Resources
Research & Publications
We do not commission our own evaluations and we do not hold sign-off on the findings. What follows includes the paper about the programmes we closed.
Peer-reviewed
Published papers
Each entry states the finding in plain language, because a title alone tells a non-specialist reader nothing about what was learned.
-
Randomised trial Open access 2026
Community health worker home visits and under-five mortality: a cluster-randomised trial across six districts
Okonjo A, Mwangi J, Adeyemi G, et al. · Journal of Global Primary Care
What it found
Door-to-door screening by trained, paid community health workers reduced under-five deaths by 31% over four years against matched control districts.
-
Economic evaluation Open access 2025
Cost per outcome in integrated versus vertical primary health programmes
Whitcombe H, Menon R, Bergström S. · Programme Economics Quarterly
What it found
Integrated delivery cost 18% more to establish and 34% less per outcome after year four, driven almost entirely by reduced repeat presentation.
-
Cohort study Open access 2025
Retention of clinical staff following handover to national health systems
Bekele T, Diallo F, Kimani J. · International Journal of Health Workforce
What it found
Staff retention two years post-handover was 79% where posts were nationally salaried from the outset, and 41% where they were not.
-
Controlled study Open access 2024
Psychological first aid delivered by non-specialists in acute displacement
Delacroix H, Tanaka Y. · Humanitarian Health Review
What it found
Non-specialist delivery matched specialist outcomes at three months on two of three measures, and was available roughly nine weeks sooner.
-
Field evaluation 2024
Solar-direct-drive cold chain performance in off-grid clinics: a 36-month field evaluation
Mwangi J, Raghunathan P. · Journal of Field Immunisation
What it found
Temperature excursions fell by 62% against generator-dependent refrigeration, with maintenance cost lower after month fourteen.
-
Retrospective analysis Open access 2023
Why three programmes were closed: a retrospective analysis of programme failure
Bergström S, Okonjo A. · Global Programme Practice Quarterly
What it found
All three closures shared one feature: the programme was designed around available funding rather than an assessed local need.
Open data
The underlying data
Published so our conclusions can be checked rather than taken on trust. Patient data is anonymised at source and never leaves the country it was collected in; what is published here is aggregated beyond re-identification.
-
Community health worker trial, anonymised
Household-level visit and outcome data across six districts, 2021–2025.
-
Clinic activity, monthly
Attendance, referral and stock-out counts for every clinic we operate.
-
Cost-per-outcome model
The spreadsheet behind the economic evaluation, with assumptions exposed.
We do not mark our own homework
Evaluations are carried out by independent academic partners who choose their own methods and publish their own conclusions. We see the findings when the journal does. Where a study has shown our work to be ineffective, that study is on this page.