model problem solution essay bridges to prosperity

Building Bridges to End Rural Isolation Around the World

Bridges to Prosperity Makes Big Problems Solvable

• Share on LinkedIn
• Share through Email
• Print this page
• Bookmark this page

It started with a photograph.  

Ken Frantz was flipping through a copy of National Geographic in 2001 and an image stopped him in his tracks. Men dangling high in the air, using a rudimentary ropes system to dangerously cross a river—a broken bridge crumbling on either side of them and the Blue Nile in Ethiopia rushing below.  

As the owner of a construction company, Frantz knew that the problem was solvable. 

It took Frantz and his team just three months to get that bridge rebuilt. Now, more than 20 years and nearly 500 bridges later, that mindset—seeing big challenges like rural isolation and poverty as solvable—fuels a new data-driven chapter for Bridges to Prosperity (B2P) , a nonprofit that aims to meet an estimated global demand for 100,000 bridges serving 250 million people—one bridge at a time.

Rwabagenzi Suspension Bridge

The Bridge to Prosperity team has been working with the community on the construction of the 78m Rwabagenzi suspension bridge in Nyarugenge district Kigali, Rwanda, which will connect over 4,500 rural residents to new opportunities.

The Challenge 

Rural isolation is a root cause of poverty.  

Access to nutritious food, education, and health care—powerful social determinants of health—all depend on sufficient transportation infrastructure to get to markets, schools, and hospitals. Without access to these critical resources, health and economic equity gaps widen. People risk their lives to travel unsafe routes or go without altogether.  

Globally, B2P’s monitoring and evaluation program has identified an estimated 1.3 million people who do not have safe access to these resources, threatening their lives and livelihoods. Yet Abbie Noriega, the Chief Impact Officer for B2P, says so many people—even those working in global development and government—are unaware of the scope of the issue. 

One reason the problem is not more well known is a lack of reliable data. 

“For the most part, it just doesn’t exist,” Noriega said. “No governments in the world understand and have documented well the infrastructure gap in the rural context. We are missing data as simple as rivers and roads for a huge portion of the world.” 

The data may not yet exist, but the case for impact is strong.  

“We construct tangible bridges. When I present a picture on my phone and say, ‘Here is the bridge,’ and I see the realization dawn on people’s faces ” said Global Advocacy and Partnerships Director Eniola Mafe-Abaga. “In an era obsessed with groundbreaking innovations and complex ‘blockchain/data/disruptive technologies,’ our work stands out as a straightforward, evidence-backed solution with the power to transform lives.”

In this day and age where we’re supposed to find these revolutionary, amazingly innovative, ‘NFT-slash-data cube-slash-disruptive technology,’ this is a very clear, proven intervention that changes lives. Eniola Mafe-Abaga Global Advocacy and Partnerships Director Bridges to Prosperity

The Solution 

Twenty-plus years ago, Ken Frantz saw a simple problem with a simple solution. So, he rallied his network, and they built a bridge. And then another, and then another.  

B2P today has trail bridges in 21 countries.  

For the organization’s first decade, the team focused on mastering the technical challenges associated with securing materials and labor and transporting them safely in some of the most remote, and often geographically challenging, environments in the world. They are now masters at their craft, and it typically takes just eight weeks to construct a bridge. 

With the practical execution perfected, B2P’s focus has increasingly shifted to maximizing cost efficiency and durability, building greater trust with governments and community partners, and—now, more than ever—building bridges that are sustainable and climate resilient. 

Equally important is advocacy.  

“Redirecting even one percent of global infrastructure spending toward trail bridges could be transformatives, would be transformative,” Mafe-Abaga said. “The evidence for their impact is robust. Our current focus is on disseminating this knowledge to those who can implement these projects broadly. The ultimate goal is for governments to be resourced, willing, and able to sustainably construct these bridges for their communities.” 

Building that kind of widespread public will and demand requires better data, an area in which B2P has experienced significant growth since its early days.  

Before B2P sets out to build a new bridge, prospective locations are identified through robust needs assessments. B2P connects with national governments to begin to build support and gain permission. Then they train local needs assessors to conduct social and technical assessments and convene public meetings and focus groups.

Working closely with the community, these assessors compile as much data as possible, from the disparity in heights between banks to the number of past mortalities on site. Catchment surveys help them understand how people are using crossings, both before and after a new bridge has been constructed. 

“It’s a much more community-driven, locally-driven process. You can never replace local knowledge,” Noriega said.  

That information is added to a centralized, growing database of global information that includes coordinates, photographs, and information on a massive network of partners on the ground. B2P sees significant opportunities ahead for how geo-mapping technologies and AI can accelerate their work and are in the beta testing phase of Fika Map, a suite of remote analysis tools that use machine learning to locate where access is most beneficial. 

The tool has the power to make B2P solutions more scalable and replicable than B2P’s founder could have ever imagined.  

In the meantime, they continue to solve major challenges for the communities they serve. According to B2P, easier access to health care leads to an 18 percent increase in care visits. There is a 30 percent increase in labor market income and a 75 percent increase in farm profits when people have year-round access to the local marketplaces. Twelve percent more children enroll when they can access school.  

B2P’s data also shows that social connection is the top reason that rural communities are crossing their bridges. 

“A connected community is a resilient community,” Noriega said. “It’s one of those things that makes life worth living.”

There are so many complicated problems that are going to take centuries, millennia to solve. The one we’re trying to solve is actually not one of them. It feels like a rare opportunity to say I'm working on something, and I'll probably see pretty massive global results in my lifetime if we do this right. Abbie Noriega Chief Impact Officer Bridges to Prosperity

The Takeaway 

B2P is a bit of an outlier in the nonprofit field. They don’t fit neatly into the category of health care, education, climate, or gender, but the work they do influences all those dimensions of life.  

“This is one of the best investments you can make, dollar for dollar, in poverty alleviation,” Noriega said. 

Everyone at B2P has a personal story to tell about their experiences visiting one of their bridges. For Noriega, she was at a bridge site in Haiti when she noticed that everyone she saw crossing while carrying something—a child, cargo, an animal pulling a cart—was a woman. In Rwanda, Mafe-Abaga watched a young boy, maybe 3 years old, running across the bridge, and she was struck by the realization that the bridge would exist and serve his community for the entirety of his life.  

Caitlin McWhorter, the Director of Marketing and Communications, has been to three or four bridges in Ethiopia and returns home each time proud and excited to tell her daughters about the work she’s helping to advance. 

“Being able to talk to my kids about that makes me so proud,” she said. “Without these bridges, kids can’t go to school. Women can’t get to hospitals to have a baby. It’s a profound feeling, getting to see how this work—this simple intervention—is actually life-changing.” 

A simple intervention with an outsized impact and a goal that the B2P team believes is achievable if they continue to do what they do best, while using data to accelerate the adoption and replicability of trail bridges around the world.  

“There are so many complicated problems that are going to take centuries, millennia, to solve. The one we’re trying to solve is actually not one of them,” Noriega said. “It feels like a rare opportunity to say I’m working on something and I’ll probably see pretty massive global results in my lifetime if we do this right.” 

Like our stories? Sign up to read more.

• Enter your email address * Required
• By submitting your information and clicking “Submit”, you agree to the data.org Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions , and to receive email communications from data.org.

Enter search terms here.

This search returns results from both GiveWell's main site and from the GiveWell Blog.

Search form

Bridges to prosperity.

• A note on this page's content

Since we published this page, a new study was published ( Thomas et al. 2021 ) that uses a quasi-experimental approach to measure the effect of trailbridges built by Bridges to Prosperity in Rwanda. We refer to this as a “pilot study” in the page below.

We do not view Thomas et al. 2021 as providing a significant update on the effectiveness of Bridges to Prosperity in Rwanda or similar settings, due to limitations in the study design. These limitations include use of quasi-experimental design and disruptions due to COVID-19. 1

In May 2022, we recommended a grant to support bridge-building in Rwanda as part of an ongoing randomized controlled trial of Bridges to Prosperity in Rwanda. Read more here . We updated our cost-effectiveness analysis for Bridges to Prosperity as part of that grant investigation.

Bridges to Prosperity staff reviewed this page prior to publication.

• What is the program? Researchers and policymakers have hypothesized that lack of access to reliable transportation infrastructure worsens outcomes for rural households in some low- and middle-income countries. Bridges to Prosperity is a nonprofit that builds trailbridges in rural areas in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, designed to connect isolated households to schools, health clinics and markets.
• What is the evidence of effectiveness? A quasi-experiment in Nicaragua finds bridges built by Bridges to Prosperity led to substantial increases in household income through increases in farm profits and increases in off-farm employment outside the village. Given the nature of this intervention, we have high uncertainty about whether these findings will generalize, especially to other settings where Bridges to Prosperity intends to build in the future. There is an ongoing, large-scale randomized controlled trial of Bridges to Prosperity in Rwanda that may help resolve some of this uncertainty.
• How cost-effective is it? In Nicaragua, where income effects are large but where the number of households affected per bridge is relatively low, our best guess is that Bridges to Prosperity is roughly as cost-effective as cash transfers, which is less cost-effective than programs we would recommend funding in the near future. In Rwanda, on the other hand, where there is ongoing research and which may more closely resemble future implementation settings for Bridges to Prosperity, the number of households affected per bridge may be substantially greater. As a result, Bridges to Prosperity could have greater cost-effectiveness there, even with much lower income effects, and could be within the range of programs we would consider recommending funding in the future. However, we are highly uncertain about whether income effects observed in Nicaragua will generalize to Rwanda and future implementation settings. We are also uncertain about the duration of the effects of bridges built by Bridges to Prosperity, number of households affected, and bridge cost.
• Is there room for more funding? Bridges to Prosperity reports having room for more funding for a current nationwide bridge-building project in Rwanda (roughly $10 million) and a planned nationwide bridge-building project in Uganda (roughly $14 million to $50 million).
• Bottom line: In May 2022, we recommended a grant to support bridge-building in Rwanda as part of an ongoing randomized controlled trial of Bridges to Prosperity in Rwanda. Read more here . We updated our cost-effectiveness analysis for Bridges to Prosperity as part of that grant investigation.

Published: March 2020; Last updated: September 2022 ( 2020 version , 2021 version )

Table of Contents

What is the problem, what is the program, quasi-randomized study in nicaragua, external validity and ongoing research in rwanda, additional benefits, potential offsetting/negative effects, how cost-effective is it, is there room for more funding, key questions for further investigation.

According to the World Bank, access to reliable transportation infrastructure (roads, bridges, etc.) is limited in rural areas of many low- and middle-income countries. 2

Researchers and policymakers have hypothesized that individuals in areas without reliable transportation infrastructure may face worse outcomes through several mechanisms: 3

• They may be less able to access healthcare services.
• They may have lower access to and benefits from schooling.
• They may be isolated from labor markets, which can reduce opportunities for off-farm employment and have spillover effects on farm production as well.

