They argue that social protection programmes are more likely to have nutrition impacts when targeted at the poorest and most vulnerable and accompanied by other interventions that target health, sanitation and maternal education. They find that unconditional transfers can also be effective and that conditionality appears to be much less important than other issues, such as the age and sex of children in the household and access to health care. Finally, better quality of service delivery, in addition to better targeting, would improve the nutritional outcomes of cash transfer programmes.