Cash Transfer Program, Household Demographics And Household Asset Holding: A Case Of Inua Jamii In Tharaka North Sub-County, Tharaka Nithi County Kenya.

Cash Transfer Program, Household Demographics and Household Asset Holding: A Case of Inua Jamii in Tharaka North Sub-County, Tharaka Nithi County Kenya

Jeremiah Murithi Ngoci, Maureen Ndagara, Justo Simiyu

Tharaka University, Kenya

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.908000167

Received: 24 July 2025; Accepted: 30 July 2025; Published: 02 September 2025

ABSTRACT

This study sought to determine the Impact of Cash Transfer Program on Beneficiary’s Household Asset Holding moderated by Household Demographics: A case of Inua Jamii in Tharaka North Sub-County, Tharaka Nithi County, Kenya. Its objective was to establish the impact of Inua Jamii cash transfer program on beneficiary’s household asset holding and to find out the moderating effect of dependency ratio on the relationship between Inua Jamii cash transfer program and beneficiary’s household asset holding in Tharaka North Sub-County, Tharaka Nithi County, Kenya. The study targeted a population of 562 households out of which a sample of 351 households were considered. Stratified simple random sampling procedure was used. Descriptive research design was employed and primary data was used. Structured questionnaires were used to collect primary data. Descriptive statistics was used in analysis while general ordered probit regression was used to measure the degree of association between independent variable and dependent variable. Results of independent variable constructs; consistency of payment, amount given and accessibility of funds on Household Asset Holding was significant at 0.05 level hence rejecting the null hypothesis. Results showed a unit increase in consistency of payment, amount predictability and accessibility of funds would lead to an increase of (0.144), (0.267) and (0.239) on household asset holding respectively. The moderator’s p-value was 0.000<0.05 concluding that dependency ratio significantly moderates the impact of Inua Jamii Cash Transfer Program on Beneficiary’s Household Asset Holding.

Keywords: Beneficiaries, Cash Transfer, Household assets holding, Household economic welfare.

INTRODUCTION

Household Asset Holding is pivotal to economic growth since it enables a household to take part in production sector and also provide agricultural law materials hence triggering growth of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in a country. Taylor and Francis (2022) Household Asset Holding helps households to effectively support growth of GDP in a country. Therefore, Household Asset Holding is directly proportional to any country’s economic growth.

Cash Transfer refers to conditional and non-conditional transfer payments made to vulnerable eligible persons in order to achieve set objectives. Cash Transfer Programs (CTP) are common in the world. There is a link between cash transfer and household asset holding. Oliveira et al. (2023) in the study to determine the effect of cash transfer programs on child health and family economic outcomes in Canada, found that cash transfer positively impacted family economic outcome. The study also found little contribution of cash transfer on education. Cahyadi et al. (2018) conducted a study on cumulative impacts of conditional cash transfer programs: Experimental evidence from Indonesia. The study was experimental for it involved beneficiaries and a control group using baseline survey. The study also used stratified simple random sampling method. The study was conducted 2 years after its inception and repeated 6 years after its inception. The study used regression model and the results showed that the program boosted health and education acquisition but no statistically detectable impact on land ownership, asset acquisition and investment. Results of the revealed study differed with results of a similar study by Rubio-Codina (2012) that founded a positive effect of cash transfer program on assets acquisition. This study did not use experimental design and it studied a cash transfer program that had been in existence for more than 10 years.

Premand et al. (2019) conducted a research on Poor Households’ Productive Investments of Cash Transfers: Quasi-experimental Evidence from Niger. The study was conducted 18 months after completion of the program. The study focused on cash transfers that were given in installments and not lump sum. It combined difference-in-difference with matching on baseline observables to estimate the impact of cash transfer program on asset holding. Results showed that cash transfer boosted asset holding only when there is accumulation of the cash received through savings. This study as well dealt with cash transfer given in installment. Further, the study used assets as measures of beneficiary’s household welfare.

Winters et al. (2019) in the thirst to determine the impacts of cash transfer on household and individual level productivity in sub-Saharan Africa, found that cash transfer improved ownership of agricultural assets in many countries.

