Research Article Evaluation of a Community Development Program in Nepal: A Propensity Score Analysis Ijin Hong 1 and Kyung-hoo Roh 2 Abstract Objective: This study aims to evaluate the impact of a community development program meant to improve living standards of poor rural families through income generating activities (IGAs) based on conditional cash transfers (CCTs) in Doti, Nepal. Method: We use cross-sectional field data from a sample of 392 families representative of the village development committees of Pokhari, Ladagada, and Gajari. After running a propensity score analysis to increase comparability between the treatment and comparison groups, we compare mean scores on a series of chosen outcome variables via t-test analyses. Results: Results suggest that, although improvements in family income and living standards are felt subjectively, crop production might have worsened as a result of IGAs, suggesting the possibility of a trade-off and of long-term effects. Discussion and Implications: This article has implications for research and practice in community development programs and data collection and evaluation of such programs. Keywords program evaluation, propensity score analysis, quasi-experiment, community development This study examines the impact of the Saemaul Zero Hunger Communities (SZHC) in community development program which took place in the district of Doti, in the Far-Western region of Nepal from the second half of 2012–2015. The pro- gram’s main goal was to ameliorate poverty problems at the village level (in the form of chronic hunger, lack of infrastruc- ture, and high prevalence of diseases such as HIV), by enga- ging families into income generating activities (IGAs) based on conditional cash transfers (CCTs). Improvements on living conditions were expected over the short term (families’ need for food and for a decent level of livelihood) and the long term (strengthening livelihood assets and improving the efficiency of existing resources; Centre for Economic Development and Administration [CEDA], 2013). Since a sample of 392 families representative of the chosen areas has participated to surveys in 2013, after 1 year of the intervention, we focused on the short- term effects of the program only. These observational data have been statistically manipulated through propensity score analy- sis to assess whether the SZHC program had made a difference in improving levels of income and livelihood in the treatment group relative to the comparison group. This study builds from a growing literature of intervention research, designed to examine a program’s purposeful impact on a specific target, at different levels (individual, family, group, community, etc.), in the presence of several interven- tion agents and contingencies (Fraser & Galinsky, 2010). In particular, community development programs involve “[ ... ] collective social action toward solidarity and agency focused on a particular locality” (Green, 2016, p. 607) and aim for community change as “[ ... ] the expected outcome of com- munity development organizations (CDOs) programs and projects designed to improve the housing, employment, and health outcomes for people living in poor communities” (Dor- ius, 2011, p. 267). Given the variety of programs that have been evaluated, ranging from interpersonal and psychological to psychosocial and community-based approaches in a variety of multidisci- plinary sectors (Thyer, 2015), it is difficult to locate an over- arching theory for evaluating all these programs. Instead, it is often the case that social and economic programs in developing countries tend not to pay attention to the real impact they have on their target populations, focusing instead on priorities set by donor agencies (such as nongovernment organizations [NGOs]; Bamberger, 2000), and CDOs might not comprehend the out- comes of their own interventions (Dorius, 2011). A shortage of theory-based evaluation and impact evaluation studies is 1 Institute for Welfare State Research, Yonsei University, Seoul, Republic of Korea 2 Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, Global Human Development Program, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA Corresponding Author: Ijin Hong, Institute for Welfare State Research, Yonsei University, Building No. 117, Room A119, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, 03722 Seoul, Republic of Korea. Email: hong.ijin@gmail.com Research on Social Work Practice 1-10 ª The Author(s) 2018 Reprints and permission: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1049731518755010 journals.sagepub.com/home/rsw