A/HRC/11/9 page 19 74. Extreme poverty affects children not only in the immediate present, but also in the longer term, having a cumulative impact on their evolving capacities. Children are particularly dependent on social services to provide the conditions they need to grow without suffering from poverty. Children require, in particular, access to health, social welfare and educational services.19 Support to children may also be deeply affected by economic deprivation and other changes that significantly reduce family capabilities to invest in their development. 75. Many CTPs identify children as a vulnerable group. These CTPs channel the benefits to heads of households with the expectation that alleviating economic constraints will be a direct (in the case of conditional cash transfer) or indirect (for the unconditional) incentive for improving access to health, education and nutrition for children. Programmes may also focus on discouraging child labour, and on raising gender equality by supporting investment in the human capital of girls and the bargaining power of women within the household. 76. Evidence suggests that cash transfers are an effective tool in improving some indicators related to child poverty. It suggests that various models of cash transfers targeting children can have broadly similar effects on poverty reduction.20 According to studies, the regularity and reliability of payments allows families to start planning again and investing additional income in generating activities, or in the education of their children.21 77. Even if children are frequently indicated as the target population of CTPs, they are not usually seen as the subjects of rights, and the evaluation of CTPs is very often not adequately child-focused. The improvement of net income to a household with children may have very limited effects if the social services offered to these same children remain inadequate to meet their basic needs. 78. Data compiled by the World Bank indicates that conditional CTPs had positive effects on school enrolment and attendance, and that they occasionally helped to reduce the gender gap in school enrolment.22 Available research says little, however, about whether students actually learn more. Furthermore there is little evidence about the modest effects in school participation, progression and attainment of additional years of schooling.23 Experts express particular fears 19 UNICEF, Innocenti Social Monitor 2006, “Understanding child poverty in South-Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of independent States”, UNICEF (2006). 20 Armando Barrientos and Jocelyn DeJong, “Reducing child poverty with cash transfers: a sure thing?” In Development Policy Review, 2006, vol. 24, No. 5, pp. 537-552. 21 Rolf Künnermann, Ralf Leonhard, “A human rights view of social cash transfers for achieving the Millennium Development Goals”, Brot für die Welt, Evangelischer Entwicklungsdienst, 2008, p. 10. 22 23 Ariel Fiszbein, Norber Schady, op. cit. note 18, chap. V. Fernando Reimers, Carol DeShano da Silva and Ernesto Trevino, “Where is the ‘education’ in conditional cash transfers in education?”, UNESCO, 2006, p. 50.