Commins (2021) conducted a study on cash Transfers: A lifeline for Children and Economies in Sub-Saharan Africa. The study used randomized controlled trial and found that beyond benefits of cash transfer to children, there is improvement in household productivity, savings and investment on productive assets such as livestock and farming equipment’s but not on land or houses. This study as well looked at asset holding as a measure of wealth. The study was conducted in different sub-Saharan countries and focused at cash transfer for children.

Further, Omayio (2022) undertook a study on impact of Inua Jamii cash transfer program on financial sustainability of the beneficiaries in Machakos County Kenya. The study found that the program improved financial sustainability, asset holding and reduction in debts.

Johannes et al. (2018) conducted a study on the long – term impact of unconditional cash transfers: Experimental evidence from Kenya. The study covered beneficiaries who received initial transfer of Kenya Shillings (Kes) .1200 and eight monthly installments of Kes.2800 and others that received a lump-sum amount of Kes.24, 000. The study was conducted three years after its inception using randomized controlled trial and founded that beneficiaries with lump-sum cash transfer held more assets than those receiving monthly cash transfer. The study determined that Cash Transfer Program slightly contributed to asset holding. The finding attached Cash Transfer Design and the amount given to the degree in which cash transfer contribute to asset holding. The study is related in this study in that they both use asset holding as a measure of household economic welfare. This Study focused on Inua Jamii Cash Transfer Program that has been in existence for longer period and that gives Kes.2000 bi-monthly which is relatively low and without a lump-sum transfer.

Syanda (2017) conducted a study on Influence of cash transfer program on social economic status in Kenya a case of persons living with disabilities in Kitui Central Sub-County, Kitui County. The study was conducted in 4 towns within Kitui Central sub-county selected randomly. The study used descriptive survey research design and found that cash transfer program contributed positively towards economic status of the beneficiaries and their households through consumption and small agricultural assets. This study as well used descriptive statistics and random sampling. This study was conducted in rural area and it included the elderly cash transfer and orphans and vulnerable children cash transfer that were not considered in the revealed literature.

Inua Jamii Cash Transfer Program is an instrument of social protection implemented in Kenya by the Kenyan government to help uplift livelihoods of the poor and vulnerable citizens (Republic of Kenya, 2022). program considers the vulnerable to be the elderly, orphans, hunger stricken and persons living with severe disabilities (Matata et al., 2022). Inua Jamii Cash Transfer Program shelters Older Persons Cash Transfer Program (OPCT), Orphans and Vulnerable Children Cash Transfer (OVCT), Persons with Severe Disability Cash Transfer (PWSD-CT) and Hunger Safety Net Cash Transfer Program (HSNP) (KiPPRA, 2019). These Cash Transfer Programs were piloted at different times; Orphan and Vulnerable Children Cash Transfer (OVCT) was piloted in 2004 with only 500 households in Garissa, Nairobi and Kwale Districts, Older Persons Cash Transfer Program (OPCT) started in 2007 HSNP started in 2009 while Persons with Severe Disability Cash Transfer (PWSD-CT) started in 2010 (KiPPRA, 2019).

Unfortunately, some eligible members of the society are left out of Inua Jamii Cash Transfer Program (Chirchir and Tran, 2019). Despite the fact that every beneficiary should receive two thousand shillings per month payable bi-monthly, consistency has not been achieved (Chirchir and Tran, 2019). Payments are done by only 4 banks in Kenya. These are Kenya Commercial Bank (KCB), Co-operative Bank (Co-op), Equity Bank or Post Bank (Republic of Kenya 2022). This makes accessibility a challenge in areas where there are no branches or agents of the contracted banks.

Beneficiaries of Inua Jamii Cash Transfer Program stands at 78% for Older Persons Cash Transfer Program (OPCT), 3% Persons with Severe Disability Cash Transfer (PWSD-CT) and 12% Orphan and Vulnerable Children Cash Transfer (OVCT) where the total number of beneficiaries is 1.2 million people in Kenya (KiPPRA, 2019). The Government of Kenya has cumulatively spent Kes. 151, 620,937,587 on Inua Jamii Cash Transfer Program since its inception in 2004 (Republic of Kenya, 2021). Motivation to extend the program, increase the number of beneficiaries and increase its allocation should come from the impacts of the program to the beneficiaries’ household economic welfare. Household economic welfare improvement can be seen if a household is able to afford daily consumption expenditure, holds assets and affords basic social services.

