Skip main navigation

What would you invest in to help children thrive?

A charitable foundation wants to invest $100 million to improve child health in your country. You can choose how best to spend that money
© London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine 2019

Imagine you’re the health minister of a large country in sub-Saharan Africa. You have a child under 5 mortality rate of 88/1000.

You also have data that rates of malnutrition (stunting, wasting) are high and that many children are doing poorly at school compared to neighbouring countries.

A charitable foundation wants to invest $100 million over 5 years to improve child health in your country. You can choose how best to spend that money.

Who would you target?

  • Any age groups in particular?
  • Boys? Girls? Both?
  • Any specific subgroups?

Which condition(s) would you focus on?

  • A single health problem or a larger number of related problems?
  • Why does this matter to your population?

What intervention(s) would you spend this money on?

  • Would you focus on innovative tools and technologies or strengthening the implementation of current tools?
  • How solid is the evidence-base for your chosen interventions?
  • What makes you believe that the project will be scalable and sustainable after the initial 5 year funding is spent?

How would you know whether your programme has been a success?

  • Which outcomes would you measure and why?
  • How would you measure them? Which methods and approaches would you use?

Pros and cons

To help with your discussions, consider the pros and cons of:

  • A highly targeted approach treating those already with a particular condition vs a broader approach focusing on those who are at-risk but not currently affected
  • ‘Vertical programmes’ — very focused on one particular problem and often using dedicated programme staff and infrastructure vs ‘Horizontal programmes’ — using and building on the existing health system, often with a secondary aim of better supporting that health system
  • Tech-heavy interventions (e.g. photo-diagnosis of malnutrition using a smartphone) vs low-tech approaches (e.g. use of paper strips, to identify malnutrition)
© London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine 2019
This article is from the free online

Improving the Health of Women, Children and Adolescents: from Evidence to Action

Created by
FutureLearn - Learning For Life

Our purpose is to transform access to education.

We offer a diverse selection of courses from leading universities and cultural institutions from around the world. These are delivered one step at a time, and are accessible on mobile, tablet and desktop, so you can fit learning around your life.

We believe learning should be an enjoyable, social experience, so our courses offer the opportunity to discuss what you’re learning with others as you go, helping you make fresh discoveries and form new ideas.
You can unlock new opportunities with unlimited access to hundreds of online short courses for a year by subscribing to our Unlimited package. Build your knowledge with top universities and organisations.

Learn more about how FutureLearn is transforming access to education