of all survey respondents in a given village Willingness to pay for deworming: measured using a binding Becker–DeGroot–Marschak (BDM) auction at endline

a role in sale activities ) Healthcare practices: Take up of vaccination, deworming; consulting

control/spillover group. Half the goats in treatment households are randomized to receive deworming medicine and control goats receive a placebo.

This study employs a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the economic impacts of deworming

goats in India. The primary research question is: if cost effective healthcare practices like deworming

hope to analyse if research-based evidence can incentivize higher adoption of the deworming pills in

Economic effects of improved healthcare in small ruminants: A randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of deworming goats in Munger

At the outset, the intervention includes a course of deworming medication and basic information

regarding the deworming treatment. The first deworming pill will be given to treatment goats a few days

, goat keepers will be given basic information about deworming. A second round dose of deworming will be

dose, all goat keepers (irrespective of treatment status) will be given the opportunity to purchase deworming pills to continue the course of medication.

Goat body weight, body condition score (BCS), sale price, goat morbidity, social network, willingness to pay for deworming

allocated to receive a course of deworming medication and the rest serve as control goats and are given

placebo pills. The farmer is not made aware of which goats are receiving deworming medicine and which

are receiving placebo. None of the goats from control households receive any deworming pills. At end

-line, after two doses of deworming medication, the treatment and spillover goat keepers have the

option to purchase deworming pills. Treatment and spillover households are randomly assigned to one of

livestock, deworming, social networks

either receiving (i) reminder, (ii) reminder + deworming take-up information text messages or (iii) no text messages.

Can social signaling incentivize adults to take up deworming treatment? Working with the Kenyan

Government, we implement a new Community Deworming Program that offers free deworming treatment to

adults and explicitly emphasizes the public good aspect of deworming. We test two types of social

incentives in the form of colorful bracelets and ink that adults receive upon coming for deworming

or bracelet or receive no incentive when coming for deworming. In a second stage, we offer free

The Role of Social Signaling in Community Mass Deworming: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Kenya

Working with the Government of Kenya we offer free deworming treatment to adults in 3 counties

central locations and sensitize households about the upcoming deworming treatment. CHVs were

identified as ideal agents to sensitize communities and give out deworming drugs, both because of their

externality aspect of deworming) and address concerns (e.g. that deworming drugs might sterilize women

). CHVs inform all study communities one week prior to the start of the deworming treatment about

Primary outcome: number of adults coming for deworming treatment. Secondary outcomes: individual knowledge and beliefs about others' deworming choices.

deworming drugs was randomly phased into schools, rather than to individuals, allowing estimation of

, and was far cheaper than alternative ways of boosting school participation. Deworming substantially

we do not find evidence that deworming improved academic test scores.

COMMENTARY: DEWORMING EXTERNALITIES AND SCHOOLING IMPACTS IN KENYA: A COMMENT ON AIKEN ET AL. (2015) AND DAVEY ET AL. (2015)

ESTIMATING DEWORMING SCHOOL PARTICIPATION IMPACTS AND EXTERNALITIES IN KENYA: A COMMENT ON AIKEN ET

deworming drugs was randomly phased into schools, rather than to individuals, allowing estimation of

, and was far cheaper than alternative ways of boosting school participation. Deworming

. Yet we do not find evidence that deworming improved academic test scores.

Deworming Program (PSDP) to provide deworming medication to individuals enrolled in 75 primary

groups. Group 1 schools began receiving free deworming in 1998, Group 2 schools in 1999, while Group

years of deworming than Group 3 children. Deworming drugs were offered twice per year in treatment schools.

Deworming Program (PSDP) to provide deworming medication to individuals enrolled in 75 primary

, creating experimental treatment groups. Group 1 schools began receiving free deworming in 1998, Group 2

received two to three more years of deworming than Group 3 children.