Bridges to Prosperity is a nonprofit that builds trailbridges in rural communities. 4 Bridges built by Bridges to Prosperity can support horses, livestock and motorcycles, though they are not designed to hold cars. 5 These bridges are intended to connect isolated households to schools, health clinics and markets. 6 They may be particularly beneficial in areas where flooding limits transportation during specific parts of the year. 7

Bridges to Prosperity has worked in 20 countries in Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa and estimates it has built more than 350 trailbridges. 8 The average bridge cost is $80,000, with costs often split between Bridges to Prosperity and government partners. 9 Bridges are designed to last 30 years. 10 In the past, Bridges to Prosperity has worked with local governments to identify need for bridges, but more recently, it has worked in partnership with national governments to identify sites for bridges. Once sites are selected, Bridges to Prosperity builds bridges in partnership with local contractors and suppliers. 11

What is the evidence of effectiveness?

There is evidence from one quasi-experiment, Brooks and Donovan 2020 , that Bridges to Prosperity improves income for households in rural Nicaragua. Brooks and Donovan 2020 find that bridges increased annual household income by 25% through increases in labor market earnings and farm profits.

We have a high degree of uncertainty about whether these same income effects are likely to occur in other settings where Bridges to Prosperity plans to operate in the near future. We anticipate that ongoing research from Rwanda may help resolve some of our questions about external validity.

In our cost-effectiveness analysis, we model the benefits of Bridges to Prosperity as operating through increases in household income. There may be additional benefits of bridges built by Bridges to Prosperity, as well as offsetting effects, that we have not incorporated into our cost-effectiveness analysis.

Brooks and Donovan 2020 is a quasi-experiment conducted in rural Nicaragua. 12

In this setting, Bridges to Prosperity identified villages that met the criteria for needing a bridge, based on village population, likelihood the bridge would be used, proximity to outside markets, and available alternatives. 13 Among villages that passed this needs assessment, Bridges to Prosperity then conducted a feasibility assessment, based on whether villages possessed environmental characteristics that made them suitable for building a bridge. 14

To measure the effect of bridges built by Bridges to Prosperity, researchers compared villages that passed both the needs and feasibility assessment and received a bridge to villages that passed the needs assessment but not the feasibility assessment and did not receive a bridge. 15 They also compare the effects of bridges during weeks with and without flooding, since the bridges were designed to allow rivers to be passable during flooding and, as a result, should have a greater effect during floods. 16

Brooks and Donovan 2020 report effects on household income from two sources: increases in off-farm employment income and increases in farm profits. Households in villages that received bridges had weekly labor market income that was 20% higher in non-flood weeks (p-value = 0.004 for main effect of bridges) and 48% higher in flood weeks (p-value = 0.038 for interaction effect of bridges during flood weeks). 17 Households in villages that received bridges also had 76% higher farm profits (p-value = 0.020). 18 These estimates suggest bridges increased household income by 25%. 19

Overall, we view this study as reasonably high quality, though not conclusive or necessarily representative of other settings where Bridges to Prosperity may operate in the future.

While the trial is not a pure randomized controlled trial (RCT), the empirical approach seems reasonable, and households across villages receiving and not receiving bridges appear balanced at baseline. 20 The lack of pure randomization may leave some concern that villages that meet feasibility criteria for bridge building could be different in other unobservable ways that might influence income and farm profit. We would weight this concern more heavily if feasibility were determined by villages' need for bridges or interest among individuals in villages in building bridges. However, because feasibility is determined by characteristics of riverbeds that are on average 1.5 kilometers from households, we guess that it is unlikely that riverbed characteristics would be correlated with other, unobservable village characteristics that would simultaneously affect household income or farm profitability. 21

In addition to the main effects of bridges on income and the differential effects in flood vs. non-flood weeks, the study reports several additional empirical results consistent with the researchers' theory, which increases our confidence in the study's main findings. However, we have only reviewed these results superficially and do not have as strong a sense of their validity. These additional empirical results include:

• Households in villages that received bridges reported more employment outside the village than households in villages that didn't receive bridges (consistent with the findings on increased labor market income). 22
• Wages were higher in villages that received bridges compared to those that didn't (consistent with general equilibrium effects driving equalization of wages inside and outside the village). 23
• Households in villages with bridges had higher fertilizer use than households in villages without bridges (consistent with an increase in farm profits). 24
• Bridges led to a decrease in household savings, in conjunction with an increase in investment in fertilizer. This is consistent with a model in which households have less need for savings once labor market income is available to smooth consumption and, as a result, choose to invest more in their farm through increased fertilizer use. Additionally, the authors find that decreases in savings were largest among farmers who increased their on-farm investment the most in response to bridges, which is also consistent with this model. 25

Limitations of the study, which give us some uncertainty, include: a) the number of clusters for randomization (15) is relatively small, 26 and b) the study was not pre-registered.

Given the nature of this intervention, we have high uncertainty about whether these findings will extend to new settings. The increases in income found in Brooks and Donovan 2020 rely on an adequate supply of labor market opportunities outside bridge-connected villages, a relative lack of labor market opportunities inside bridge-connected villages during floods, rivers that are impassable during floods but become passable when bridges are installed, weather patterns that make flooding sufficiently frequent to affect behavior, and potentially other conditions as well.

Our rough impression is that these conditions may not generalize to new settings. Because our understanding is that Bridges to Prosperity will likely prioritize bridge-building in Rwanda and Uganda in the future (see below ), understanding generalizability in these or similar settings will be particularly important.

We are aware of two ongoing follow-up studies of the impact of Bridges to Prosperity in Rwanda. We are likely to place a high value on the findings of these studies because we expect them to provide more information on the generalizability of the findings in Brooks and Donovan 2020 .

The main study is a large-scale RCT that will use step-wedge randomization to measure the effect of more than 250 bridges built by Bridges to Prosperity in Rwanda over five years. 27 Results are not expected for several years. In preparation for that larger study, researchers have been conducting a pilot study that uses a quasi-experimental approach that is similar to that used in Brooks and Donovan 2020 . 28 While the purpose of the pilot study is to understand the feasibility of conducting the full-scale RCT, it may also provide evidence on the effect of Bridges to Prosperity in Rwanda. Full results from the pilot study are likely to be available by mid-2020.

We have seen preliminary results from this pilot study, and while our impression is that these results show mechanisms consistent with Brooks and Donovan 2020 , we have not undertaken a thorough review since the results are likely to change once all data are available. We also do not yet have a strong understanding of the quality of the pilot study (e.g., statistical power, likelihood of bias from quasi-experimental approach) and so do not know how much the full pilot results will update our assessment of Bridges to Prosperity's impact in Rwanda. We plan to undertake further review of the pilot study once full results are available.

Bridges built by Bridges to Prosperity may confer other benefits to households, beyond increases in labor market income or farm profits. Bridges to Prosperity has suggested that bridges may also improve access to healthcare services, make it easier for children to attend school, or improve access to government programs. 29 We have not seen any direct evidence for or against these effects, and we currently factor these additional benefits into our assessment of the cost-effectiveness of Bridges to Prosperity using a rough estimate. 30

One possible negative effect of bridges built by Bridges to Prosperity is that increases in labor supply from individuals in previously isolated rural villages may drive down wages in villages receiving new workers, which can lower income for individuals in those receiving villages. We have not reviewed in depth how large this effect might be, and our cost-effectiveness model only includes a rough estimate on this effect. 31 We have also not thoroughly vetted the safety of the bridges built by Bridges to Prosperity.

In May 2022, we updated our cost-effectiveness analysis for Bridges to Prosperity as part of an investigation into a grant to support an ongoing randomized controlled trial of Bridges to Prosperity in Rwanda. The updated cost-effectiveness model for this intervention is available here . 32

Note that our cost-effectiveness analyses are simplified models that do not take into account a number of factors. There are limitations to this kind of cost-effectiveness analysis, and we believe that cost-effectiveness estimates such as these should not be taken literally due to the significant uncertainty around them. We provide these estimates (a) for comparative purposes and (b) because working on them helps us ensure that we are thinking through as many of the relevant issues as possible.

The cost-effectiveness analysis models the effect of Bridges to Prosperity in Nicaragua, based on the findings from Brooks and Donovan 2020 , and in Rwanda, where there is ongoing research and which may more closely resemble future implementation settings for Bridges to Prosperity (see below ).

In early 2022, we updated our cost-effectiveness model for Bridges to Prosperity by:

• Adding a leverage and funging estimate. We adjust our cost-effectiveness estimates to account for the extent to which we believe our funding may influence how other funders spend their funds (leverage) or may crowd out funding that would otherwise have come from other sources (funging). See more details in this blog post . We have added parameters to estimate leverage and funging here .
• Differentiating between effects on households who live close to the bridge and those that live farther from the bridge. We assume that those who live closer to the bridge will have more benefits, but that those who still use the bridge but live farther away will benefit as well. 33
• Updating our estimate of effects on household consumption. We updated our cost-effectiveness model to incorporate information from three additional studies. New sources we incorporate include a quasi-experimental study of Bridges to Prosperity in Rwanda ( Thomas et al. 2021 ), and two quasi-experimental studies of rural road building (not bridge-building) programs in Ethiopia ( Nakamura et al. 2019 ) and India ( Asher and Novosad 2019 ). 34 We continue to use information from the Brooks and Donovan 2020 study in Nicaragua.
• Adding supplemental adjustments. We also added parameters to our model to estimate (very roughly) effects of bridges on outcomes other than consumption, such as access to other services, as well as downside adjustments. 35

Overall, we estimate that Bridges to Prosperity's program in Nicaragua is roughly as cost-effective as direct cash transfers, given the relatively small number of households affected. While Brooks and Donovan 2020 find a large effect on income (25% increase in annual household income) that we estimate endures over 15 years, the number of households affected per bridge appears to be small (40, according to our best guess) and bridge cost is relatively expensive ($88,000 per bridge plus maintenance costs). 36 In Rwanda, these updates have led us to decrease our estimates of cost-effectiveness. Our best guess is that in Rwanda, Bridges to Prosperity is just below the range of cost-effectivness of programs we would recommend funding. 37

However, these calculations are based on several key parameters, about which we have a high degree of uncertainty and that could affect our cost-effectiveness estimates:

