evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Jordan Takaful — Algorithmic Cash Transfer Targeting for Vulnerable Households

Jordan · Amman · See the Jordan profile · See the Amman profile

Evidence: Observational / pre–post Top 83% 40/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

Jordan's National Aid Fund uses a 57-factor algorithm to target 250,000+ households under Takaful, World Bank co-designed. HRW (2023) and CHRGJ (2024) documented opaque eligibility, systematic exclusion of non-Jordanians, and no appeals mechanism.

250,000+ households
Households reached (by 2023)
57 factors
Eligibility factors used in algorithm (ongoing)
~24 %
Share of Jordan's population below poverty line targeted (as of reporting)
Jordan Takaful — Algorithmic Cash Transfer Targeting for Vulnerable Households

Details

Maturity
Established
Promoter
National Aid Fund of Jordan
Period
2019–present
Keywords
social protection, welfare, government

Context

Jordan's National Aid Fund (NAF), under the Ministry of Social Development, operates Takaful, a World Bank-co-designed cash transfer programme that uses an algorithmic eligibility system to identify and rank vulnerable households. Launched in 2019, the programme targets the approximately 24% of Jordan's population living below the poverty line. The algorithm evaluates households across 57 undisclosed factors, assessed at a single point in time, to assign eligibility scores that determine transfer amounts.

Results

The programme had reached over 250,000 households by 2023. Two independent assessments document significant governance failures. Human Rights Watch (July 2023) found the system excessively inflexible — unable to respond to dynamic poverty conditions — and systematically excluding Syrian refugees, Palestinians without Jordanian passports, migrant workers, and non-Jordanian family members of Jordanian women. The Center for Human Rights and Global Justice (February 2024) documented how the algorithm's full opacity — no factor weights or eligibility thresholds are publicly available — leaves affected households without meaningful grounds to challenge adverse decisions.

Conclusions

Takaful illustrates a recurring dilemma in AI-assisted welfare delivery: national-scale coverage breadth is achievable, but rigid point-in-time targeting combined with opaque criteria can entrench exclusion of particularly vulnerable populations. It underscores the importance of transparent factors, dynamic data updates, and accessible appeals mechanisms as design requirements — not afterthoughts — in welfare AI.

Implementation

Indicative cost
High (€500k–€5M) — National administrative system with World Bank technical co-design; no published unit or total cost figures.
Time to results
Long (> 3 years) — Launched 2019; reached 250,000+ households by 2023; still operating at national scale as of reporting.
Staffing & skills
National Aid Fund (NAF), under Jordan's Ministry of Social Development, operates Takaful with World Bank technical co-design support

Conditions for success

  • World Bank proxy-means-testing template provides an internationally replicated technical foundation
  • Full national rollout achieved and institutionally stable since 2019

Common failure modes

  • 57 eligibility factors and their weights are not published, and no appeals mechanism exists
  • Eligibility assessed at a single point in time with no dynamic updating, systematically excluding Syrian refugees, Palestinians without Jordanian passports, migrant workers and non-Jordanian family members of Jordanian women (HRW 2023, CHRGJ 2024)
  • Algorithm's opacity prevents external audit or meaningful challenge by affected households

Where it fits

Governance type
national ministry, World Bank-co-designed
Scale
national
Income level
lower-middle-income

Commonly funded by

National / regional programmes

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful