The International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) is an international grant-making NGO promoting evidence-informed development policies and programmes. We are the global leader in funding, producing and synthesising high-quality evidence of what works, how, why and at what cost. We believe that better and policy-relevant evidence will make development more effective and improve people's lives.
3ie impact evaluations3ie-supported impact evaluations assess the difference a development intervention has made to social and economic outcomes. 3ie is committed to funding rigorous evaluations that include a theory-based design, use the most appropriate mix of methods to capture outcomes and are useful in complex development contexts.
About this report
SummaryLimited availability of skilled providers, particularly in rural areas, is thought to be an important constraint to increasing rates of use of maternal and child health services in low-and middle-income countries. There are, however, few well-identified studies of the relationship between the supply of skilled workers and outcomes. In this project, we studied the effects of a government program in Nigeria that sought to alleviate supply-side constraints by deploying skilled midwives to primary health facilities in rural communities, to provide round-the-clock access to skilled care.We evaluate the impact of the Midwives Service Scheme (MSS), a government program introduced in 2009 to increase access to skilled care in underserved rural areas in Nigeria. At rollout, the MSS deployed nearly 2,500 midwives to 652 primary health care centers across 36 states. To evaluate the impact of the program, we surveyed 7,104 women with a birth within the preceding five years in 386 communities across 12 states. The intervention group consisted of communities that participated in the initial rollout; the comparison group consisted of communities that would receive the program approximately three years later. To understand implementation challenges and contextualize the quantitative results, we carried out a nested qualitative study in three states, consisting of in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with policymakers, providers, childbearing women, and community stakeholder groups.Overall, we found that the program's effects were smaller than anticipated. The main effect was a 7.3-percentage-point increase in antenatal care use in program clinics (about 12 percent relative to baseline levels) and a 5-percentage-point increase in overall use of antenatal care (6 percent relative to baseline levels) within the first year of the program. We found suggestive but not conclusive evidence of a small increase in skilled birth attendance, but this was confined to the south, where there were fewer challenges with midwife retention. We did not find any significant improvements in postnatal visits or child immunizations. Given this, it is not surprising that we did not find any evidence of improvements in maternal and child health.Our data allow us to shed some light on why ...