• Number of households affected per bridge. Brooks and Donovan 2020 collect outcome data for individuals within three kilometers of proposed or actual bridge sites 38 and estimate that there are 34 households on average per village. 39 We have high uncertainty about the extent to which additional households that were farther away and therefore not surveyed might have also experienced income benefits from bridges. Bridges to Prosperity has indicated to us that its estimates suggest substantially more households were affected by bridges built in Nicaragua, but we have not vetted these numbers or sought to estimate what income effects we would expect for these households. 40 We have included a rough guess that 20% more households than those surveyed by Brooks and Donovan 2020 saw income effects of the magnitude they observed in the Nicaragua trial. 41 However, we have not conducted a thorough investigation into this parameter, and it is possible that this estimate is still too conservative. If there were additional households affected, our cost-effectiveness for Nicaragua will be underestimated. Under the assumption that relatively few households were affected per bridge, the findings from Nicaragua suggest that Bridges to Prosperity is roughly as cost-effective as cash transfers.
• Duration of benefits. Bridges to Prosperity estimates that bridges last 30 years. 42 However, we might expect the effect of bridges on income to endure for less than 30 years for a variety of reasons. First, bridges may break down at a higher rate than estimated, due to overly optimistic projections or unforeseen events like soil erosion. Second, it's possible that in the counterfactual world without Bridges to Prosperity, local or national governments would build these bridges regardless. 43 In our current model, we assume that effects persist for 15 years. We are highly uncertain about this parameter and view it as a rough guess.
• Bridge cost and leveraging of funding from the government. Bridges to Prosperity estimates that bridges cost $80,000 on average (though cost varies across settings), and that it shares 40%-50% of costs with government partners. 44 We have not thoroughly vetted these estimates and take them at face value in our current cost-effectiveness model. We also do not have a well-vetted estimate of maintenance costs and instead include an extra 10% to the $80,000 bridge cost estimate to capture our best guess. 45
• Effects in Rwanda. In Rwanda, the number of households per bridge is likely to be much higher. 46 As a result, Bridges to Prosperity could have much greater cost-effectiveness in Rwanda, even with much lower income effects. On the other hand, it is possible that income effects could be negligible in Rwanda or that only a small subset of households could be affected, which could cause Bridges to Prosperity's cost-effectiveness to fall outside of the range of programs we would fund. We are likely to substantially update our model once we review results from the ongoing study in Rwanda.
• Additional outcomes. We are uncertain about the effects on households' health, educational, and other outcomes that are not directly related to income. In addition, we are uncertain about the effect on households who are on the side of the bridge that is less affected by the bridge. The upcoming study in Rwanda may update our views on these questions.

This section was last updated in March 2020. More recent information is not yet reflected in this section.

Bridges to Prosperity reports that it has significant room for more funding in the next several years. It estimates that it has room for more funding for an ongoing nationwide bridge-building project in Rwanda (roughly $10 million) and a planned nationwide bridge-building project in Uganda (roughly $14 million to $50 million). 47 Bridges to Prosperity is also currently deciding where to target its intervention in future years, which will likely also result in additional room for more funding.

• What are the appropriate values for the number of households affected by bridges, duration of bridge effects, bridge costs and leveraging of funding from governments?
• What effects on income will the ongoing research on Bridges to Prosperity in Rwanda find?
• Are these effects likely to generalize to other settings where Bridges to Prosperity has room for more funding or may have room for more funding in the future (e.g., Uganda)?
• How safe are bridges built by Bridges to Prosperity?
• What are the key mediating factors that influence the effect of Bridges to Prosperity across settings, and how might we model these in our cost-effectiveness analysis?
• How important are any potential additional benefits from bridges built by Bridges to Prosperity (access to healthcare, education and government programs)?
• What is the effect of bridges built by Bridges to Prosperity on households in areas on the "other side" of the bridge (i.e., areas that were not isolated but are now connected to previously isolated areas)?
• What type of monitoring and evaluation does Bridges to Prosperity conduct to determine, e.g., the number of individuals utilizing bridges or bridge quality?
• Given the long time horizon projected for the effects of bridges, are there additional components we should incorporate into our cost-effectiveness analysis (e.g., changes in weather patterns and the probability of flooding predicted over time)?

• “The study employed a matched-cohort design, in which 12 bridge sites were matched to 12 comparison sites.” Thomas et al. 2021 , p. 3. We view this type of study as less reliable than, for example, a well-conducted randomized controlled trial.
• “A major complication during t = 2 data collection was the COVID-19 crisis. This stopped data collection after only some data was collected, and generates an unbalanced panel of households, which will be important for interpreting data from the t = 2.” Thomas et al. 2021 , p. 5. We guess this may have limited the power of the study and also may have introduced bias, since households who weren’t reached through data collection were likely not random.

See, for example:

• "In developing countries, particularly in Africa, the vast majority of farmers do not have good access to the local, regional, or global market, and depends on subsistence farming with few advanced inputs. Limited connectivity is a critical constraint in accessing social and administrative services, especially in rural areas where the majority of the poor live." Iimi et al. 2016 , p. 2.
• "The Rural Access Index (RAI), developed by Roberts, Shyam, and Rastogi (2006), is among the most important global development indicators in the transport sector. It measures the fraction of people who have access to an all-season road within a walking distance of approximately 2 kilometers (km). The original work relied on available household surveys. Although there remains some ambiguity about the methodologies used across countries, the RAI was estimated at 68.3 percent, leaving about one billion rural residents unconnected in the world (map 4). There is significant inequality across regions: while nearly 90 percent of the rural population in East Asia and Pacific has 2 km access to the road network, in Sub-Saharan Africa the RAI is estimated at only 33.9 percent (figure 7). In general, the RAI is expected to increase as the economy grows. African countries are clearly lagging behind at any particular level of rural accessibility (figure 8)." World Bank 2016 , pp. 1-2.
• "The new method was applied to eight pilot counties: Ethiopia, Kenya, Mozambique, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia in Africa, and Bangladesh and Nepal in South Asia. Rural access varies significantly across these countries, from 17 percent in Zambia to 56 percent in Kenya (figure 2). In total, it is estimated that about 34 percent of the rural population is connected, with roughly seven million people left disconnected." World Bank 2016 , p. Xi.

Citations from researchers and policymakers describing potential mechanisms:

• "Transport infrastructure connects people to jobs, education, and health services; it enables the supply of goods and services around the world; and allows people to interact and generate the knowledge and solutions that foster long-term growth. Rural roads, for example, can help prevent maternal deaths through timely access to childbirth-related care, boost girls' enrolment in school, and increase and diversify farmers' income by connecting them to markets." World Bank, Transport overview .
• "Many of the world's poor people live in rural areas isolated by distance, terrain and poverty from employment and economic opportunities, markets, healthcare and education. Lack of basic infrastructure (paths, trails, bridges and roads) and access to transport services makes it difficult for poor people to access markets and services." Starkey and Hine 2014 , p. 4.
• "Access to employment outside the village may play an important insurance role, and improved access to external health and education services may be valuable; indeed, we find elsewhere that rural roads cause increases in educational attainment (Adukia et al., 2017)." Asher and Novosad 2019 , p. 26.
• "In practice, improving access to transport for rural men and women in low income countries is considered essential to promote rural development, to increase uptake of human development services (educational and health), to facilitate inclusion of different ethnic and other groups, to improve employment opportunities, and to stimulate growth for poverty reduction." Roberts et al. 2006 , p. 1.
• "For example, 18 percent of households in the control group mentioned clinic and maternal health care access as an important service cut off by flooding." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 72.
• "'Rural bridges play a key role in Bangladesh's development, and an efficient rural road network can have a big effect in improving rural livelihoods,' said Qimiao Fan, Country Director for Bangladesh, Bhutan, and Nepal. 'By enabling greater connectivity, these two projects will help rural communities gain safer access to schools, health facilities and markets, reduce transport costs, increase non-agriculture incomes, and expand employment for both women and men.'" World Bank, Bangladesh: World Bank Supports Rural Roads and Bridges .
• "Connections to new markets should encourage educational attainment if they increase returns to education, or otherwise raise household income or liquidity. However, immediate earnings opportunities for the young could motivate an earlier exit from schooling. As educational investment responds to market integration, it shapes the long-run economic impacts of policies that are increasingly integrating markets in developing countries." Adukia et al. 2019 , p. 1.
• "Increased integration has potentially large benefits in rural areas where household income is derived from both farming and labor markets, a common feature of income-generating activities in the developing world (Foster and Rosenzweig, 2007). [FN: The direct effect is access to higher wages outside their village (Bryan, Chowdhury and Mobarak, 2014; Bryan and Morten, 2018). However, to the extent that wage income allows farmers to relax credit constraints or better manage risk, it may simultaneously decrease farm-level distortions. Mobarak and Rosenzweig (2014) and Karlan et al. (2014), among others, find benefits from formal rainfall insurance, while Jayachandran (2006) and Fink, Jack and Masiye (2017) show how missing credit markets affect agricultural employment and production. Thus, these margins potentially play an important role.] Thus, understanding spillovers between wage work and farm decisions are necessary to understand the full effect of labor market integration." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 1.

Bridges to Prosperity, FAQs :

• "B2P is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, ID #54-2031102."
• "We believe that safe access is a human right. Access is an equalizer, creating equal opportunity for all members of a community. We act on this belief by turning rural isolation into connection. We’re a non-profit organization that connects isolated communities to education, health care, and economic opportunity. We do this by working alongside community members, industry partners, and governments to build trailbridges.​"

"Bridges cannot be crossed by cars, but can support horses, livestock, and motorcycles." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 8.

• "We design, build, and maintain durable and environmentally sustainable bridges to connect the rural last mile to the rest of the world." Bridges to Prosperity, Our approach .
• "The isolated communities where we work are cut off from schools, health clinics, and markets for months out of the year." Bridges to Prosperity, FAQs .

"The rivers our trailbridges span are perilous to cross on foot, and they often become completely impassable during the rainy season. Trailbridges create improved access to essential services and opportunity." Bridges to Prosperity, FAQs .

• "We've built more than 350 trailbridges, serving over 1.2 million community members throughout the world." Bridges to Prosperity, Home page .
• "B2P has worked in 20 countries since 2003." GiveWell's non-verbatim summary of a conversation with Avery Bang and Dr. Christina Barstow, December 12, 2019 , p. 1

GiveWell's non-verbatim summary of a conversation with Avery Bang and Dr. Christina Barstow, December 12, 2019 :

• "B2P estimates that its 350 bridge project in Rwanda will cost a total of $28 million, averaging $80,000 per bridge." P. 2
• "B2P’s aim is to have each government pay for half of the costs of the bridge building projects in that country." P. 4

"B2P’s technical advisors use an estimated lifespan of 30 years." GiveWell's non-verbatim summary of a conversation with Avery Bang and Dr. Christina Barstow, December 12, 2019 , p. 6

• "Until a few years ago, B2P primarily identified projects through a local process, one bridge at a time. This often involved leveraging the connections of its board members or approaching local governments to ask where a bridge was needed and seeking to expand its contacts from there. B2P’s current process is to begin by approaching national ministries and advocating for funding at the national level." P. 1
• cost of employment in the country that B2P is working in [...]
• local availability of materials… B2P will have materials that are not locally available… shipped in." P. 3

"In this paper, we directly study the impact of integrating rural Nicaraguan villages with outside labor markets and show empirically that it has sizable effects on household wage earnings, farm investment decisions, and savings." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 1.

"B2P takes requests from local village organizations and governments, then evaluates these requests on two sets of criteria. First, they determine whether the village has sufficient need. This assessment is made based on the number of people that live in the village, the likelihood that the bridge would be used, proximity to outside markets and available alternatives." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 8.