The main objective of Inua Jamii Cash Transfer Program was to offer unvarying and predictable cash to the targeted groups as well as to enrich capacities of beneficiaries and their households to improve livelihoods which is key towards achievement of Kenya vision 2030 (Githinji and Mungai, 2024). To the contrary, many beneficiaries of Inua Jamii Cash Transfer Program are still in poverty and face economic hardships (Mohamed et al., 2021). This research concentrated with Older Persons Cash Transfer Program, Orphans and Vulnerable Children Cash Transfer Program and People with Severe Disability Cash Transfer Program and give no attention to Hunger Safety Net Program because it is not a nationwide program (Republic of Kenya, 2021).This study therefore, wished to establish the impact of Inua Jamii Cash Transfer Program on beneficiaries’ household asset holding in Tharaka North Sub-County Tharaka Nithi County.

Demographics are statistics used to describe features of a given population. The study used household demographic of dependency ratio as moderating variables of the relationship between cash transfer program and household asset holding. Cash transfers are normally directed to vulnerable individuals and families in the society. Therefore, dependency ratio of the benefiting family can influence the level to which the cash transfer program affects household asset holding. Escamilla (2019) conducted a study in Northern Brazil on effects of family income and conditional cash transfers on household food insecurity using dependency ratio as a moderator. The study found that increase in dependency ratio reduces impact of cash transfer in a household.

Daidone et al. (2019) conducted a research on the household and individual level productive impacts of cash transfer programs in sub-saharan Africa. The study used in-depth interviews and purposive sampling method. The study findings indicated that the lower the dependency ratio the greater the impact of cash transfer and the higher the dependency ratio the less the impact of cash transfer.

In addition, Haushofer and Shapiro (2018) sought to find out the impact of unconditional cash transfers: experimental evidence from Kenya using randomized control trial. The study findings depicted improvement in asset holding, food security and consumption by beneficiaries compared to non-beneficiaries. Nevertheless, the study cited dependency ratio and family relations as limiters of the impact of cash transfer. Further, Schreyer et al. (2017) conducted a study on individual and household welfare in Kenya using consumption and asset holding as measures of welfare. The study used dependency ratio as a moderator and the findings showed that increase in dependency ratio reduces welfare but not in the same proportion because of economies of scale. The study first scaled household consumption expenditure and expenditure on assets by the number of household members.

Statement of the Problem

Household asset holding enables a household to effectively take part in production, trade and consumption which are key promoters of any country’s economic growth. Inua Jamii cash transfer program was introduced to reduce poverty and uplift livelihood of the targeted households. It is expected that beneficiaries of Inua Jamii cash transfer program have experienced improvement in their household assets acquisition and wealth accumulation. Unfortunately, some beneficiaries are still suffering in poverty. Few related studies on impact of cash transfer programs have been conducted in Kenya for instance Omayio (2022), Musa (2022) and Syanda (2017). However, these studies looked at the impact of older persons cash transfer program and people with severe disability cash transfer program on food consumption and financial sustainability. Previous studies have not looked at Inua Jamii cash transfer program holistically, but have singled out individual programs under Inua Jamii hence reducing the scope. Further, the studies have always concentrated on food consumption and financial sustainability and assuming household asset holding. Finally, previous studies ignored the moderating effect of dependency ratio. This study assessed the impacts of Inua Jamii cash transfer program on beneficiaries’ household asset holding in Tharaka North Sub-County, Tharaka Nithi County, Kenya using household demographics as a moderating variable.

Objectives of the Study

1. The objective of the study was to establish the impact of Inua Jamii cash transfer program on beneficiary’s household asset holding in Tharaka North Sub-County, Tharaka Nithi County, Kenya.
2. To establish the moderating effect of dependency ratio on the relationship between Inua Jamii cash transfer program and beneficiary’s household economic welfare in Tharaka North Sub-County, Tharaka Nithi County, Kenya.

