Table 1.
Coverage of nutrition-specific interventions target with impact on stunting.
Table 2.
Nutrition-specific interventions targeting with impact on wasting.
Table 3.
Nutrition-specific interventions targeting with impact on anemia.
Fig 1.
Locations of the counties included in this study.
Fig 2.
Baseline distribution of stunting (defined as moderate or severe stunting) across different age groups among the 24 counties.
Fig 3.
Allocative efficiency to minimize stunting prevalence across 24 counties.
The baseline bars represent estimated spending on nutritional interventions aimed at reducing prevalence of stunting. Optimized bars depict the results of budget reallocation, leading to a reduction in stunting prevalence. This reallocation shifted resources, predominantly allocated to Zinc for treatment and ORS at baseline, to more effective interventions, including balanced energy-protein supplementation, multiple micronutrient supplementation, lipid-based nutrition supplements, infant and young child feeding education (IYCF) and vitamin A supplementation. Note that the size of bars does not necessarily reflect coverage due to different unit costs (e.g., vitamin A is prioritized but does not require much budget as it is cheaper than the other interventions). In instances where funding was sufficient to reach full coverage of all interventions that impact stunting, the remainder was classed as “Excess Budget not allocated.” These funds could be used to address the other nutritional outcomes.
Fig 4.
Distribution of wasting across different age groups among the 24 counties.
Fig 5.
Allocative efficiency of resources to minimize wasting prevalence in 24 counties.
Baseline bars denote the status quo allocations to nutritional interventions targeting wasting, and the optimized bars denote optimization results, where a reduction in wasting was achieved by increasing budget reallocation primarily to cash transfers in most counties.
Fig 6.
Distribution of under-five anemia prevalence across different age groups among the 24 counties.
Fig 7.
Allocative efficiency of resources towards the reduction of anemia prevalence in children in 24 counties.
Baseline bars denote the status quo allocations to nutritional interventions, and the optimized bars denote optimization results, where a reduction in number of anemic children was achieved in the model by reallocating budgets primarily to LLINs and IFA fortification of maize. In the instances where funding was sufficient to reach full coverage of all interventions that impact anaemia in children, the remainder was classed as “Excess Budget not allocated.” These funds could be used to address the other nutrition outcomes.
Fig 8.
Allocative efficiency of resources towards reduction of anemia prevalence in pregnant women in 24 counties.
Baseline bars denote the status quo allocations to nutritional interventions, and the optimized bars denote optimization of the available resources to effective interventions.