"If the village passes the needs assessment, the country manager conducts an engineering assessment. The purpose of this assessment is to determine if a bridge can be built at the proposed site that would be capable of withstanding a flash flood. To be considered feasible, the required bridge cannot exceed a maximum span of 100 meters, and the crests of the riverbed on each side must be of similar height (a differential not exceeding 3 meters). Moreover, evidence of soil erosion is used to estimate water height during a flood. The estimated high water mark must be at least two meters below the proposed bridge deck." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 8.

"We compare villages that passed both the feasibility and the needs assessments, and therefore received a bridge, to those that passed the needs assessment, but failed the feasibility assessment." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 8.

Brooks and Donovan 2020 :

• "During the rainy season, floods cause stream and riverbeds that are usually passable on foot to rise rapidly and stay high for days or weeks. … During these periods, villages are cut off from access to outside markets. However, it is important to emphasize a number of features of this flooding risk that are relevant for interpreting our results. First, floods are intense torrents of water from the mountains, not simply villages situated next to rivers. Thus, crossing the river by swimming, or any other method, entails substantial risk of injury or death. These floods usually generate prohibitively dangerous crossing conditions or a long journey on foot to reach the market by another route." Pp. 4-5.
• "The bridges we build traverse potentially flooded riverbeds, thus allowing village members consistent access to outside markets. We partner with Bridges to Prosperity (B2P), a non-governmental organization that specializes in building bridges in rural communities around the world." P. 7-8.

Table 3, column 1. Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 34:

• For non-flood weeks, the effect of a bridge is C$159.424 (p-value = 0.004) from a base of C$783.563. C$159.424/C$783.563 ≈ 20%
• For flood weeks, the effect of a bridge is C$148.699 (p-value = 0.038) plus C$159.424 (p-value = 0.004) from a base of C$783.563 minus $C143.627. (C$148.699+C$159.424)/(C$783.563-$C143.627) ≈ 48%.
• Note: Confidence intervals are not reported.
• Table 6, column 9. Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 45. The effect of a bridge is C$1957.61 (p-value = 0.020) from a base of C$2559.20. C$1957.61/C$2559.20 ≈ 76% Note: Confidence intervals are not reported.
• The authors argue that flood weeks are unlikely to affect farm profits and do not report differential effects by flooding: "Second, it is unlikely that the flooding has any direct effect on village farms, as the average household is nearly a mile (1.5 kilometers) from the river." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 5. We have not vetted this claim but our impression is that it seems reasonable.

See calculations here .

Table 2. Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 33.

"Our identification strategy is based on the fact that many villages need bridges, but construction is infeasible for some villages due to the characteristics of the riverbeds that they aim to cross. Because these rivers are typically distant from the houses and farmland of the village (the average village household is 1.5 kilometers from the potential bridge site), the failure to pass the engineering assessment is orthogonal to any relevant household or village characteristics. We verify this by showing that baseline characteristics are balanced across villages that do and do not fulfill the engineering requirements, which we detail in Section 2." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , pp. 1-2.

"Men shift employment from inside to outside labor market work. In the average household, the number of males working outside increases by 0.19 (p = 0.000), compared to a 0.12 person decrease (p = 0.128) inside the village. Combined they generate a statistically insignificant net change in the number of males employed." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 14.

"Next, we find that male daily wages inside the village increase by C$69 (p = 0.092), consistent with general equilibrium effects resulting from the decreased labor supply induced by the bridge. The male wages outside the village do not change (-C$5.6, p = 0.816) because these villages account for a small fraction of labor market activity outside their village. The wage gap between inside-village and outside-village employment, therefore, converges for men." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 14.

"First, we see a very large increase in intermediate expenditures. Intermediate expenditures increase by C$659.97 (p = 0.048) on a baseline mean of C$890. The changes are primarily accounted for by fertilizer investment, which increases by C$383 (p = 0.026) compared to a statistically insignificant C$167 (p = 0.260) for pesticide." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 15.

"Bridges improve market access and increase earnings, which may result in greater savings. However, they also smooth the earnings process of workers that can now consistently reach those markets, which may reduce motives for precautionary savings. The key liquid savings vehicle in rural Nicaragua is storage of staple crops. Storage is defined as quantity harvested net of sales, debt payments, gifts, and land payments, measured as a share of total harvest quantity. We measure this in terms of quantities for both maize and beans. Any household with no crop production is given a value of zero in this regression. Table 7 shows how bridges affect savings behavior. Regressions 1 and 3 show the average effect. Farmers save about 9 percentage points less of both their maize harvest (p = 0.014) and their bean harvest (p = 0.052). Columns (2) and (4) again show that the decrease in storage is concentrated among continuing farmers, the same subgroup as those who increase investment. Among continuing farmers, we find decreases of 13 percentage points for maize (p = 0.016) and 17 percentage points for beans (p = 0.056). Among those who did not farm at baseline, we see small and statistically insignificant changes in storage rates across build and no-build villages. "Taken together, these results suggest that farmers are selling a greater share of their harvests and using the proceeds to invest more in their farms. We test this directly by correlating changes from baseline intermediate expenditures with changes for baseline storage among treatment households. The correlation is -0.28 when using corn storage and -0.34 for bean storage. Both are statistically significant at the one percent level. This demonstrates that those who are increasing fertilizer the most are also those decreasing their savings the most." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 17.

The study includes 15 villages. The average number of households per village is 33.5, and the authors report 97 percent participation in the first round of the annual survey. Average sample size in main regressions we use in our cost-effectiveness analysis is 6,443 (effects on labor market income, Table 5, column 1, p. 42) and 1,493 (effect on farm profit, Table 9, column 3, p. 45). Annual data were collected in three waves from 2015-2017 (one wave before bridge construction and two waves following bridge construction), and biweekly data were collected over a period of 64 weeks starting with the rainy and dry seasons before construction through the end of the rainy and dry seasons after construction. Citations below:

• "We study a total of fifteen villages. Of these, six passed both the needs and feasibility assessments, and therefore received bridges. The other nine passed only the needs assessment and did not receive a bridge." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 9.
• "The data used in our analysis comes from surveys conducted at the end of the main rainy season, in November 2014, November 2015, and November 2016. Bridges were constructed in early 2015. Therefore we have surveys from three years for all villages. For those that receive a bridge, we observe one survey without a bridge and two surveys with a bridge. We refer to these survey waves as t = 0, 1, 2." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 9.
• "The second component of our data is biweekly follow-up surveys conducted by phone with a subset of households. Because floods are high frequency and short term events, this data shows the contemporaneous effect that flooding has on households. We carried out these surveys for 64 weeks, covering the rainy season before construction, along with the first dry and rainy seasons after construction." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 10.
• "On average, there are 33.5 households per village." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 72.
• "Participation in the first round of the survey was very high in general, with 97 percent of households agreeing to participate." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 10.

"Over the next five years, Professors Brooks and Donovan will be conducting a randomized controlled trial (RCT) on the effect of 267 B2P bridges in Rwanda… The RCT is a stepped-wedge design (i.e. treatment is delivered in "steps" rather than simultaneously)." GiveWell's non-verbatim summary of a conversation with Professor Wyatt Brooks and Professor Kevin Donovan, January 6, 2020 , p. 3

"Professors Brooks and Donovan have been conducting an initial pilot study in Rwanda over the past year and are continuing to collect data and analyze results. The pilot was intended to test and adapt the survey design and field methods used in Nicaragua to Rwanda in order to ensure operational efficiency during the full study." GiveWell's non-verbatim summary of a conversation with Professor Wyatt Brooks and Professor Kevin Donovan, January 6, 2020 , p. 4

• health care
• collective efficacy
• access to social/government programs
• women’s empowerment (the Nicaragua study documented a 60% increase of women joining the market)
• climate resilience (flash floods can inhibit access to markets when no bridge is available)."

GiveWell's non-verbatim summary of a conversation with Avery Bang and Dr. Christina Barstow, December 12, 2019 , p. 4

• Brooks and Donovan 2020 also note, "Note, however, that there are potentially other effects we are missing. For example, 18 percent of households in the control group mentioned clinic and maternal health care access as an important service cut off by flooding." P. 72.
• 30 See here in our cost effectiveness model.
• 31 See here in our cost-effectiveness model.
• 32 Our cost-effectiveness model from 2020 is available here .
• 33 See these parameters here and here in our cost-effectiveness model.
• 34 These studies all have limitations. We weigh the studies based on how similar they are in program and setting to Bridges to Prosperity's Rwanda program here .
• 35 See these adjustments here .

See the cost-effectiveness model here for details on calculations of income effects.

• 37 See here for our previous cost-effectiveness model, 'Best Guess of Effect of Bridges to Prosperity in Rwanda' column, 'Bridges vs cash' row. See here in our updated cost-effectiveness model, 'Best Guess of Effect of Bridges to Prosperity in Rwanda' column, 'x cash after leverage and funging' row.

Brooks and Donovan 2020 collect outcome data for individuals in villages immediately adjacent to proposed or actual bridge sites ("Our strategy was to survey all households within three kilometers of the proposed bridge site on the side of the river that was intended to be connected." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 9) and estimate 33.5 households per village ("On average, there are 33.5 households per village." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 72). It is not clear from Brooks and Donovan 2020 whether there are other households in other villages that were also likely to have seen income effects from the bridges. However, it is our understanding that in the Nicaragua setting there were likely to be fewer households affected per bridge than other settings.

"On average, there are 33.5 households per village." Brooks and Donovan 2020 , p. 72

Bridges to Prosperity's estimates of households affected are provided in this document .

• 41 See more details in a cell note here in our cost-effectiveness analysis, row "Households affected by each bridge".

It's also possible that income effects may fade out over time, though it may also be possible that benefits compound over time.

• "B2P’s aim is to have each government pay for half of the costs of the bridge building projects in that country. In Rwanda, B2P is paying about 60% of the expenses. In Uganda, the expenses are split 50/50." P. 4
• 45 See here in our cost-effectiveness analysis.

"B2P also believes that the number of households affected by each bridge in Rwanda will be much larger than in Nicaragua." GiveWell's non-verbatim summary of a conversation with Avery Bang and Dr. Christina Barstow, December 12, 2019 , p. 5

"B2P’s funding gap in Rwanda is about $9.5 million to $10 million… B2P’s funding gap in Uganda is in the range of $14 million to $50 million." GiveWell's non-verbatim summary of a conversation with Avery Bang and Dr. Christina Barstow, December 12, 2019 , p. 7

2020 Elevate Prize

Bridges to Prosperity

I am Avery Bang, President and Chief Executive Officer of Bridges to Prosperity (B2P), a social enterprise providing isolated communities with access to healthcare, education, and economic opportunities by supporting the construction of trailbridges over impassable rivers. Under my leadership, B2P has connected over one million people around the world. I was featured in the IMAX film Dream Big and have spoken on stages ranging from TED to the UN. I am a Distinguished Alumni of The University of Iowa, where I completed degrees in Studio Art and Civil Engineering, and The University of Colorado where I completed an MSc in Geotechnical Engineering. I earned an MBA from The University of Oxford and received an honorary doctorate degree from Clarkson University.

