Perhaps I misread Todd's intent, but I thought the most important point he made in his recent post is that if we (read the "development community") care about reconstituting a meaningful development assistance capability in the US Government, the political argument is not going to be won on the basis of more / better evidence of its effectiveness (in a developmental sense). This particular sequel addressing the macro-micro debate is useful if we are concerned about how to make the most effective use of a given - in fact, rapidly shrinking - pool of resources. But I don't think that's the primary question we should be particularly concerned about now - and I don't think it's the main question Todd was pointing to in his post. Given where we are today, I would prefer to see us work together to rebuild the political constituency for a robust development assistance capability as part of US foreign policy. We need a compelling narrative that appeals to the American people and their representatives for why US support for development remains in the interests of the United States. I don't yet know what that argument is, but I am confident it doesn't require more RCTs.