Subsidy Reinvestment and Empowerment Programme Maternal and Child Health Initiative Impact Evaluation (SURE-P MCH) 2014 - 2015, Midline Survey
Nigeria, 2014 - 2015
Pedro Rosa Dias, Marcos Vera-Hernández, Marcus Holmlund, Pamela Jervis Ortiz, Qiao Wang
Created on
December 06, 2017
Last modified
December 06, 2017
Page views
23451
Download
479
Documentation in PDF
Metadata
DDI/XML
JSON
Identification
Survey ID Number
NGA_2014_SUREPIE-ML_v01_M
Title
Subsidy Reinvestment and Empowerment Programme Maternal and Child Health Initiative Impact Evaluation (SURE-P MCH) 2014 - 2015, Midline Survey
Subtitle
Midline Survey
Country
| Name | Country code |
|---|---|
| Nigeria | NGA |
Series Information
The Maternal and Child Health (MCH) project of the Subsidy Reinvestment and Empowerment Programme (SURE-P) was set up by the Federal Government of Nigeria to reduce maternal and newborn morbidity and mortality inthe country. MCH initiative is a follow-up program to Midwives Service Scheme, implemented by the Nigeria National Primary Health Care Development Agency, that provides demand and supply side incentives, community monitoring, and increased human resources to improve the rates and quality of antenatal care and skilled birth attendance in Nigeria.
On the supply-side, SURE-P aims to recruit, train and deploy 5,400 midwives and 14,100 community health extension workers, as well as to upgrade essential infrastructures and guarantee the adequate provision of supplies and equipment to primary health centres between the end of 2012 and 2015. In addition SURE-P will hire and train a total of 38,700 village health workers, who are expected to establish the connection between the primary healthcare centres (PHC) and pregnant women in each village.
On the demand-side, SURE-P introduces a CCT, whereby all pregnant women will be given a total cash payout of 5,000 Naira (about USD 32), conditional on attending antenatal care, skilled birth attendance and postnatal care. Also, an information campaign aims to target all women of reproductive age to encourage them to register with their nearest PHC.
The rigorous impact evaluation was implemented to determine the causal impact of this programme. The IE comprised a quasi-experimental impact evaluation which aim was to evaluate the SURE-P package, and four experimental evaluations which evaluated the impact that distinct components had within the SURE-P package, such as:
- the effect of alternative incentives regimes to midwives on their retention rates
- the effect of conditional cash transfers on utilization of MCH services
- the effect of community monitoring of essential commodities on incidence of stock-out of supplies at the PHC
The baseline data collection was carried out in September - November 2013. The midline survey was implemented in December 2014 - February 2015, after SURE-P Phase I implementation. The final data collection took place from March 2016 to June 2016, after SURE-P Phase II implementation.
All three waves are available in the Microdata Library.
On the supply-side, SURE-P aims to recruit, train and deploy 5,400 midwives and 14,100 community health extension workers, as well as to upgrade essential infrastructures and guarantee the adequate provision of supplies and equipment to primary health centres between the end of 2012 and 2015. In addition SURE-P will hire and train a total of 38,700 village health workers, who are expected to establish the connection between the primary healthcare centres (PHC) and pregnant women in each village.
On the demand-side, SURE-P introduces a CCT, whereby all pregnant women will be given a total cash payout of 5,000 Naira (about USD 32), conditional on attending antenatal care, skilled birth attendance and postnatal care. Also, an information campaign aims to target all women of reproductive age to encourage them to register with their nearest PHC.
The rigorous impact evaluation was implemented to determine the causal impact of this programme. The IE comprised a quasi-experimental impact evaluation which aim was to evaluate the SURE-P package, and four experimental evaluations which evaluated the impact that distinct components had within the SURE-P package, such as:
- the effect of alternative incentives regimes to midwives on their retention rates
- the effect of conditional cash transfers on utilization of MCH services
- the effect of community monitoring of essential commodities on incidence of stock-out of supplies at the PHC
The baseline data collection was carried out in September - November 2013. The midline survey was implemented in December 2014 - February 2015, after SURE-P Phase I implementation. The final data collection took place from March 2016 to June 2016, after SURE-P Phase II implementation.
