NEW UPDATE: Completed trials may now upload and register supplementary documents (e.g. null results reports, populated pre-analysis plans, or post-trial results reports) in the Post Trial section under Reports, Papers, & Other Materials.
Healthcare Delivery in Sierra Leone
Last registered on March 10, 2017


Trial Information
General Information
Healthcare Delivery in Sierra Leone
Initial registration date
March 09, 2017
Last updated
March 10, 2017 10:14 AM EST
Primary Investigator
Princeton Unviersity
Other Primary Investigator(s)
PI Affiliation
The World Bank
PI Affiliation
University of Chicago
Additional Trial Information
Start date
End date
Secondary IDs
Over the past decade, the Government of Sierra Leone (GoSL) has made a concerted effort to improve health care services throughout the country, including an ambitious free health care initiative launched in 2010. Key to the success of the initiative was strengthening the weak incentives faced by front-line health providers—for example, in early 2010, a large share of health staff were compensated entirely through informal fee payments from users and margins from drug sales. To alleviate basic resource constraints, the GoSL increased worker salaries and the flow of resources to clinics nationwide, and sought to introduce non-financial incentive schemes, which recent studies have shown to be highly effective in improving worker performance in a range of environments. However, could such schemes be applied to Sierra Leone’s health sector, and if so, what types of non-financial incentives would work best?

To answer this question, the GoSL, in conjunction with the World Bank, the Center for the Study of African Economies, and Innovations for Poverty Action, launched a randomized controlled trial to test the effectiveness of two innovative interventions using non-financial incentives to improve health care outcomes. The first intervention involved community monitoring of health clinics through the use of health scorecards and collaborative meetings between community members and health staff. The second intervention used non-financial awards, such as public commendations, with the aim of improving worker motivation and promoting greater efficiency within health clinics. This document is an analysis plan for gauging the effects of these interventions, and builds on an initial report released by Innovations for Poverty Action in 2014.
External Link(s)
Registration Citation
Dube, Oeindrila, Johannes Haushofer and Bilal Siddiqi. 2017. "Healthcare Delivery in Sierra Leone." AEA RCT Registry. March 10. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.2085-1.0.
Former Citation
Dube, Oeindrila et al. 2017. "Healthcare Delivery in Sierra Leone." AEA RCT Registry. March 10. http://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/2085/history/14852.
Experimental Details
Intervention Start Date
Intervention End Date
Primary Outcomes
Primary Outcomes (end points)
Maternal healthcare utilization, health service delivery, health clinic quality, health outcomes, general utilization, community health engagement, health satisfaction, community water and sanitation, collective action, economic status.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Secondary Outcomes
Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Experimental Design
Experimental Design
Clinics and their catchment area were randomly selected to participate in one of the interventions (they constitute the “treatment group”) or to act as control. Within each clinic catchment, two communities were randomly selected, and households were randomly sampled from within these communities. This methodology ensures that observed and unobserved characteristics likely to affect health outcomes and clinics effectiveness are similarly distributed across treatment and control groups before the intervention. Consequently, any difference in indicators of interest between treatment and control groups observed after the intervention can be interpreted as the effect of the intervention itself.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Randomization done in office by a computer.
Randomization Unit
Randomization took place at the clinic level.
Was the treatment clustered?
Experiment Characteristics
Sample size: planned number of clusters
254 clinics.
Sample size: planned number of observations
5,080 households.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
~85 clinics in each treatment arm.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials

There are documents in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access to this information.

Request Information
IRB Name
Study has received IRB approval. Details not available.
IRB Approval Date
Details not available
IRB Approval Number
Details not available
Analysis Plan
Analysis Plan Documents
Healthcare Delivery in Sierra Leone

MD5: 2e56a7f9d07e7767ab4e70f3d88109b7

SHA1: 675d55dd4605f60247782140e3b140b93acd2507

Uploaded At: March 09, 2017

Post Trial Information
Study Withdrawal
Is the intervention completed?
Is data collection complete?
Data Collection Completion Date
Final Sample Size: Number of Clusters (Unit of Randomization)
Was attrition correlated with treatment status?
Final Sample Size: Total Number of Observations
Final Sample Size (or Number of Clusters) by Treatment Arms
Data Publication
Data Publication
Is public data available?
Program Files
Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials
Relevant Paper(s)