Cost-effectiveness evidence can guide decision-making by showing which interventions offer the highest value for money, critical in an era of diminished resources for development. But, despite widespread acknowledgment of their importance, value for money analyses remain the exception rather than the rule. 

Evidence can help us achieve more with less

‘The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2024 makes for sobering reading. It finds that only 17 per cent of the SDG targets are on track, nearly half are showing minimal or moderate progress, and progress on over one third has stalled or even regressed.’ 

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are a powerful tool for understanding what works in development and anti-poverty programs. They provide insights to guide practitioners and policymakers in improving and scaling interventions. But for RCT findings to inform these decisions, they must be communicated clearly and systematically—something that’s easier said than done. Good reporting isn’t just about sharing final findings; researchers should share their process to make results actionable.