Project name:

One-line project summary:.

We connect isolated communities with healthcare, education, and economic opportunities by constructing trailbridges over impassable rivers.

Present your project.

Globally, more than 900 million people travel by foot but lack access to pedestrian infrastructure that is passable during all seasons. Seasonal rains, and resultant flooding, effectively cuts off residents living in the rural last mile from the resources they need to thrive, including markets, employment, education, healthcare, and emergency services.

Bridges to Prosperity partners with local governments, global stakeholders, and communities to create sustainable pedestrian access to essential services through the construction of trailbridges. These trailbridges are relatively low-cost, designed to be built in remote environments, and utilize repurposed or locally-sourced materials. By providing a path for rural residents to reliably access opportunities, trailbridges play a foundational role in connecting a broad range of services to the populations that will most benefit from them, and have the power to improve the livelihoods and well-being of entire regions.

Submit a video.

What specific problem are you solving.

Analyzing geospatial and population data, we estimate that more than 250 million people are in need of a trailbridge globally. For last-mile communities that must cross rivers in their routes to roads and critical resources, heavy seasonal rains make the journey more dangerous. When rivers swell, reaching school, the doctor, work, or the market can become life-threatening without a bridge to cross. Studies from rural poor communities throughout the world have demonstrated that safe access provided by reliable pedestrian transportation infrastructure can have dramatic effects on the ability of residents to meet their own needs, care for their families, earn stable incomes, build resiliency, and weather crises (Roberts, KC, & Rastogi, 2006). When residents are not certain that they will be able to cross a river to reach markets, schools, or clinics, they are less likely to invest in farming more of their land, prioritizing school attendance for their children, or accessing preventative healthcare. They make decisions based on the risk of being cut off from resources and this perception of risk can cripple potential opportunities to improve key outcomes, locking rural residents in poverty (Lebo & Schilling, 2001).

What is your project?

We partner with local governments and communities in the world’s rural farmlands to construct trailbridges over impassable rivers and canyons. These bridges connect residents, previously isolated for weeks or months at a time during rainy seasons, with the services and resources they need to move themselves and their families out of poverty. A study by economists from the University of Notre Dame and Yale University (Brooks and Donovan, Econometrica , summer 2020) evaluated the impact of safe access provided by a B2P trailbridge. The study found that access has immediate influence on key economic indicators, such as farm profits, but also long-term impact on decision-making and risk-taking behavior. When communities are able to rely on a safe river crossing, they are more willing to take advantage of alternative labor-earning opportunities, which builds savings, makes it possible to sell crops that would previously have been stored for personal consumption, and reinvest in fertilizer or seed. As a result, communities receiving trailbridges (compared with a control group) saw not only a 30% increase in labor market income, but a 45% increase in investment in farm inputs, a 75% increase in farm profits, and a 59% increase in women entering the labor market.

Who does your project serve, and in what ways is the project impacting their lives?

54% of the population of frontier- and emerging-market countries live in rural areas where the primary modes of transportation are non-vehicular (World Bank, 2017), and a lack of access to vital resources severely impacts outcomes for residents living in the isolated last mile. This challenge is particularly acute for women, who bear a disproportionate share of the household transportation burden and who must overcome institutional and societal barriers to opportunities, as well as the elderly, those with physical disabilities, and small children (Roberts et al., 2006). For last mile residents, typically living on less than $1.90 USD a day, access is critical. 

The benefits of safe access extend to adjacent communities not directly or regularly affected by river flooding. Improvement of rural transport networks is shown to increase inter-district trade and general economic activity for entire regions, improve food security, and facilitate cross-community social engagement that promotes civic participation and well-being.

We at B2P believe that design and implementation of a rural connectivity strategy must be human-centric and inclusive. We have constructed our model around local government investment and ownership, elevating the voices of last-mile residents, and recruiting and training local talent, from program leadership to project foremen.

Which dimension of The Elevate Prize does your project most closely address?

Explain how your project relates to the elevate prize and your selected dimension..

The focus of government investment in transportation infrastructure in frontier- and emerging-market countries is typically on vehicular roads that connect larger urban networks. Rural populations, who depend on pedestrian trails and moto transport, are often left out of national strategic plans for development, and this lack of investment locks them in generational cycles of poverty that are nearly impossible to escape from. Trailbridges provide these rural residents with a literal pathway out of poverty, and beyond that, government investment in connecting them to opportunity represents an acknowledgement of the invaluable contribution they make to the regional and national identity.

How did you come up with your project?

B2P was founded in 2001 by a construction industry veteran, after learning about the severe isolation of rural farming communities in Ethiopia through an article published in National Geographic magazine. Joined by family and friends, our founder would complete one or two new trailbridge projects a year, utilizing donated materials and labor and with the support of a few small funding partners. I joined B2P in 2006 as a volunteer and in 2008 as the organization’s first full-time employee. Over the last twelve years, I have built a global team committed to local engagement, efficiency, and impact, and together with local partners we have connected over 1 million people and are on track to double that impact in the next five years.

Why are you passionate about your project?

While volunteering with the Fijian Breast Cancer Foundation during my time studying abroad with the University of Iowa, I was exposed to the inequality caused by rural poverty, and saw that simple trailbridges were changing the entire healthcare system for a community, providing earlier diagnoses and more consistent access to care. The power of infrastructure captured me, and I returned to Iowa committed to build bridges to provide life-changing access. Initially, altruism drove my deep-seated desire to create change in the world, but I knew that to truly contribute to B2P’s work, I would need something more than passion. I chose to further my studies at the globally recognized Mortenson Center for Global Engineering at the University of Colorado, and my degree in Civil Engineering now informs B2P’s commitment to quality, my own understanding of responsible development models, and my passion for the power of the built environment to create inclusive opportunity. 

Why are you well-positioned to deliver this project?

We are the only organization with global reach solely focused on connecting the rural last mile through bridge-building. Over the course of B2P’s history, I have led a high-performing team in refining designs and processes and developing systems and partnerships to scale. This track record of learning and growth uniquely positions us to solve the problem of rural isolation within our lifetime, providing a framework of:

• highly-skilled talent
• experts and advisors that elevate the organization’s capacity
• broad experience engaging with local governments
• and solutions to potential roadblocks

Designs and construction models have been standardized to be implementable in rural environments around the world, and we have to-date supported the construction of more than 330 trailbridges in 21 countries that serve more than 1.1 million people. Locally-hired teams in each country adapt designs to particular societal, political, and environmental conditions, and lead in partnering with governments to advocate for last-mile communities.

In 2019, we launched a first-of-its-kind partnership with the Government of Rwanda to connect the entire country’s last mile by 2024 through the construction of more than 250 trailbridges. We believe that this groundbreaking partnership will prove that national governments can prioritize, procure, and finance rural infrastructure at scale. The five-year program also aggregates a portfolio of projects large enough to randomize a controlled study of the impact of access on longer-term outcomes like education, health, and climate resiliency. We are excited to be partnering with a collaborative of researchers to create this invaluable evidence in advocacy of last-mile connectivity.

Provide an example of your ability to overcome adversity.

B2P, along with much of the world, paused operations in its program countries to abide by lockdown restrictions with the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, East Africa, where our work is currently centered, was at the same time experiencing unprecedented flooding, making safe, reliable access more important than ever, especially considering the food security challenges many isolated communities were already facing amidst the lockdowns. We worked with government partners in both Rwanda and Uganda (current program countries) to develop a plan to resume construction of trailbridges but with strict safety protocols in place to ensure the health of our staff, local labor employed on bridge sites, and the members of communities surrounding the sites. These protocols included the provision of additional handwashing stations, posting of training images on COVID-19 prevention within and outside of all sites, thermal scanning and symptom survey of all workers before they entered site, distribution of a personal set of PPE for all workers (including face masks, gloves, safety glasses, and hard hats), and the enforcement of social distancing on site whenever possible. These provisions allowed us to return to the field and to continue to construct connection for communities in desperate need.

Describe a past experience that demonstrates your leadership ability.

After leading B2P for nearly a decade, I understood that I was approaching the limits of what my intuition, training, and network could offer the organization. In 2017, I approached our Board of Directors with a unconventional but brave request: invest in my return to school to build my vocabulary and expertise in strategic business development and finance, or hire another leader with that experience, who I would support to lead the organization in a way I knew I at the time could not. The Board supported a year of sabbatical for me to complete an MBA at the University of Oxford, and when I returned to B2P, I led our pivot from a technologically-focused organization into a team of advocates, technical assistance players, and financially-literate partnership development professionals who are aiming to change the way that last-mile infrastructure is prioritized and financed around the world. I believe my ability to acknowledge my own shortcomings and to pursue continued learning, in and out of the classroom, are two of the characteristics that make me a powerful leader.

How long have you been working on your project?

Where are you headquartered, what type of organization is your project.

https://www.bridgestoprosperity.org

If you have additional video content that explains your project, provide a YouTube or Vimeo link here:

Describe what makes your project innovative..

Poverty in frontier- and emerging-market countries is a culmination of many factors, including access to healthcare and education, farm productivity, and market return. Existing development interventions target these factors individually, with billions spent on services specific to education, health, or agriculture. This narrow focus limits impact in failing to address the expansive spectrum of influences affecting poverty for the bottom billion. Trailbridges are foundational to the successful delivery of a broad range of development initiatives, directly serving rural residents but also creating a network of connectivity that serves the entire last-mile development community.

B2P-designed trailbridges have a decades-long lifespan and require minimal maintenance. Considering the impact on incomes created by trailbridges, it is estimated that a trailbridge will pay for itself in economic gains alone in two years (dependent on population density). Other income-improving interventions targeting last-mile farmers require ongoing investment for increases in income to continue to be realized year-over-year, and other familiar development products, such as water pumps or solar grids, have short lifespans and demand significant maintenance. A B2P trailbridge, built to serve entire communities for generations, will generate 10 to 20 times the cost of the structure in additional farmer income over its lifespan.

What is your theory of change?

Trailbridges provide safe, reliable access to critical resources that, if accessible, represent opportunities for rural populations experiencing acute poverty to improve both short- and long-term outcomes. We know, from catchment surveys taken at completed bridge sites, that members of last-mile communities utilize our bridges to access farms, jobs, schools, healthcare services and hospitals, religious facilities, and government services, and to visit friends and family. This connectivity is transformative – studies show that access to critical services like these improves health, livelihoods (through increased agricultural production, income, consumption, and economic resilience), academic performance for students, and civic engagement and collective efficacy at the community level (Brooks & Donovan, 2020; UNOPS, 2019; Roberts, KC, & Rastogi, 2006). Long-term, these outcomes compound to create improved well-being, poverty graduation, gender equity, and climate change resilience for entire communities, countries, and regions (ODI, 2010; UNECE, 2009).

