IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1003746.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-effectiveness and economic returns of group-based parenting interventions to promote early childhood development: Results from a randomized controlled trial in rural Kenya

Author

Listed:
  • Italo Lopez Garcia
  • Uzaib Y Saya
  • Jill E Luoto

Abstract

Background: Early childhood development (ECD) programs can help address disadvantages for the 43% of children under 5 in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) experiencing compromised development. However, very few studies from LMIC settings include information on their program’s cost-effectiveness or potential returns to investment. We estimated the cost-effectiveness, benefit–cost ratios (BCRs), and returns on investment (ROIs) for 2 effective group-based delivery models of an ECD parenting intervention that utilized Kenya’s network of local community health volunteers (CHVs). Methods and findings: Between October 1 and November 12, 2018, 1,152 mothers with children aged 6 to 24 months were surveyed from 60 villages in rural western Kenya. After baseline, villages were randomly assigned to one of 3 intervention arms: a group-only delivery model with 16 fortnightly sessions, a mixed-delivery model combining 12 group sessions with 4 home visits, and a control group. At endline (August 5 to October 31, 2019), 1,070 children were retained and assessed for primary outcomes including cognitive and receptive language development (with the Bayley Scales of Infant Development, Third Edition) and socioemotional development (with the Wolke scale). Children in the 2 intervention arms showed better developmental outcomes than children in the control arm, although the group-only delivery model generally had larger effects on children. Total program costs included provider’s implementation costs collected during the intervention period using financial reports from the local nongovernmental organization (NGO) implementer, as well as societal costs such as opportunity costs to mothers and delivery agents. We combined program impacts with these total costs to estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), as well as BCRs and the program’s ROI for the government based on predictions of future lifetime wages and societal costs. Total costs per child were US$140 in the group-only arm and US$145 in the mixed-delivery arm. Because of higher intention-to-treat (ITT) impacts at marginally lower costs, the group-only model was the most cost-effective across all child outcomes. Focusing on child cognition in this arm, we estimated an ICER of a 0.37 standard deviation (SD) improvement in cognition per US$100 invested, a BCR of 15.5, and an ROI of 127%. A limitation of our study is that our estimated BCR and ROI necessarily make assumptions about the discount rate, income tax rates, and predictions of intervention impacts on future wages and schooling. We examine the sensitivity of our results to these assumptions. Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first economic evaluation of an effective ECD parenting intervention targeted to young children in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) and the first to adopt a societal perspective in calculating cost-effectiveness that accounts for opportunity costs to delivery agents and program participants. Our cost-effectiveness and benefit–cost estimates are higher than most of the limited number of prior studies from LMIC settings providing information about costs. Our results represent a strong case for scaling similar interventions in impoverished rural settings, and, under reasonable assumptions about the future, demonstrate that the private and social returns of such investments are likely to largely outweigh their costs. Trial registration: This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03548558, June 7, 2018. American Economic Association RCT Registry trial AEARCTR-0002913. Italo Lopez Garcia and colleagues conduct an economic evaluation of an effective parenting intervention to promote cognitive, receptive language, and socioemotional development among children under 3 years in Kenya.Why was this study done?: What did the researchers do and find?: What do these findings mean?:

Suggested Citation

  • Italo Lopez Garcia & Uzaib Y Saya & Jill E Luoto, 2021. "Cost-effectiveness and economic returns of group-based parenting interventions to promote early childhood development: Results from a randomized controlled trial in rural Kenya," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(9), pages 1-20, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1003746
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003746
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003746
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003746&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003746?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lopez Garcia, Italo & Luoto, Jill E. & Aboud, Frances E. & Fernald, Lia C.H., 2023. "Group Meetings and Boosters to Sustain Early Impacts on Child Development: Experimental Evidence from Kenya," IZA Discussion Papers 16392, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Blimpo, Moussa & Carneiro, Pedro & Jervis Ortiz, Pamela & Lahire, Nathalie & Pugatch, Todd, 2024. "Improving Parental Investments in Children: Experimental Evidence from The Gambia," IZA Discussion Papers 17133, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Zulfiqar A Bhutta & Kathryn M Yount & Quique Bassat & Caitlin E Moyer, 2021. "Sustainable Developmental Goals interrupted: Overcoming challenges to global child and adolescent health," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(9), pages 1-5, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1003746. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.