Objective: To assess the effect of an unconditional cash transfer (CT) implemented as part of an emergency response to food insecurity during a declared state of emergency. Design: Pre-post intervention observational study involving two rounds of data collection, i.e. baseline (April 2012) and final survey (September 2012), on the same cohort of 'poor' and 'very poor' households enrolled by Save the Children in an unconditional CT programme. Setting: Aguié district, Maradi, Niger. Subjects: Households with a non-acutely malnourished child aged 6-36 months (n 412). Results: The study showed that the living standards of 'poor' and 'very poor' households improved, as indicated by a reduction in poverty-related indicators and an improvement in household food security. Anthropometric outcomes for children aged 6-36 months improved significantly, despite a decline in child health and women's well-being and autonomy. Risk factors for becoming acutely malnourished post-intervention were being from a very poor household at baseline, starting the lean season with low weight-for-height Z-score (WHZ < −1) and the presence of co-morbidity. Conclusions:The results of the study are consistent with the published evidence regarding the general impact of CT and suggest it is plausible that giving cash during an emergency can help safeguard living standards of the very poor and poor. While improvements in childhood nutrition status were seen it is not possible to attribute these to the CT programme. However, knowledge of the risk factors for acute malnutrition in a particular setting can be used to influence the design of future CT interventions for which a controlled trial would be recommended if feasible.

Unconditional cash transfers (UCTs) are used as a humanitarian intervention to prevent acute malnutrition, despite a lack of evidence about their effectiveness. In Niger, UCT and supplementary feeding are given during the June–September “lean season,” although admissions of malnourished children to feeding programmes may rise from March/April. We hypothesised that earlier initiation of the UCT would reduce the prevalence of global acute malnutrition (GAM) in children 6–59 months old in beneficiary households and at population level. We conducted a 2‐armed cluster‐randomised controlled trial in which the poorest households received either the standard UCT (4 transfers between June and September) or a modified UCT (6 transfers from April); both providing 130,000 FCFA/£144 in total. Eligible individuals (pregnant and lactating women and children 6–<24 months old) in beneficiary households in both arms also received supplementary food between June and September. We collected data in March/April and October/November 2015. The modified UCT plus 4 months supplementary feeding did not reduce the prevalence of GAM compared with the standard UCT plus 4 months supplementary feeding (adjusted odds ratios 1.09 (95% CI [0.77, 1.55], p = 0.630) and 0.93 (95% CI [0.58, 1.49], p = 0.759) among beneficiaries and the population, respectively). More beneficiaries receiving the modified UCT plus supplementary feeding reported adequate food access in April and May (p < 0.001) but there was no difference in endline food security between arms. In both arms and samples, the baseline prevalence of GAM remained elevated at endline (p > 0.05), despite improved food security (p < 0.05), possibly driven by increased fever/malaria in children (p < 0.001). Nonfood related drivers of malnutrition, such as disease, may limit the effectiveness of UCTs plus supplementary feeding to prevent malnutrition in this context. Caution is required in applying the findings of this study to periods of severe food insecurity.