Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41612292›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2026

"Poverty is a social issue, not a mathematical problem": examining the lessons for beneficiary identification from implementation of the UHC indigent program in Kenya.

Beryl Maritim, Rahab Mbau, Anita Musiega, Anne Musuva, Beatrice Amboko, Benjamin Tsofa, Caitlin Mazzilli, Ileana Vilcu, Ethan Wong, Felix Murira and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors.

Beryl MaritimHealth Economics Research Unit, KEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Nairobi, Kenya. bmaritim@kemri-wellcome.org.
Rahab MbauHealth Systems Insight, Nairobi, Kenya.
Anita MusiegaHealth Economics Research Unit, KEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.
Anne MusuvaHealth Systems Insight, Nairobi, Kenya.
Beatrice AmbokoHealth Economics Research Unit, KEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.
Benjamin TsofaHealth Economics Research Unit, KEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.
Caitlin MazzilliGates Foundation, Seattle, WA, USA.
Ileana VilcuHealth Systems insight, Washington, DC, USA.
Ethan WongGates Foundation, Seattle, WA, USA.
Felix MuriraHealth Systems Insight, Nairobi, Kenya.
Jacinta NzingaHealth Economics Research Unit, KEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.
Matt BoxshallHealth Systems insight, Washington, DC, USA.
Peter MugoHealth Economics Research Unit, KEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.
Rose Nabi Deborah Karimi MuthuriHealth Economics Research Unit, KEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.
Wangari Ng'ang'aGates Foundation, Seattle, WA, USA.
Nirmala RavishankarGates Foundation, Seattle, WA, USA.
Edwine BarasaHealth Economics Research Unit, KEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.

Funding

Gates Foundation INV-049230
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundKenya rolled out a UHC indigent program aimed to expand financial protection and health service access for poor households through subsidized health insurance under the national insurer, National Health Insurance Fund (NHIF). As Kenya transitions to a new social health insurance framework under the Social Health Authority (SHA), understanding the implementation experience of the UHC indigent program is critical for informing the roll out of SHA’s indigent program.

methodsWe conducted a qualitative process evaluation of the UHC indigent program using document reviews, semi-structured interviews with 23 key informants from national and county health authorities, development partners, and implementing actors, complemented by a validation workshop with 57 stakeholders. Our analysis was guided by Moore et al.‘s process evaluation framework and Wu et al.‘s policy capacity lens, examining implementation fidelity and capacities at multiple levels.

resultsThe program’s implementation deviated from its original centralized design, with counties exerting control over beneficiary identification due to national data gaps, incomplete rollout of the Harmonized Testing Tool, and political and operational constraints. Variations in targeting methods, reliance on under-resourced community health actors, and delays in biometric registration contributed to partial enrolment, limited access, exclusion errors, and mistrust. Although some counties reported increased service utilization, this was limited by unregistered dependents and lack of beneficiary awareness. Stakeholders expressed concern over SHA’s use of proxy means testing for identifying the poor, citing risks of exclusion, manipulation, and failure to capture locally constructed definitions of poverty.

conclusionKenya’s experience demostrates the need to align national targeting frameworks with local realities, invest in policy capacity across stakeholders, and prioritize community validation and communication in subsidy programs. As SHA rolls out a new indigent program, these lessons offer critical guidance for enhancing fidelity, equity, and accountability.

Indexed as

Health Services AccessibilityNational Health ProgramsPovertyHumansKenyaProgram EvaluationQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID41612292
PMCPMC12903745

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.