Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Smart Buys Lists rank development interventions by cost-effectiveness for a specific outcome (e.g., child mortality, learning levels). They show which programs typically deliver the most impact per dollar based on rigorous evidence.

Unlike other research methods, Smart Buys start with the outcome you want to improve, then compare all relevant interventions—grouping them as "Best Buys," "Good Buys," etc.

Key principle: No intervention is inherently cost-effective—only relative to alternatives for the same outcome.

How are they different from other research?

• Cost-benefit analysis monetizes all benefits; Smart Buys compare within an outcome

• Literature reviews summarize themes; Smart Buys rank by cost-effectiveness

• Systematic reviews prioritize exhaustive coverage; Smart Buys prioritize timely guidance

• Meta-analyses harmonize data for one intervention; Smart Buys compare across many

Smart Buys Lists serve different users:

For donors/funders:

• Get a quick evidence snapshot without reading academic papers

• Reference specific categories in RFPs (e.g., "proposals should prioritize Best or Good Buys")

• Evaluate proposals: Does this intervention have strong cost-effectiveness evidence?

For implementers:

• Understand what's in scope for RFPs

• Know when to include impact evaluation in your proposal (e.g., for "Promising Buys" with limited evidence)

• Justify why an "Unpromising Buy" would work in your context

For researchers:

• Identify where new evidence would be most valuable (e.g., meta-analyses on Best Buys to understand what drives impact)

Smart Buys Lists rely on impact evaluations that meet specific quality standards. These standards vary by list, but typically include:

Study methodology:

• Most rigorous: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) only

• More inclusive: RCTs plus quasi-experimental studies with credible counterfactuals

• Supplemental: Qualitative research to understand why interventions work (not for cost-effectiveness calculations)

Publication status:

• Conservative approach: Only peer-reviewed journal articles (slower, but less likely to change)

• Pragmatic approach: Published papers plus publicly available working papers (faster, captures recent evidence)

• Rarely: Grey literature like internal reports (harder to verify quality)

Recency:

• Most lists only include studies from 2000 or later (older contexts may not reflect current realities)

• Cut-off dates depend on team capacity and how much the context has changed

Trust in Smart Buys Lists should depend on transparency and appropriate use.

Transparency indicators:

• Clear methodology: All decisions documented (outcome definition, inclusion criteria, costing approach)

• Expert review: Advisory boards of researchers, implementers, and end-users validate choices

• Evidence quality tags: Studies marked by methodology type so you can assess robustness

• Honest caveats: Upfront about limitations, data gaps, and where evidence is thin

No. Smart Buys show what typically works globally based on evidence, not what must be implemented in every setting.

Why context matters:

• Capacity: Implementation requires adequate staff, systems, and infrastructure

• Political feasibility: Local stakeholder support and institutional buy-in vary

• Population Match: Target groups differ across settings (income level, demographics, needs)

• Prerequisites: Enabling conditions may not exist everywhere

Implementation support: The Smart Buys Alliance offers implementation consultancies to help agency units integrate Smart Buys findings into their specific contexts—assessing feasibility, adapting approaches, and planning context-appropriate rollout.

Bottom line: "Best Buy" indicates strong evidence of cost-effectiveness across multiple contexts, not a universal prescription. Smart Buys identify promising options; implementation requires contextual judgment and often adaptation.

The Implementation Consultancy connects agency units with expert research organizations to translate Smart Buys evidence into context-specific programs.

Who provides it: Leading organizations co-hosting the Smart Buys Alliance: J-PAL, CEGA, the Global Poverty Research Lab, and CGD.

What it offers: 

• Rapid evidence reviews (2-3 weeks) or in-depth cost-effectiveness analyses (~6 months)

• Contextualization guidance: where and how to implement top interventions effectively

• Support integrating cost-effectiveness evidence into internal processes like procurement, RFP design, and proposal evaluation

• Learning agendas identifying research gaps for promising interventions