The model outlined here has been foundational to our understanding of how an individual bridge addresses poverty for a community, but it does not take into account the complex network of gaps that exist between a community needing safe access and the completion of a new trailbridge. This is where our value as B2P is shifting.

We see our work in systems change taking three paths: building a global voice, proving model and impact, and providing technical assistance. In building a global voice, we seek to organize a coalition to strengthen the case for investment in rural access. In proving model and impact, we seek to deepen our collective understanding to better serve national policies and strategies for alleviating rural poverty. In providing technical assistance, we seek to remove barriers by creating a suite of tools and processes that could be used by governments or the private sector to create safe access at scale. We believe this work will create a global strategy for policy, financing, and implementation of last-mile connectivity programs and elevate trailbridges as a catalytic tool for alleviating poverty, all directly leading to the provision of safe access for a greater number of people and bringing the end of poverty caused by rural isolation into focus.

Select the key characteristics of the community you are impacting.

• Women & Girls
• Pregnant Women
• Children & Adolescents
• Middle-Income
• Persons with Disabilities

Which of the UN Sustainable Development Goals does your project address?

• 1. No Poverty
• 2. Zero Hunger
• 3. Good Health and Well-Being
• 4. Quality Education
• 5. Gender Equality
• 6. Clean Water and Sanitation
• 8. Decent Work and Economic Growth
• 9. Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure
• 11. Sustainable Cities and Communities
• 13. Climate Action
• 17. Partnerships for the Goals

In which countries do you currently operate?

In which countries will you be operating within the next year, how many people does your project currently serve how many will it serve in one year in five years.

The 338 bridges completed over the course of B2P’s history currently serve an estimated 1,190,000 people around the world with safe access. Over the next year, we will partner to support the construction of another 31 trailbridges that will directly serve approximately 90,000 people, and over the next five years, we anticipate serving 7,500,000 rural residents through the completion of the national program in Rwanda and the launch of a similar program in Uganda.

What are your goals within the next year and within the next five years?

Ultimately, we aim to solve the problem of rural isolation within our lifetime, with a specific aim of 2070. This will require a shift in the role that we play. Historically, the organization has been a leader in rural trailbridge construction, and has fundraised to co-finance bridge projects with local governments. To ensure that all 250 million people worldwide in need of safe access receive it, we will facilitate the development of a broad-reaching coalition of partners to fund, procure and deliver connectivity. B2P, while still an implementor, will more strongly participate as advocate, technical advisor, and innovator.

To position the organization for this pivot, we will focus on proving scalability, impact, and return on investment in East Africa first. 40% of the sites identified as in need of a trailbridge globally are in Africa, and more than half of the 82 million isolated people in Africa reside in East Africa. By targeting efforts here, we, in collaboration with local government and private sector partners, will connect 30 million isolated rural residents by 2030 and catalyze a global effort to solve the problem at scale.

We launched our targeted work in East Africa in Rwanda, through a five-year program started July 2019. In the 2020-2021 year, we will grow the Rwanda program’s annual bridge construction and address key organizational capacities to provide access for 1.1. million people by 2024 and build the case study of impact, scalability, and return on investment that will mobilize a global coalition of partners.

What barriers currently exist for you to accomplish your goals in the next year and in the next five years?

B2P continues to invest time and resource to build the capacity of the organization to grow and pivot for scale. We understand that the successful completion of the Rwanda program is critical both as a proof point for government partnership and to facilitate the large-scale research study on the impacts of last-mile transportation infrastructure that we believe will motivate governments and aid partners alike to invest in trailbridges as a catalytic development tool. B2P is responsible for raising more than $16 million in co-financing against the overall five-year Rwanda program cost of $28 million, a formidable goal.

There is a complexity to partnering with academics to launch a large-scale research program in parallel to the scaled bridge-building program in Rwanda. The research effort will provide valuable data beyond economic indicators and across geographic boundaries, but the structure of the study requires the research team to randomize against the order in which projects are built at the district level. This constraint on project scheduling inhibits B2P’s ability to operate with flexibility and efficiency.

Finally, programmatic activity scaled to a national level brings with it inherent procurement and staffing challenges. The Rwanda program requires us to source material, both donated and purchased, and qualified labor at a new level, and to coordinate with government partners who may be supplying and transporting materials to make sure they are delivered on-time and of the quality required.

How do you plan to overcome these barriers?

We are cultivating a pool of potential philanthropic funders, exploring lines of credit, and pursuing opportunities in results-based financing to meet the fundraising challenge. 

To mitigate the constraints imposed by the research study structure, the B2P team is partnering with district representatives to determine project order earlier and has developed robust communication channels with the research team.

On the procurement front, we have added capacity to our procurement and staffing teams to cultivate partnerships with existing and potential suppliers and training programs to ensure that we are able to source materials, both locally and internationally, at the rate and quality required by the program, and to develop a pipeline of skilled talent as we grow our own in-country team and build the capacity of private sector partners and other potential implementers.

What organizations do you currently partner with, if any? How are you working with them?

The national program to construct last-mile connectivity in Rwanda was organized in partnership with the Rwandan Ministries of Infrastructure, Finance and Economic Planning, and Local Government, as well as the Rwanda Transport Development Agency and the Local Administrative Entities Development Agency. The fabrication shop at the Integrated Polytechnic Regional College in Kigali produces the steel components for all bridges, and district partners secure materials, local labor, and land rights.

In Uganda, partnership extends from the Ministry of Works and Transport and the Uganda National Roads Authority to districts.

B2P, in partnership with geospatial data specialists, governments, and other last-mile service providers, is developing an analysis tool that utilizes geospatial datasets (roads, waterways, rural population distribution, administrative boundaries, etc.) and field-geolocated resources (markets, health centers, Community Health Worker routes, credit and savings institutions, schools, etc.) to create a digital landscape of services and routes available to the rural last mile. This new wealth of centralized data, contextualized in an interactive map, will help governments and implementors to better understand the barriers that residents in target communities face in accessing services and the potential for increased impact when those barriers are removed or overcome. Partners in this effort include the Tableau Foundation, Planet, EarthLab, Alteryx, and Datablick.

Finally, B2P has a long-standing relationship with Helvetas, a Swiss nonprofit organization with a trailbridge program focused primarily in Nepal and Ethiopia. We often share innovations and trainings between the two organizations, and are speaking with them now about participation in the last-mile access collaborative.

What is your business model?

We work with local governments to map and scope the widespread and significant impact a last-mile pedestrian transport network could have for their constituencies, and provide a cost-efficient solution to connect isolated communities to services and opportunities. Our bridges are designed to be safely constructed in remote field environments with little to no access to modern power equipment. Excavations and foundations are completed by hand by community volunteers or workers employed by the local district, and rock, gravel, and sand are sourced directly from the river when environmentally and structurally appropriate. Each project utilizes repurposed cable and steel donated by ports and large construction sites for structurally-critical components.

Our program structure is designed to streamline growth and expansion within a country, creating efficiencies that allow us to serve more people with critical access through the construction of a greater number of trailbridges. The structure is based on a team model, where a “Build Team Lead” manages a group of specialists in procurement, community coordination, and engineering, with each Project Engineer managing a team of three Foremen. New Build Teams can be quickly hired, trained, and deployed as a self-contained unit, constructing, at capacity, 24 bridges a year each. These Build Teams are supported by a global “Advisory Services” team, which provides legal, procurement, training, finance, and policy support through global communications channels, an extensive network of expertise and counsel, in-person and distanced training platforms, and digital systems that allow for data aggregation, analysis, and delivery.

What is your path to financial sustainability?

While we currently co-finance trailbridge projects with government partners, we believe that ultimately, transportation infrastructure is the responsibility of governments, and that the barriers that prevent these governments from providing rural citizens with critical access can be overcome with technical assistance and by raising the profile of last-mile connectivity as a catalytic development tool globally. As B2P demonstrates success contracting rural infrastructure projects at a national level and the Rwanda program demonstrates transformative impact, we believe that last-mile connectivity programs will launch across East Africa. By 2030, an expanded study on the impact of trailbridges on a broad range of outcomes will have been released, and this study, when paired with the proof point on program structure and cost-efficiency developed in East Africa, will motivate governments and aid institutions across the globe to prioritize last-mile connectivity programs to achieve key development outcomes. At that point, governments will procure their own infrastructure, and we will contract as an implementor and technical advisor.

In the interim, B2P funding currently partners local government support (typically covering the cost of locally-sourced materials and the wages of local labor) with philanthropic support. This support includes donated repurposed cable and steel, corporate sponsorships, foundation grants, and contributions from individuals, including major gifts and general annual campaign funds. The organization also employs concessional loans through financing partners to provide working capital for the purchase of materials in advance of trailbridge construction.

If you have raised funds for your project or are generating revenue, please provide details.

B2P government partners include the Rwandan Ministries of Infrastructure, Finance and Economic Planning, and Local Government. Budget for the Rwandan national last-mile connectivity program is allocated through district partners, and is primarily modelled as pay-for-performance contracting. In Uganda, government partners include the Ministry of Works and Transport and the Uganda National Roads Authority, which contract us as a trailbridge implementor.

Grant funding partners include a number of foundations that prefer anonymity, but current annual grant funding commitments total approximately $2.5 million USD.

Our Corporate Partnership Program has secured some of the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction industry’s most significant players as corporate sponsors, including Kiewit, Bechtel, and WSP. In exchange for a unique portfolio of benefits, companies underwrite the cost of a trailbridge project.

General annual campaign fundraising efforts typically secure approximately $500,000 annually from individual supporters giving primarily through an online donation platform and responding to our marketing communications.

Finally, working capital lines are provided by philanthropic investors and foundations with an interest in supporting our work in unique ways outside of traditional grant opportunities. The capital is typically concessional, and is repaid when our government partners reimburse on pay-for-performance structured contracts.

If you seek to raise funds for your project, please provide details.

The successful completion of the Rwanda national program is critical, not only for the proof point it represents for the structuring of a country-wide program but to facilitate the large-scale research study being completed in parallel to the program. Together, these two case studies will raise the profile of last-mile transportation infrastructure as a catalytic development tool and motivate other governments and aid partners to include trailbridges in their own strategic planning. We are seeking philanthropic funding (grants and donations) in the amount of $10,700,500 to unlock the remaining $8,280,000 in government co-financing and carry the program through to completion by 2024.

What are your estimated expenses for 2020?

2020 expenses reflect a temporary operational pause due to the restrictions put in place in response to the COVID-19 outbreak, and a corresponding slow in operational capacity as the team returns to the field but with safety protocols in place. Therefore, we anticipate 2020 expenses to be approximately $6,000,000.

Why are you applying for The Elevate Prize?