Hypotheses

H0₁;  Inua Jamii cash transfer program has no statistically significant impact on beneficiary’s household asset holding in Tharaka North Sub-County, Tharaka Nithi County Kenya.

H0₂; Dependency ratio does not significantly moderate the relationship between Inua Jamii cash transfer program and beneficiary’s household economic welfare in Tharaka North Sub-County, Tharaka Nithi County Kenya.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This study was conducted in Tharaka North Sub-County. The sub-County has its headquarters at Gatunga market and its coordinates are 0.0999^oS, 38.0116^oE. The location is chosen because its poverty level is high and many beneficiaries of Inua Jamii Cash Transfer Program are still poor (Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, 2022). Descriptive research design was applied. This study targeted beneficiaries of Inua Jamii Cash Transfer Program that were in the program by 2023 because any beneficiary who was in the program by 2023 must have been recruited at least in 2017 when the last indexing was done which is long enough for the impact of the program to be visible. The study covers three categories under Inua Jamii Cash Transfer Program. These categories are Older Persons Cash Transfer (OPCT), Persons with Severe Disability Cash Transfer (PWSD-CT) and Orphan and Vulnerable Children Cash Transfer (OVCT). The population of Older Persons Cash Transfer Program (OPCT), Orphan and Vulnerable Children Cash Transfer (OVCT) and Persons with Severe Disability Cash Transfer (PWSD-CT) is 336, 180 and 46 beneficiaries respectively. This makes an aggregate total population for the three categories to be 562 beneficiaries.

The study employed stratified random sampling techniques to come up with a sample. The study used three strata that is older persons, persons with severe disability plus orphans and vulnerable children and then did a random sampling in each strata. Sample size of each strata was calculated using Yamane formula. Study sample size was; 183 beneficiaries of Older Persons Cash Transfer Program (OPCT), 126 beneficiaries of Orphans and Vulnerable Children Cash Transfer Program (OVCT) and 42 beneficiaries of Persons Living with Severe Disability Cash Transfer Program (PWSD-CT). Therefore, total sample size for the study was 351.This study used quantitative data. Primary data was collected from beneficiaries and or their primary caregivers using structured paper questionnaires.

Questionnaires were administered to all the 351 beneficiaries and or their primary caregivers out of which 330 beneficiaries responded. Informed consent was obtained from all participants through signing of consent forms before filing the questionnaire. Confidentiality and anonymity were maintained. The study used Stata Version 18 statistical software in analysis. The type of data used is cross-sectional. General ordered probit regression model was used. General Ordered Probit Regression was employed due to the ordinal nature of the dependent variable. The model was selected over ordinal logit due to improved fit as evidenced by lower Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) and significant likelihood ratio tests.

This model accounts for violation of the parallel lines assumption common in traditional ordinal logit models. Inferential statistics was employed. Hypothesis was tested at 0.05 level of significance. Ordinary regression analysis test was not carried out but analysis carried out post estimation tests to establish suitability of the model.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The study assessed the Impacts of Cash Transfer Program on Household Asset Holding as moderated by Household Demographics. A case of Inua Jumii in Tharaka North Sub-County, Tharaka Nithi County, Kenya. The constructs of Inua Jamii Cash Transfer Program were consistency of payment, amount given and accessibility of funds. Results of response rate is given in Table 1

Table 1: Response Rate

The study achieved a cumulative of 94% response rate (330/351), indicating adequate participation from all targeted respondents. This complete data collection ensured that the results accurately reflected the population under study, reducing the risk of systematic errors associated with missing responses. Orphans and Vulnerable Children Cash Transfer had the highest response rate of 96.8% seconded by Persons with Severe Disabilities Cash Transfer with 95.2%. Older Persons Cash Transfer had the lowest response rate of 91.8%. Kimathi, (2023) while addressing rewards and employee job satisfaction among health care workers in level five public hospitals in upper eastern, Kenya got a response rate of 92.7%.