Health, education, Africa, externalities, randomized evaluation, RCT, worms, Kenya, deworming, helminths, schistosomiasis

Drug take-up: quantified by how many children took deworming drugs. Worm prevention behavior

THE ILLUSION OF SUSTAINABILITY We use a randomized evaluation of a Kenyan deworming program to

towards sustainable community provision of public goods. Deworming is a public good since much of its

social benefit comes through reduced disease transmission. People were less likely to take deworming if

their direct first-order or indirect second-order social contacts were exposed to deworming. Efforts

deworming drugs was randomly phased into schools, rather than to individuals, allowing estimation of

We use a randomized evaluation of a Kenyan deworming program to estimate peer effects in technology

of public goods. Deworming is a public good since much of its social benefit comes through reduced

disease transmission. People were less likely to take deworming if their direct first-order or

indirect second-order social contacts were exposed to deworming. Efforts to replace subsidies with

Deworming Program (PSDP) to provide deworming medication to individuals enrolled in 75 primary

groups. Group 1 schools began receiving free deworming in 1998, Group 2 schools in 1999, while Group

years of deworming than Group 3 children. Deworming drugs were offered twice per year in treatment

schools. This study uses the Primary School Deworming Project (PSDP) to test several interventions

as the respondent’s direct “social links.” The survey also collected information on the deworming

Deworming Program (PSDP) to provide deworming medication to individuals enrolled in 75 primary

, creating experimental treatment groups. Group 1 schools began receiving free deworming in 1998, Group 2

received two to three more years of deworming than Group 3 children. Data was collected through pupil

schools. Cost-sharing: Between 1998 and 1999 PSDP delivered free deworming pills to 50 sample schools

geohelminths, schistosmiasis, worms, deworming, cost-haring, preventative healthcare, Kenya

7,500 individuals who attended schools that were part of a health program that provided deworming

Deworming Program (PSDP) to provide deworming medication to individuals enrolled in 75 primary

schools began receiving free deworming in 1998, Group 2 schools in 1999, while Group 3 schools began

treatment. Children in Group 1 and 2 schools thus received two to three more years of deworming than

Group 3 children, and these early beneficiaries are what we call the deworming treatment group in

the present study. Deworming drugs were offered twice per year in treatment schools. Analysis during

Deworming Program (PSDP) to provide deworming medication to individuals enrolled in 75 primary

analytical strategy. Group 1 schools began receiving free deworming in 1998, Group 2 schools in 1999, while

more years of deworming than Group 3 children, and these early beneficiaries are what we call the deworming treatment group in the present study.

deworming long run impacts RCT

previously benefited from a randomized health (deworming) program. The project will exploit experimental

Deworming Program (PSDP) to provide deworming medication to individuals enrolled in 75 primary

schools began receiving free deworming in 1998, Group 2 schools in 1999, while Group 3 schools began

treatment. Children in Group 1 and 2 schools thus received two to three more years of deworming than

Group 3 children, and these early beneficiaries are what we call the deworming treatment group

(parents) in the present study. Deworming drugs were offered twice per year in treatment schools

Primary School Deworming Program (PSDP). The PSDP provided deworming medication to primary school

delivering iron supplementation and deworming drugs to Indian preschool children. At baseline 69 percent

deworming drugs to Indian preschool children. At baseline, 69 percent were anemic and 30 percent had

deworming drugs (400 mg of albendazole) administered during “health camps” conducted three times a year in

and deworming in addition to Vitamin A, relative to Vitamin A alone.

deworming, iron supplementation, school attendance, preschool, anemia, school participation, vitamin A, India

previously benefited from a randomized health (deworming), vocational education, and/or cash grant

conducted during 1998-2003 (deworming), 2009-2011 (vocational training), and 2013-2014 (cash grants).

: a health study known as the Primary School Deworming Program (PSDP; described in detail in Miguel

detail in Hicks et al., 2015c). Previous results indicate that primary school deworming led to

, a deworming drug that was moderately well-known and for which negative learning due to side effects

offered to each household: Panadol (paracetamol, a painkiller), Elyzole (albendazole,a deworming

main hypotheses in the study: H1: Econometrics training impact policy choices on deworming

our signal of RCT evidence (deworming policy) and two placebo policies (school and orphanage