using structured questions, with field visits for those unreachable by phone. Interviews were conducted in local languages and verified against payment records.

Government researchOffline data collection (CATI & CAPI)Data processing & analytics

beneficiaries

20,000

• Respondents were selected across Six states using quotas set in advance for each location and respondent type, so no single area or group dominated.
• Telephone contacts were dialled from verified lists, with quotas tracked live by the field team.

• Trained local-language interviewers conducted interviews in person on tablets (CAPI), with time and location recorded for every interview.
• Telephone interviews were run from our CATI centre, with calls monitored for quality.

• Back-checks on a share of completed interviews
• Time and location checks on field interviews
• Supervisor accompaniment in the field
• Live call monitoring and recording review
• Call-back verification
• Logic and range checks on the final data
• Work carried out under our ISO 20252 quality procedures

• Interactive dashboard for ongoing tracking

• Most payments reached eligible beneficiaries, but some had outdated bank details.

Random verification gave credible evidence.

• Build on the core insight: random verification gave credible evidence.
• Focus effort where the evidence was strongest: most payments reached eligible beneficiaries, but some had outdated bank details.
• Re-measure after the changes to confirm the effect.

• The programme updated records.
• The programme also simplified the process for updating bank details through local offices.

What changed in the business as a result of the work. Impact is described qualitatively.

• Insight report and management presentation
• Cleaned data file and data tables
• Interactive dashboard
• Evaluation findings with programme recommendations

• Repeat the measure after changes are in place to track progress.
• A natural follow-on question: what do citizens think about a policy?