A reliability test was conducted using Cronbach’s Alpha to assess the internal consistency of the study variables based on pilot study data. The null hypothesis Ho_1: The data shall not be considered reliable if Cronbach’s Alpha value< 0.7. Results of reliability is displayed in Table 2

Table 2: Reliability Test (Cronbach Alpha)

Results in Table 2 rejected the null hypothesis and accepted the alternative that data was reliable across all constructs. The cash transfer program variable achieved a Cronbach’s Alpha of (α =.717) across three items, suggesting good internal consistency. The household asset holding variable demonstrated a reliability score of 0.70 with nine items. These results suggest that the measurement tool for the study was reliable for capturing the intended constructs. Demographic data looked at program type, gender, age and level of education and presented in Table 3.

Table 3: Descriptive Statistics for Program Type, Gender, Age and Level of Education.

 Results in Table 3 revealed that nearly half the sample (48.5%) participated in Older Persons Cash Transfer (OPCT) program, followed by Orphans and Vulnerable Children Cash Transfer (OVCT; 34.5%) and Persons with Severe Disabilities Transfer (PWSD-CT; 16.9%). These differences conforms to difference in sample sizes of respective strata.  The sample showed balanced gender representation (male = 49.7%, female = 50.3%) with age distribution skewing toward older adults (45.4% aged 70+ years). Skewedness towards the aged shows that Older Persons Cash Transfer (OPCT) has more beneficiaries covered under Inua Jamii Cash Transfer Program. Educational attainment was predominantly at the primary level (65.8%), with decreasing proportions at secondary (24.5%), college (5.5%), and university (4.2%) levels. The results shows that education acquisition for these vulnerable groups supported through cash transfer is low and also the elderly who are the majority in the program have low levels of education.

Descriptive Statistics for Household Size

The study sought to determine the number of household members. Results were presented in Table 4

Table 4: Household Size

Results presented in Table 4 show that 39.4% of the respondent’s households have (7-9) members, 32.4% have (4-6) members, 22.1% have above 9 members and 6% have (1-3) members. These results indicate that the community has large families which means either there is little use of family planning among the vulnerable or there is a culture of extended families to enhance sharing of resources.

Descriptive Statistics for Cash Transfer Programs

Table 5: Descriptive Statistics for Cash Transfer Programs

Statistics for Cash Transfer Programs in Table 5 reveals moderate predictability and accessibility of Cash Transfer Program (CTP) funds. While beneficiaries reported some ability to predict collection locations (Mean = 3.01>2.5, Standard Deviation = 1.271). They expressed uncertainty about disbursement consistency (Mean = 2.15<2.5, Standard Deviation = 1.17) and amount predictability (Mean = 2.46<2.5, Standard Deviation = 1.10). The low standard deviations (all>1.09) indicate substantial variations.

Descriptive statistics for Household Asset Holding

The study presented descriptive statistics for three household asset holding

Household Asset Holding

Descriptive analyses were conducted for Household Asset Holding and results presented in Table 6

Table 6: Descriptive Statistics for Household Asset Holding

Descriptive statistics for Household Asset Holding in Table 6 showed how beneficiaries invested Cash Transfer Program (CTP) funds in productive assets and income-generating activities. The most common investments were purchasing agricultural tools (Mean = 3.19>2.5, Standard Deviation = 1.30), leasing farming land (Mean = 3.05>2.5, Standard Deviation = 1.43), and buying livestock (Mean = 3.01>2.5, Standard Deviation = 1.43). Business-related uses were also frequent where (Mean = 2.95>2.5, Standard Deviation = 1.43) and expanding businesses (Mean = 2.90>2.5, Standard Deviation = 1.48) slightly higher than housing-related expenditures (building: Mean = 2.65>, Standard Deviation = 1.32; renovation: Mean = 2.21<2.5, Standard Deviation = 1.22). The pattern suggests Cash Transfer Program Funds were primarily directed toward agricultural production and small enterprise development, with relatively less allocation to housing improvements. Moderate standard deviations (all >1.20) indicate substantial variation in how recipients prioritized these investment categories.