All three waves are available in the Microdata Library.
Abstract
The SURE-P MCH midline (second round) data collection was administered in 500 primary healthcare facilities participating in the first phase of the program and in their surrounding catchment areas, and 500 more primary healthcare facilities participating in the second phase of the program and in their surrounding catchment areas.
The midline survey had four modules:
- midwife;
- primary healthcare facility;
- ward development committee;
- household/individual.
The midline survey had four modules:
- midwife;
- primary healthcare facility;
- ward development committee;
- household/individual.
Kind of Data
Sample survey data [ssd]
Unit of Analysis
- Midwife
- Primary healthcare facility
- Ward Development Committee
- Women that have given birth in the three months preceding the survey
- Primary healthcare facility
- Ward Development Committee
- Women that have given birth in the three months preceding the survey
Version
Version Description
v01, edited, anonymized datasets
Scope
Notes
The scope of the study includes:
Midwife: (i) general information; (ii) post-secondary education; (iii) exposure to rural settings; (iv) job attributes preferences; (v) Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI); (vi) work conditions; (vii) family; (viii) altruism game; (ix) other revenues; (x) household assets, land, and animals; (xi) non-experimental measure of intrinsic motivation; (xii) time preferences game; (xiii) community relations and support; (xiv) prosocial scales; (xv) charitable donations; (xvi) midwifery courses preferences; (xvii) antenatal care (ANC); (xviii) opinions about work and family; (xix) incentives, locus of control and trust; (xx)contact information; (xxi) incentives videos; (xxii) post-contract*; (xxiii) social norm excise; (xxiv) risk preferences game.
Primary Health Care Facility: (i) general information; (ii) facility characteristics; (iii) administration and management; (iv) human resources; (v) organizational citizenship and behaviors; (vi) Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI); (vii) patient records; (viii) community outreach; (ix) health services; (x) user fees; (xi) national protocols; (xii) equipment; (xiii) drug storage and availability.
Ward Development Committee: (i) general information; (ii) access to basic services and community characteristics; (iii) social capital and community empowerment; (iv) external shocks; (v) direct observation.
Household/individual: (i) contact information; (ii) household roster; (iii) education; (iv) transfers and other income; (v) adverse events; (vi) household health services utilization and payment; (vii) antenatal care service utilization; (viii) labor and delivery; (ix) postpartum care and breastfeeding; (x) female adult expectations section a; (xi) maternal knowledge; (xii) Edinburg Postnatal Depression Scale; (xiii) female adult expectations section b; (xiv) delivery problems; (xv) exposure to media and mobile phone; (xvi) village leader and WDC; (xvii) dwelling characteristics and household amenities; (xviii) household assets; (xix) food and non-food consumption.
Midwife: (i) general information; (ii) post-secondary education; (iii) exposure to rural settings; (iv) job attributes preferences; (v) Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI); (vi) work conditions; (vii) family; (viii) altruism game; (ix) other revenues; (x) household assets, land, and animals; (xi) non-experimental measure of intrinsic motivation; (xii) time preferences game; (xiii) community relations and support; (xiv) prosocial scales; (xv) charitable donations; (xvi) midwifery courses preferences; (xvii) antenatal care (ANC); (xviii) opinions about work and family; (xix) incentives, locus of control and trust; (xx)contact information; (xxi) incentives videos; (xxii) post-contract*; (xxiii) social norm excise; (xxiv) risk preferences game.
Primary Health Care Facility: (i) general information; (ii) facility characteristics; (iii) administration and management; (iv) human resources; (v) organizational citizenship and behaviors; (vi) Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI); (vii) patient records; (viii) community outreach; (ix) health services; (x) user fees; (xi) national protocols; (xii) equipment; (xiii) drug storage and availability.
