From the article:

"So is it fair to say 'most social programmes don’t work?'

I think this is a little ambiguous and potentially misleading. Individual projects mostly don’t work, but whole areas often do have a positive impact. So, if you pick an intervention at random, then on average your impact will be positive, because there’s a small but important chance of you picking one of the good ones."

Can we fix this to the proper, non clickbait title of "What fraction of social programmes don’t work?"