General Ordered Probit Regression Analysis

The study sought to determine the association between independent variable (Cash Transfer Program) and dependent variable household asset holding brings about utility. The study categorizes utility as; (average utility) for coefficients greater than coefficient of cut1 but less than or equal to coefficient of cut2, (high utility) for coefficients greater than coefficient of cut2 but less or equal to coefficient of cut3 and (very high utility) for coefficients greater than coefficient of cut3 but less than or equal to coefficient of cut4 in all the 3 regression analysis.

General Ordered Probit Regression Results for Impacts of Cash Transfer Program on Household Asset Holding

The objective was to establish the impact of Inua Jamii cash transfer program on beneficiary’s household asset holding in Tharaka North Sub-County, Tharaka Nithi County, Kenya. From this objective, the null hypothesis Ho₂: Inua Jamii cash transfer program has no statistically significant impact on beneficiary’s household asset holding in Tharaka North Sub-County, Tharaka Nithi County Kenya was formulated. To test this hypothesis, general ordered probit regression was conducted and results presented in Table 7.

Table 7: Regression Results for Impacts of Cash Transfer Program on Household Asset Holding

*** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1

The regression results in Table 7 provide insights into the relationship between household asset holding and various factors related to cash transfer programs (CTP). Household asset holding can be categorized into either very low, low, moderate, high, or very high. Results show consistency of payment is significant at (0.01) < (0.05) and its coefficient is (0.144). This signifies that a unit increase in consistency of payment leads to 0.144 units increase in household asset holding. So, households with more consistent payments are likely to hold more assets. Amount predictability is also significant at (0.01) < (0.05) and it has a coefficient of (0.267) meaning that an increase in predictability of the amount of income or funds by one unit results to increase in household asset holding by 0.267 units. The more predictable their income is, the more the assets they tend to accumulate.

Ease of Access to Funds is statistically significant at (0.01) < (0.05). It has a coefficient of (0.239) meaning that for every unit increase in ease of access to funds, the household asset holding increases by 0.239 units. Therefore, all three predictors (Consistency of Payment, Amount Predictability, and Ease of Access to Funds) are significant and have a positive relationship with Household Asset Holding, meaning that higher values in any of these factors are associated with higher household asset holdings hence rejecting the null hypothesis and concluding that cash transfer program has significant impact on household asset holding. Consistency of payment, amount predictability and ease of access to funds coefficients 0.144, 0.267 and 0.239 respectively are all greater than -0.152 but less than 1.061 hence falling in average utility category. This implies that although an increase in consistency of payment, amount predictability and ease of access to funds leads to an increase in household asset holding, the level of satisfaction is average so an increase in these factors only does not promise optimal satisfaction.

These findings of the study that cash transfer program has a positive impact on household asset holding coincides with opportunity theory of poverty developed by Merton in 1957. The theory explain that people becomes poor because they lack opportunity to access resources and that given an opportunity to access resources could lead to reduction of poverty and bring about accumulation of wealth. Further, conclusion that cash transfer program boosts household asset holding matches India’s MGNREGA, where cash-for-work boosted productive assets by 22% (Ravi & Engler, 2015). It also agrees with Ethiopia’s PSNP, which raised microenterprise activity (Hoddinott et al., 2014).

Moderating Effect of Dependency Ratio on the Impact of Inua Jamii Cash Transfer Program on Household Asset Holding

A test was also carried out to establish how dependency ratio moderate the impact of Inua Jamii CTP on household asset holding. The null hypothesis H0_1: Dependency ratio does not significantly moderate the relationship between Inua Jamii cash transfer program and beneficiary’s household economic welfare in Tharaka North Sub-County, Tharaka Nithi County Kenya. The Two-way chi-square test showed p-value (p=0.000<0.05) rejecting the null hypothesis and concluding that larger households experience reduced impact of the program.

Post Estimation Test on General Ordered Probit Regression Results for Impacts of Cash Transfer Program on Household Asset Holding

Table 8 Estimated strata

Results in Table 8 show 0 singleton strata. This means that there is no strata represented by only one observation. This is a positive outcome, as singleton strata can lead to unreliable estimates. There are also 0 certainty strata which indicates that there are no categories where the outcome can be predicted with absolute certainty based on the model and that there is a proof of randomness. This is favorable, because it suggests variability in the data. The total number of strata is 3 indicating that the three distinct groups supported under Inua Jamii are captured in the analysis.