While funding in support of national scale in Rwanda will be integral to the success of our program, we are most attracted to the Elevate Prize for the network, inspiration, and mentorship promised to award finalists. We are at a pivot point as an organization – we are transforming from an implementing organization focused on filling a technology gap to an advisory and advocacy organization that aims to catalyze a global movement for access. We are not the first to face the challenges associated with that pivot, and the opportunity to draw on the expertise and experience of the Elevate Prize and MIT Solve networks would be transformational for us.

In which of the following areas do you most need partners or support?

• Funding and revenue model
• Talent recruitment
• Board members or advisors
• Marketing, media, and exposure

What organizations would you like to partner with, and how would you like to partner with them?

In building a global voice for the importance of rural transportation infrastructure in development strategies, we would like to partner with other consortiums, research collaboratives, and policy-making organizations with shared objectives. These include the Sub-Saharan Africa Transport Policy Program (SSATP), the Partnership on Sustainable, Low Carbon Transport (SLOCAT), Sustainable Mobility for All (Sum4All), the Infrastructure Transitions Research Consortium (ITRC), and the Research for Community Access Partnership (ReCAP).

In building a coalition for connectivity, we are in conversation with or seeking introduction to a number of other international non-governmental organizations that serve last mile populations, including Helvetas, Catholic Relief Services, CARE International, and BRAC.

In driving funding and finance to rural transportation infrastructure, we are in conversation with or seeking introduction to the mission offices in Rwanda and Uganda of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the United Kingdom Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDA), the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), and the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ).

As we explore which implementers may be able to step in alongside of B2P to bid and execute on trailbridge tenders at scale, we look to partner with the United Nations Office for Project Services and the World Bank Transport and Information and Communications Technologies (ICT) Global Practice Group.

Please explain in more detail here.

We are looking for funding partners to help us unlock an additional $8,280,000 in funding from the Government of Rwanda through 2024. Beyond this, we are looking for expertise and support in a number of areas as we build capacity to scale last-mile connectivity significantly in the next ten years.

• Talent sourcing, training, and development, at the leadership level but also within country programs where hiring and onboarding is happening rapidly and tenures are timebound to program completion
• Large-scale material procurement
• Design of systems that make data collected on schedule, service delivery, health and safety, expenses, and impact informative, relevant, and actionable
• Design of an advocacy campaign around the efficiency of last-mile connectivity as a foundational tool to achieve a number of the SDGs, including support in packaging that campaign for conversations with federal-level governments and potential aid funding partners

Solution Team

The Solve team will review your report and remove any inappropriate content.

Why is this item inappropriate?

We use cookies.

We use cookies and other tracking technologies to improve your browsing experience on our website and to understand where our visitors are coming from. By browsing our website, you consent to our use of cookies and other tracking technologies.

TED is supported by ads and partners 00:00

The Power of Connection

Bridges to Prosperity

Author: Avery Bang

Date published

23 January 2018

First published

Learn about the technical challenges faced by bridges to prosperity (b2p), a non-profit organisation with projects in over 18 countries on four continents..

B2P partners with bridge engineering and construction experts to develop safe and locally appropriate technologies. The organisation builds cable-supported bridges over impassable rivers, providing invaluable support to rural communities through access to healthcare, education, and market opportunities.

The lecture also looks at collaboration with industry experts in both the design process and on-site in some of the most remote communities in the world.

Avery Bang is the President and CEO of B2P. Under her leadership, B2P has reached nearly one million people around the world.

Supported by

The Technical Lecture Series is supported by Trimble.

Additional information

Related resources & events, eefit/ gem lecture: earthquake loss modelling for disaster risk management.

Lecture by GEM on earthquake loss modelling for disaster risk managment.

Humanitarian and international development engineering case studies

Hear case studies from around the world showcasing how structural engineers can positively work in humanitarian and international development contexts.

Q&A with... Miriam Graham

Miriam Graham, structural engineer at Arup, reflects on her work in the humanitarian and international development sector and being part of the IStructE's HID panel.

Item Added to basket

• Program on Social Enterprise, Innovation, and Impact

Bridges to Prosperity: Avery Bang on the Power of Geographic Connection for Economic Development

Approximately one billion people live life entirely on foot. Their communities lack vital transportation infrastructure, which means long, arduous daily commutes often dependent on seasonal weather patterns for safe travel. In other words, because of living in remote areas, nearly 15% of the global population does not have year-round, reliable access to basic necessities such as healthcare, education, or employment. Bridges to Prosperity (B2P), a US-based nonprofit, aims to change that. Working with local governments and other non-governmental organizations, B2P builds durable, sustainable footbridges to help address the overwhelming challenges caused by rural isolation. The organization currently supports over 1 million people with 250 bridges around the world. On January 29, 2020, Yale SOM’s Social Impact Lab hosted the President and CEO of B2P, Avery Bang.

Bang joined B2P as an undergraduate at the University of Iowa, where she earned a BSc. in Civil Engineering. Inspired to expand the organization’s work, Bang went on to earn a master’s degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Colorado, Boulder, and an MBA from Oxford’s Saïd Business School.

Her experience at B2P has led her to a unique philosophy on economic development: the power of physical connection as the foundation for growth and opportunity. She explained that B2P’s footbridges provide year-round, safe travel for people, bicycles, and livestock over dangerous rivers and treacherous mountain passes. In improving a community’s geographic connectivity, this infrastructure opens access to new markets as well as previously inaccessible vital resources such as healthcare and education. By simply providing physical access to goods and services, the results are extraordinary. An initial study revealed that one footbridge in the right place had the potential to increase labor market income by 30%. Bang noted that this result stemmed from other positive behavior changes associated with connectivity such as increased healthcare-seeking and a rise in school attendance.

To build these bridges, Bang and her team collaborate with local governments as well as what the organization calls “Industry Partners” – local and multinational engineering firms that partner with B2P to provide resources and expertise. Governments negotiate for placement of bridges and garner community support while Industry Partners aid in implementation, ongoing maintenance, and inspection. The average bridge takes about eight weeks to complete, depending on the level of community engagement and availability of labor, and costs about $60,000. The majority of the organization’s funding comes from grants and from in-kind contributions from Industry Partners.

In addition to building bridges, B2P implements unique monitoring capabilities, which include SMS feedback surveys to bridge users and a spatial mapping platform to help identify future needs. Bang also emphasized that their data collection efforts have supported global research on the impacts of rural isolation and the power of physical infrastructure. She concluded her talk with a brief overview of results-based financing, a key component of her research at business school, and a strategy she hopes will fund B2P’s projects in the future.

The work that Bang has accomplished with B2P supports innovative approaches to poverty alleviation that go beyond traditional philanthropy or micro-lending. Her passion for infrastructure was infectious and even hours after the talk, students reconsidered the value of a paved road and an easy walk home.

By Laura Wood ‘21

Avery Bang is building more than bridges

In the United States, we cross bridges every day, in cars and trains and on foot. So much so that we rarely give it a second thought. If a bridge is closed, it’s an inconvenience that often costs us time. At worst, we don’t go to work or school or complete our errands that day.

But for many people around the world, the absence of a bridge can have dire consequences. Avery Bang saw firsthand how this lack of access can impact a population when she was a University of Iowa undergraduate studying abroad in Fiji—and she has since committed her career to eliminating these barriers.

In Suva, the island country’s capital, Bang volunteered with a breast cancer foundation. At the time, the average diagnosis of the disease on the South Pacific islands occurred at stage four, and one of her tasks was to help distribute pamphlets about early detection among the more rural communities.

Iowa will prepare you, challenge you, and change you. You will change the world. We accept applications year-round, and are currently admitting new students for the following fall semester.

“I’d tag along with a little group of mainly Fijian women with our packet of materials in hand and walk and walk and walk until we came to a river. Our ability to reach the women on the other side—to be able to do something as simple as preventative health care—was decided by how high the river was that day,” she says. “I remember thinking how unjust it was that they were not able to have the same service as someone on the other side. And then I started thinking about how their kids couldn’t get to school and the farmers couldn’t get to market. It’s kind of analogous to being born on the wrong side of the tracks. But instead of having those tracks just be an inconvenience, you literally could die on your way across.”

Bang, who was studying civil and environmental engineering and studio arts at Iowa, returned to campus determined to find or start an organization building pedestrian bridges in remote areas, and a search led her to Bridges to Prosperity, a small nonprofit in Virginia doing just that. As part of an Iowa honors project in engineering, she rallied a small group of peers to join her in raising funds and building a bridge in Peru and convinced the organization’s leader to partner with them.

Long story short: They turned their textbook lessons into a tangible bridge. And, more than a decade later, Bang is president and CEO of Bridges to Prosperity, where she has standardized a footbridge design and overseen tremendous growth. To date, the nonprofit, now based in Denver, has built 310 bridges serving some 1.1 million people over 20 countries in Africa, Central America, and South America.

That sense of purpose Bang discovered as a UI undergraduate remains strong.

“The classroom taught me to be open and curious—I asked myself, ‘How can I take this expertise in engineering or this creativity coming from art and blend that with local expertise in countries all around the world?’ My experience at Iowa helped me build that humility and perspective, which have been invaluable in my career.”

Iowa City native Avery Bang was recruited by the University of Iowa to play soccer. In fact, the minute she received a scholarship offer from Iowa, she knew she was going to be a Hawkeye—and she says her athletic experience has served her well as the CEO and president of Bridges to Prosperity: “Being a Division I athlete at the University of Iowa, I learned very quickly that you have to be accountable to everyone around you. And that has been really important as I’ve built this global team of people trying to solve poverty in the rural last mile.”

“I wake up every day really excited that I have the opportunity to do this,” says Bang, who graduated from Iowa in 2007 and fine-tuned a footbridge design as a graduate student in geotechnical engineering at the University of Colorado Boulder. “Oftentimes for people who don’t have safe drinking water, are not able to pursue secondary education, or are not receiving proper health care benefits, it is because of a lack of access. One in seven people walk everywhere. If people can’t get to where they need to go, all of the money in the world will not solve the education problem or the water problem. To me, transportation infrastructure, and specifically bridges, is at the very foundation of how we can create economic prosperity for people.”

Research bears that out. Economists from the University of Notre Dame found in 2014–16 that rural footbridges built in Nicaragua by Bridges to Prosperity boosted farmer profits by 75% and labor market income by 30%—with nearly twice the benefit for women, who previously stayed home when it rained.

Government leaders and philanthropists are starting to take notice, Bang says. In June 2019, Bridges to Prosperity signed an agreement with Rwandan officials to build 355 bridges in that country over the next five years. In addition to maintaining a team in Rwanda, Bridges to Prosperity employs staff in Bolivia, Liberia, and Uganda.

Hear University of Iowa graduate Avery Bang discuss how building footbridges changes lives in this archived 2017 TED Talk.

Building a bridge, Bang explains, is a methodical process that involves collaboration with local governments and partnerships with local industries and can take up to several years. Once a bridge site is selected, a Bridges to Prosperity team mobilizes community members to organize labor and trains them to maintain the structure after completion. Construction usually takes a couple of months.

