Scaling up an early childhood development programme through a national multisectoral approach to social protection: lessons from Chile Crece Contigo

Abstract

Helia Molina Milman and colleagues describe how intersectoral collaboration between health, social protection, and education sectors enabled Chile Grows with You (Chile Crece Contigo) to help all children reach their full developmental potential

A future for the world's children? A WHO–UNICEF–Lancet Commission

“…Chile's multisectoral programme for improving early childhood development (Chile Crece Contigo; panel 7) provides a model for defining roles and budgets across sectors, and financing and monitoring systems that encourage collaboration. 54,198 Policies across sectors must be examined for their potential effect on child health and wellbeing. The content of these assessments could draw from the child enti tlements framework, discussed earlier, and by reviewing existing guidance from UNICEF and the World Bank, 199 on integrating a child focus into poverty and social impact analysis, and from the work of national governments, such as New Zealand, which has introduced a budgeting approach in which costbenefit analyses are based on current and future wellbeing.…”

“…Success is predicated on the basis of a sophisticated understanding of the key actors, their incentives and constraints, and the functioning of the overall political ecosystem, with distributed leadership that engages a According to a case study by Milman and colleagues, 198 Chile Crece Contigo was found to be cost-effective and associated with a decrease in the proportion of children younger than 5 years old with a developmental delay, from 14% to 10% over the 10 years of its implementation. Nearly three-quarters of beneficiaries described the programme as being central to their experience of pregnancy and parenting, suggesting high satisfaction with its services.…”

Funding of Hispanic/Latino Health-Related Research by the National Institutes of Health: An Analysis of the Portfolio of Research Program Grants on Six Health Topic Areas

“…At the same time, our analysis suggests that health services research, translational medicine, and/or CBPR are types of research that could be further developed within the context of the six health condition areas that were reviewed. Whereas the focus on implementation science and translational research at the NIH has been increasing (92,93), our findings suggest that future research could focus on understudied approaches in Hispanic/Latino health, including, but not limited to, deeper understanding of effectiveness of currently recommended therapies and potential differences among heritage groups (56,(94)(95)(96); participation and/or increased inclusion in genetics/genomic studies (97)(98)(99); innovative strategies to implement recommended guidelines of care, and especially those move beyond the "sideways" approach (100); the intersection (101-103) of social determinants of health other factors on disease risk and the effectiveness of clinical or multi-level interventions (104)(105)(106)(107); design and analysis of multi-level or multi-sectoral (108)(109)(110) interventions; implementation and dissemination studies in real-world settings (92,111); the role of health information technologies on health-care delivery and health outcomes (112)(113)(114)(115)(116)(117)(118); the impact of interventions or policies designed to reduce health and health-care disparities (119)(120)(121)(122)(123)(124)(125)(126); and the effects of national or local policies on healthcare services and health outcomes (e.g., natural experiments) (127,…”

What Is the Role of Civil Society in Multisectoral Nutrition Governance Systems? A Multicountry Review

“…For example, in a recent analysis of multisectoral collaboration in a scaled-up health and nutrition hotline in Malawi, bidirectional coordination and communication structures indicated intentional process improvement operations (feedback loops) important for assessing impact. 49 Such feedback loops can ensure continuous feedback not only at the national but more importantly subnational levels to identify program implementation “gaps and problems” and do so in a timely manner.…”