Ward Development Committee: (i) general information; (ii) access to basic services and community characteristics; (iii) social capital and community empowerment; (iv) external shocks; (v) direct observation.
Household/individual: (i) contact information; (ii) household roster; (iii) education; (iv) transfers and other income; (v) adverse events; (vi) household health services utilization and payment; (vii) antenatal care service utilization; (viii) labor and delivery; (ix) postpartum care and breastfeeding; (x) female adult expectations section a; (xi) maternal knowledge; (xii) Edinburg Postnatal Depression Scale; (xiii) female adult expectations section b; (xiv) delivery problems; (xv) exposure to media and mobile phone; (xvi) village leader and WDC; (xvii) dwelling characteristics and household amenities; (xviii) household assets; (xix) food and non-food consumption.
Coverage
Geographic Coverage
All 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory
Universe
Five hundred primary healthcare facilities participating in the first phase of the program, and 500 more primary healthcare facilities participating in the second phase of the program; 1,285 midwives enrolled the first phase (during 2013/14) in an experiment to test the effectiveness of different forms of incentives (monetary; non-monetary; combined) on midwife attrition and 2,180 midwives enrolled in the second phase; ward development committees in the catchment areas of all primary healthcare facilities included in the study; women that had given birth in the three months preceding the survey in the catchment areas of all primary healthcare facilities included in the study.
Producers and sponsors
Primary investigators
| Name | Affiliation |
|---|---|
| Pedro Rosa Dias | Imperial College London |
| Marcos Vera-Hernández | University College London |
| Marcus Holmlund | World Bank |
| Pamela Jervis Ortiz | University College London |
| Qiao Wang | World Bank |
Producers
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Emily Crawford | World Bank | Field Coordinator |
| Felipe Dunsch | World Bank | Coordinator |
Funding Agency/Sponsor
| Name | Abbreviation |
|---|---|
| Bill and Melinda Gates | Gates Foundation |
| World Bank Strategic Impact Evaluation Fund | SIEF |
Other Identifications/Acknowledgments
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Ugo Okoli | SURE-P MCH | Project Director |
| Mohammed Sidi Ali | SURE-P MCH | Deputy Project Director |
| Adetokunbo Oshin | SURE-P MCH | Deputy Project Director |
| Jamila Bello-Malabu | SURE-P MCH | Team member |
| Chukwuebuka Ejeckam | SURE-P MCH | Team member |
| Oluwafemi Adedipe | SURE-P MCH | Team member |
| Chidimma Aigbe | SURE-P MCH | Team member |
| Amina Muhtar | SURE-P MCH | Team member |
| Laura Morris | SURE-P MCH | Team member |
| Chioma Oduenyi | SURE-P MCH | Team member |
| Nonso Onwudinjo | SURE-P MCH | Team member |
| Segun Oguntoyinbo | Hanovia Limited | Managing Director |
| Gbenga Adedayo | Hanovia Limited | Field Coordinator |
| Nnamdi Ezike | Hanovia Limited | Lead Data Officer |
Sampling
Sampling Procedure
Primary health care facility: the survey targeted 500 primary healthcare facilities participating in the first phase of the SURE-P MCH program and additional 500 primary healthcare facilities in Phase 2.
Midwife: 1,285 midwives from the 500 primary healthcare facilities enrolled the first phase (during 2013/14) and additional 2180 midwives from the 500 primary healthcare facilities enrolled in the second phase from the additional 500 SURE-P MH.
Ward development committee: the survey targeted all 500 ward development committees operating in areas with a SURE-P MCH primary healthcare facility in Phase 1 and additional 500 ward development committees operating in areas with a SURE-P MCH primary healthcare facility in Phase 2.
Household/individual: within the catchment area of each SURE-P MCH Phase 1 and Phase 2 primary healthcare facility, the survey was administered to five randomly selected households containing a woman that had given birth in the past three months for a total of 5000 households/women.
