Cash transfer as one of the main tools to mitigate poverty, increase access to service and if conditional in long term change behavior, has been and will always be part of debates on Social policy. As experiences have shown the impact of it has been different in different countries this due to different factors. But what sparks my interest in this article is freedom of choice that Shanta suggest. Giving cash to citizens is giving them freedom to chose. Giving them freedom to chose will naturally nurture the skill of doing smarter choices. But "cynicism" that money will be diverted to other non priority expenditures kills the essence of empowerment and debilitate the capacity of citizens to make choices. For whatever good or bad reason, government feel safe to have more control on programming and delivering what thinks citizens should have. To prove wrong this "cynicism" and build evidence based facts to support cash transfer as positive and right based approach, I suggest that cash transfer shouldn't remain a stand alone process. Monitoring of impact of cash transfer in community level might be a good tool to understand how cash is been spend by a family, how much has improved its economical condition, nutrition intake, life quality and so forth. Education, promotion, training, parenting guidance could be some of community programme which can help citizens to improve their knowledge, education, and increase capacities in better decision making and better citizenship.