Table 9: Estimated covariance

Each variable in Table 9 has an associated coefficient and standard error. The coefficients represent the estimated effect of each variable on the outcome, while the standard errors indicate the uncertainty around these estimates. Consistency of payment coefficient (0.1435131) and covariance of 27.064 indicates moderate variability relative to the coefficient, suggesting that the estimate is reasonably stable but has some uncertainty. Amount predictability coefficient (0.2665547) and covariance of 22.1297 indicates lower variability, suggesting a more stable estimate. Accessibility of funds coefficient (0.239381) and covariance of 21.6184 also indicates a stable estimate. The three variance results (27.064, 22.1297 and 21.6184) are between 20% and 30% which is considered moderate stability (Jogler, 2023).

Table 10 Variance covariance matrix of coefficients of general ordered probit model for household asset holding.

The off-diagonal elements represent the covariance between pairs of coefficients. Positive values indicate that as one coefficient increases, the other tends to increase as well, while negative values indicate an inverse relationship. The covariance between consistency of payment and household asset holding is 0.00282936, suggesting a positive relationship. This means an increase in consistency of payment leads to an increase in household asset holding. The covariance between amount predictability and household asset holding is -0.00008252, indicating a slight negative relationship. This means that there is some level of amount predictability that could lead to reduction in household asset holding. Covariance between accessibility of funds and household asset holding is -0.00010181 which shows a slight inverse relationship. This means that an increase of accessibility of funds to some level could lead to a decrease in household asset holding. The cut points show varying covariance with the coefficients, which are important for understanding how the thresholds relate to the estimated effects of the independent variables.

Overall, the findings from the estimated strata, estimated covariance, and estimated variance covariance commands provide a comprehensive view of the model’s structure, the stability of the estimates, and the relationships between the coefficients. The absence of singleton and certainty strata, along with the coefficients’ covariance indicate a well-structured model with sufficient variability and stability in the estimates.

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMEDATIONS

Results showed that consistency of Payment, amount predictability and accessibility of funds are significant at (0.01) < (0.05). This rejected the null hypothesis that Inua Jamii cash transfer program has no statistically significant impact on beneficiary’s household asset holding in Tharaka North Sub-County, Tharaka Nithi County Kenya. Their coefficients are (0.144). (0.267) and (0.239). Meaning that household asset holding increases by (0.144). (0.267) and (0.239) due to a unit increase in consistency of Payment, amount predictability and accessibility of funds respectively. These results suggest asset-building occurs in discernible phases, requiring sustained program reliability to enable households to progress beyond initial, modest asset tiers. Payment consistency, amount predictability, and fund accessibility systematically improve household asset holding. These features exhibit outcome-specific dominance, with consistency critical for assets. Results reveal that asset holding require sustained program stability.

Policy-wise, Inua Jamii’s CTP successes in basic welfare align with Bastagli et al. (2016), but gaps in entrepreneurship call for integrated approaches, like Ethiopia’s mix of cash and training. Kenya’s Social Protection Secretariat (2022) advocates tiered payments for household size, which could amplify impacts. Overall, Inua Jamii reflects both the potential and limitations of unconditional rural transfers, necessitating context-driven adaptations to maximize financial and non-financial assets accumulation. The program should prioritize consistency and predictability of payments, expand banking infrastructure or use mobile money for accessibility, consider tiered disbursements based on household size and engage stakeholders including the Ministry of Labour, county governments, financial institutions, and NGOs for integrated support like asset training programs.

We recommend digitization of disbursements to improve payment consistency, scale payment amounts relative to household size, implement asset tracking systems, conduct longitudinal follow-up studies, and include complementary programs like financial literacy.