Midwife: 1,285 midwives from the 500 primary healthcare facilities enrolled the first phase (during 2013/14) and additional 2180 midwives from the 500 primary healthcare facilities enrolled in the second phase from the additional 500 SURE-P MH.
Ward development committee: the survey targeted all 500 ward development committees operating in areas with a SURE-P MCH primary healthcare facility in Phase 1 and additional 500 ward development committees operating in areas with a SURE-P MCH primary healthcare facility in Phase 2.
Household/individual: within the catchment area of each SURE-P MCH Phase 1 and Phase 2 primary healthcare facility, the survey was administered to five randomly selected households containing a woman that had given birth in the past three months for a total of 5000 households/women.
Response Rate
- Midwife: phase 1 response rate: 100%; Phase 2 response rate: not defined
- Primary health care facility target: 1,000; achievement: 912; response rate: 91%
- Ward development committee target: 1,000; achievement: 928; response rate: 93%
- Household target: 5,000; achievement: 4,950; response rate: 99%
- Primary health care facility target: 1,000; achievement: 912; response rate: 91%
- Ward development committee target: 1,000; achievement: 928; response rate: 93%
- Household target: 5,000; achievement: 4,950; response rate: 99%
Data Collection
Dates of Data Collection
| Start | End |
|---|---|
| 2014-12-08 | 2015-02-10 |
Data Collection Mode
Face-to-face [f2f]
Data Collectors
| Name |
|---|
| Hanovia Limited |
Access policy
Contacts
| Name | Affiliation | |
|---|---|---|
| Marcus Holmlund | World Bank | mholmlund@worldbank.org |
| Qiao Wang | World Bank | qwang3@worldbank.org |
| Felipe Dunsch | World Bank | fdunsch@worldbank.org |
Access conditions
Licensed access with confirmation by Primary Investigators (represented by Marcus Holmlund, mholmlud@worldbank.org)
Citation requirements
The use of the datasets must be acknowledged using a citation which would include:
- the identification of the Primary Investigator (including country name);
- the full title of the survey and its acronym (when available), and the year(s) of implementation;
- the survey reference number;
- the source and date of download (for datasets disseminated online).
Example:
Holmlund, Jervis Ortiz, Rosa Dias, Vera-Hernandez, Wang (2015). Nigeria Subsidy Reinvestment and Empowerment Programme Maternal and Child Health (SURE-P MCH) Impact Evaluation 2014, Midline Survey. Ref. NGA_2014_SUREPIE-ML_v01_M. Dataset downloaded from [URL] on [date].
- the identification of the Primary Investigator (including country name);
- the full title of the survey and its acronym (when available), and the year(s) of implementation;
- the survey reference number;
- the source and date of download (for datasets disseminated online).
Example:
Holmlund, Jervis Ortiz, Rosa Dias, Vera-Hernandez, Wang (2015). Nigeria Subsidy Reinvestment and Empowerment Programme Maternal and Child Health (SURE-P MCH) Impact Evaluation 2014, Midline Survey. Ref. NGA_2014_SUREPIE-ML_v01_M. Dataset downloaded from [URL] on [date].
Disclaimer and copyrights
Disclaimer
The user of the data acknowledges that the original collector of the data, the authorized distributor of the data, and the relevant funding agency bear no responsibility for use of the data or for interpretations or inferences based upon such uses.
Copyright
Holmlund, Jervis Ortiz, Rosa Dias, Vera-Hernandez, Wang (2015)
Metadata production
DDI Document ID
DDI_NGA_2014_SUREPIE-ML_v01_M_WB
Producers
| Name | Abbreviation | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| Development Data Group | DECDG | World Bank | Study documentation |
| Development Impact Evaluation | DECIE | World Bank | Study documentation |
Date of Metadata Production
2017-12-06
DDI Document version
v01 (December 2017)