Conditional cash transfer (CCT) programs have been implemented in many Latin American countries as strategies to reduce poverty and increase human capital. Rigorous impact evaluations often accompanying these interventions demonstrate their important potential to improve social welfare among poor families. The health-related conditionalities - usually taking children for preventive health visits - have led to better nutritional status of children in Nicaragua, fewer incidences of childhood illness in Mexico and improved vaccination rates in Honduras.
A nascent CCT program in Peru called Juntos is beginning to demonstrate results. This new paper (.pdf) by Nicola Jones, Rosana Vargas and Eliana Villar documents some initial findings and reports similar health outcomes to those seen in other CCT programs:
There has been an impressive increase in health-seeking behavior since Juntos was initiated. This is reflected in the 30% increase in children under 1 year receiving vaccinations in 2006 as compared with 2005, and the 200% increase in health clinic visits for children under 5 years and much higher rate of children aged 5-14 years visiting health clinics for check-ups rather than only in the case of illness. Pre- and post-natal visits have increased by 65% and there has been a reported reduction in home births, which is seen as a priority given the very high levels of maternal mortality in the area.
This is great news and encouraging for policymakers and program designers seeking new ways to get better health results. However, fine-tuning a CCT program to achieve certain health aims requires good information. Evidence on health outputs and outcomes like those described above is a start, but more in-depth analysis of health-related impact could increase the effectiveness of future CCT programs. Can CCTs impact the quality of health care in addition to improving utilization rates? What level of incentive will encourage the desired health behavior? Are the improvements in use of services leading to the expected declines in morbidity and mortality?
Disclaimer
CGD blog posts reflect the views of the authors, drawing on prior research and experience in their areas of expertise. CGD is a nonpartisan, independent organization and does not take institutional positions.
Related Posts
There was bad news in research published yesterday in the New England Journal of Medicine about the effectiveness of what had seemed to be the best prospect for a malaria vaccine, known by the unsexy name of 'RTS,S'.
The study of the phase III trials finds that in babies (aged 6-12 weeks) the vaccine only reduces malaria by less than a third. This is disappointing because this is less than half the effectiveness that had been suggested by the phase II clinical trials.
UNITAID: maybe you’ve heard of it, or maybe not. Launched in 2006, UNITAID has lived in the shadow of its older and bigger global-health siblings (the Global Fund, GAVI, and PEPFAR, to name a few). Perhaps due to its relative obscurity and late entry to a crowded global-health field, UNITAID has proactively worked to differentiate itself through a focus on commodities, market shaping, novel funding sources, and innovation. To wit, UNITAID’s stated mission is “to contribute to scale up access to treatment for HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis for the people in developing countries by leveraging price reductions of quality drugs and diagnostics, which currently are unaffordable for most developing countries, and to accelerate the pace at which they are made available.”
Commentary Menu