REFERENCES

1. Abdille, I., & Mbataru, P. (2019). Cash Transfer and the Economic Well-Being of Persons with Severe Disability in Wajir County, Kenya. International Journal of Current Aspects, 3, 135–153.
2. Alghaib, O. (2018). Impact of the Palestinian National Cash Transfer Programme on Persons with Disabilities’ Independent Living.
3. Annan, J., Blattman, C., & Horton, R. (2006). The State of Youth and Youth Protection in Northern Uganda Findings from the Survey for War Affected Youth a Report for UNICEF Uganda.
4. Asenahabi, B. (2019). Basics of research design: A guide to selecting appropriate research design. International Journal of Contemporary Applied Researches, 6(5), 76–89.
5. Bastagli, F., Hagen-zanker, J., Harman, L., Barca, V., Sturge, G., & Schmidt, T. (2018). The Impact of Cash Transfers: A Review of the Evidence from Low- and Middle-income Countries. Journal of Social Policy, 48(03), 569–594.
6. Daidone, S., Davis, B., Handa, S., & Winters, P. (2019). The Household and Individual‐Level Productive Impacts of Cash Transfer Programs in Sub‐Saharan Africa. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 101(5), 1401–1431.
7. Fuller, E., Zaffar, N., Cohen, E., Pentland, M., Siddiqi, A., Vandermorris, A., Van Den Heuvel, M., Birken, S., Guttmann, A., & de Oliveira, C. (2022). Cash transfer programs and child health and family economic outcomes: a systematic review. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 113(3), 433–445.
8. Githinji, L., & Mungai, D. A. M. W. (2024). Project Cost Management and Sustainability of Inua Jamii Cash Transfer Community Development Program in Kiambu County, Kenya. International Journal of Social Sciences Management and Entrepreneurship (IJSSME), 8(1).
9. Haushofer, J., & Shapiro, J. (2016). The Short-term Impact of Unconditional Cash Transfers to the Poor: Experimental Evidence from Kenya. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 131(4), 1973–2042.
10. Jorgenson, D. W., & Schreyer, P. (2017). Measuring Individual Economic Well-Being and Social Welfare within the Framework of the System of National Accounts. Review of Income and Wealth, 63, S460–S477.
11. Kamwara, D. kimathi, Justo Masinde Simiyu, & Dr. Andrew Muguna. (2023). the Role of Direct Financial Rewards on Employee Job Satisfaction among Healthcare Workers in Public Hospitals in Upper Eastern Region, Kenya. Journal of Environmental Sustainability Advancement Research, 9(1), 42–56. https://journals.chuka.ac.ke/index.php/jesar/article/view/129
12. Mohamed, T. S., Porisky, A., & Muthui, P. M. (2021). The Politics of Social Protection in Kenya: State Capacity, Political Competition and Social Pension Registration in Marsabit County. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3782388
13. Musa. (2022). Effect of Elderly Persons’ Unconditional Cash Transfer on Welfare of Older People in Chuka Sub county, Tharaka Nithi County, Kenya.
14. Palmeira, A., Costa, R., & Escamilla, R. (2019). Effects of family income and conditional cash transfers on household food insecurity: evidence from a longitudinal study in Northeast Brazil. Public Health Nutrition, 23(4), 756–767.
15. Ravi, S., & Engler, M. (2015). Workfare as an Effective Way to Fight Poverty: The Case of India’s NREGS. World Development, 67, 57–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.09.029.
16. Suiter, M., & Taylor, K. (2016). Resources for economic educators from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. The Journal of Economic Education, 47(1), 71–75.
17. Suresh, V., & Ruchi, T. (2023). Challenges and Opportunities at Utility Companies amid Pandemics. African Journal of Business and Management (AJBUMA), 8(1), 155–164.
18. Syanda, M. (2017). Influence of Cash Transfer Program on Socio-economic Status of Beneficiaries in Kenya: a Case of Persons Living with Disabilities in Kitui Central Sub-county in Kitui County. Erepository.uonbi.ac.ke.
19. Taylor, & Francis. (2021). Gender Difference in Household’s Expenditure on Higher Education: Evidence from Mongoria.
20. Zanker, J., Bastagli, F., Harman, L., Barca, V., Sturge, G., & Schmidt, T. (2016). Briefing Shaping policy for development Understanding the impact of cash transfers: the evidence.