Seeing the looks on the faces of residents when a bridge is finally complete is inspiring, Bang says.

“Despite all of the photos and schematics you share with them beforehand, hauling rocks and digging holes every day is challenging work,” she says. “So to see people convert that effort into ‘That’s how my kid’s going to go to school’ is really touching. It’s a big part of what motivates me every single day.”

Having an international experience, whether part of a UI course, a study abroad program, or a student initiative like Bang’s, is becoming increasingly important as U.S. engineering firms step up international work, says Craig Just, associate professor of civil and environmental engineering at Iowa.

In addition to earning an engineering degree, Avery Bang completed a separate degree in studio art. The University of Iowa College of Engineering encourages its students to pursue interests outside the college. To learn more, see the college’s website.

“Experiences like Avery’s are transformative,” says Just, who has led students in water sustainability projects in places like Mexico, Nicaragua, and India. “At the College of Engineering, we strive to give students global experiences, not just as tourists but working with a community on a project. With the population on the planet projected to grow by 2 billion between now and 2050—95% of that in developing countries—college graduates without some global perspective are at a market disadvantage.”

Bang says her life-changing honors project in Peru wouldn’t have happened without the education and encouragement she received from the University of Iowa. Not only did she learn cement-to-water ratios optimal for durability, for example, she also gained that global perspective.

“I think because of Iowa’s geographic isolation, the faculty are really invested in producing global citizens,” says Bang, who later earned an MBA from the University of Oxford. “I started to really understand my role coming from a place of relative privilege. I knew I could create profound change, but only when I had a listener-and-learner’s mentality. The classroom taught me to be open and curious—I asked myself, ‘How can I take this expertise in engineering or this creativity coming from art and blend that with local expertise in countries all around the world?’ My experience at Iowa helped me build that humility and perspective, which have been invaluable in my career.”

Bridges to Prosperity

Ken Frantz enthusiastically recalls the day in March 2001 that transformed his life forever. Waiting for an oil change at a car dealership in Virginia, he picked up a National Geographic magazine, which fell open to a dramatic photograph: a man dangling from a rope strung between two arches of a broken stone bridge spanning the Blue Nile River in Ethiopia.

Built 360 years ago, the Second Portuguese Bridge had been partially destroyed during World War II by Ethiopian patriots desperate to keep Italian dictator Mussolini’s troops from entering their territory. But Ethiopia, one of the world’s poorest countries, had not been able to repair the bridge, a lifeline for moving everything from grain to live animals from one side to the other. For 65 years, crossing the river over the broken span required a group of men standing on either side with a rope, pulling the person across inch by inch.

When Frantz saw the photo, the semi-retired construction executive had an immediate thought: “Here’s something that I can do. There’s a tremendous need, and it wouldn’t be that hard.” Thinking about the photograph as he drove home from the car dealership, Frantz had another idea: “Not only could I fix this bridge, I could see if there are opportunities to fix other bridges.” After talking with his wife, Cheri, and his two pre-teen sons, and after establishing a non-profit organization, Bridges to Prosperity, Frantz began writing letters and making phone calls to family members and friends, requesting their support.

That the magazine had fallen open to that page “was quite strange,” said the 1971 political science graduate of Washington State University. “I had been thinking about what is going to be my legacy, beyond family and beyond succeeding in business. Personally, for me it was a calling.”

Another twist of fate was the fact that his brother, Forrest Frantz (’74 General Studies, ’78 M.B.A.), had seen the same photograph and had the identical thought of rebuilding the bridge–a coincidence the pair discovered when they talked a couple of weeks later. Forrest, who lives in Snoqualmie Pass with his wife, Pat King Frantz (’77 Office Administration), and their two daughters, became a founding director of Bridges to Prosperity and played a key role in overseeing the design and engineering of Second Portuguese Bridge.

Ken Frantz is no stranger to construction projects and bridges, or to completing them quickly. Growing up in Burien, he, Forrest, and their three brothers–Jim (’70 Electrical Engineering), Lawrence (’72 Chemical Engineering), and Marty (x’73 Business Administration)–helped their father, a Boeing engineer, build summer vacation homes. Then the homes were sold to fund the boys’ tuition at WSU.

Frantz recalls building a 120-unit apartment complex with Marty in 56 days, setting a national record. And when Frantz relocated his family from California’s Silicon Valley to Gloucester County, Virginia, in 1992, he fulfilled a longtime dream of buying an island–Cuba Island on the York River. Of course, while building a home on the 17-acre island, he needed to get to the mainland, which required construction of a bridge.

But repairing a bridge in another country–especially a country with few resources and many needs–was a new challenge. Frantz first contacted the Ethiopian embassy, where he shared his plan for rebuilding the bridge with Brook Hailu. The second ambassador to the U.S. expressed his enthusiastic support for the proposal and offered to provide letters of introduction to local and national Ethiopian officials.

While conducting research on the bridge, Frantz also received some valuable advice from Paul Henze, one of the world’s foremost experts on Ethiopian history. “He said, ‘When dealing with people in Ethiopia, start with local people and work your way up,’ ” Frantz recalled. “In the U.S., our tendency is to work from the top down.”

Three months after Ken Frantz first saw the National Geographic photo, he was on his way to Ethiopia. Forrest, a systems engineer for the Boeing Co., traveled with him to survey the bridge and determine what it would take to repair the structure. “Ken’s job was to handle the politics. My job was to handle the engineering,” said Forrest.

Other family members and friends rallied around Frantz’s idea, offering their support. Brett Hargrave, a nephew and former U.S. Army survival instructor, volunteered to serve as the party’s medic. Two other acquaintances with construction backgrounds, Randy Stacey and Gary Bunch, also offered to accompany the group and help. All of the men paid their own expenses, including airfare.

Because the bridge site was a considerable distance from the Addis Ababa airport, Frantz hired an expedition firm to help them reach their destination. The 25-member party traveled in jeeps to the trailhead at Mot’a, then began the toughest part of the journey: a 26-mile trip on foot, packing their gear in by donkey.

Once they arrived at the site, they planned to follow the “bottom up” strategy recommended earlier: approach the respected elders of villages on both sides of the broken bridge to seek their permission and blessing. However, before they had an opportunity to travel anywhere, a delegation of 16 elders appeared at the river to talk about the bridge. They offered their overwhelming support, a trend that continued during three different meetings with more than 60 leaders at villages on both sides of the Blue Nile.

The results were nothing short of amazing in an area where the only means of “fast” communication are telegraph wires and human messengers who serve as runners from one village to the next. Village elders flooded the state capital with messages urging the government to approve the bridge repair project. “We had the permit in hand within two weeks after returning to the U.S.,” Frantz said.

Through the Internet, Ken and Forrest discovered Sahale, a Seattle company that specializes in the design, engineering, construction, and repair of remote pedestrian bridges like those found on mountain hiking trails. Sahale did the design at cost, to meet two main requirements. The bridge would have to be strong, as Bridges to Prosperity would have no control over how many people and animals used the span at once. “At the same time, it would have to be transportable–something that could be broken down and be thrown on the back of donkeys,” Forrest explained.

After the design was complete, the bridge’s lightweight steel trusses were fabricated in Turin, Italy. Then, early last February, they were shipped via boat to the nearest seaport, located in the country of Djibouti, from there by train to Addis Ababa, and finally by truck and jeep to the trailhead.

Ken Frantz, his nephew, Brett, and friends Randy and Gary returned to the site to supervise the bridge construction. The movement of 25,000 pounds of concrete, steel, and gear required that 25 donkeys and 50 porters make several trips between the trailhead and the bridge site.

Bridges to Prosperity hired local villagers to work on various aspects of the construction project, distributing the work equally between villages. All of this was coordinated by another key volunteer, Zoe Keone. She served as photographer, videographer, payroll master, menu coordinator, and dispute resolution manager, along with many other tasks.

Keone also oversaw the start-up and operation of a free medical clinic staffed by an Ethiopian doctor and a nurse originally hired to handle construction injuries. During construction, the clinic treated 1,000 people from nearby villages, with the waiting line at times growing to more than 500.

The bulk of the bridge repair involved masonry work, followed by assembly of the bridge, which was pulled manually by ropes into place over the broken section. The entire project, scheduled to take two weeks, was completed in 10 days.

Once the bridge was finished, Frantz held an inauguration ceremony that drew 1,000 people who celebrated the moment with dances, singing, and speeches. In a touching display of affection, villagers brought him gifts of eggs–a precious commodity in a land where many suffer from malnutrition.

Frantz originally estimated that reopening the bridge would increase trade in the region from $300,000 per year to $3 million annually. He now believes that total is likely to be much greater. Such economic benefit is at the heart of the Bridges to Prosperity mission statement, which reads, in part: “We believe improved access to markets brings about more trade, and more trade improves economic prosperity.”

As the construction party hiked out of the area, Frantz noted some interesting traffic moving in the opposite direction: Porters carrying sheet metal headed for villages across the bridge to modernize old grass huts, and a large caravan of mules loaded with goods to be sold on the other side.

This is the true story of the bridge, Frantz said–the resulting increase in trade between villages and the economic benefit for people who so desperately needed to transport their goods easily from one place to another.

Many people want to aid poor countries and are often moved by images of starving children, Frantz added. But Bridges to Prosperity is “doing something that has long-lasting benefit for those starving children, that allows them to help themselves inside their own country.”

Bridges to Prosperity has completed three other small pedestrian bridge projects, including two in Nepal and one in Indonesia. A second Ethiopian bridge, across another portion of the Blue Nile River, is in the design stage.

And to come full circle on the magazine photo that started it all, National Geographic featured Frantz’s work to repair the Second Portuguese Bridge in its October 2002 issue.

Teresa Wippel is a Seattle free lance writer.

Zoe Keone is a professional photographer based in Gig Harbor, Washington.

For more information on Bridges to Prosperity, click here .

Meet Banchamlak

Perhaps the most touching story to come out of Ken Frantz’s journey to Ethiopia is that of a 12-year-old girl named Banchamlak.

During their initial survey trip, the Bridges to Prosperity delegation made an overnight stay in a nearby village. Banchamlak’s father asked if the visitors could help the girl, who was accidentally burned from her forearm to her shoulder years earlier. With no doctors to care for her, the burn formed scar tissue that held her arm permanently locked at a 90-degree angle, severely limiting her most basic activities.

In Ethiopia, Ken noted, “women must do huge amounts of work in and out of the home. With only one good arm, Banchamlak was severely handicapped.”

The delegation was moved by Banchamlak’s condition, but at that point there was nothing they could do except recommend that the father try to get his daughter to a hospital. The memory of the little girl, however, stayed with Frantz until he returned to oversee the bridge construction eight months later.

Once the free medical clinic was established at the bridge construction site, Frantz had an inspiration: He would send for Banchamlak and have her examined by the clinic doctor, Mengistu Mekonnen. The doctor was positive about the possibility of an operation for her at the nearest hospital in Bahir Dar, so Frantz arranged to take the girl for surgery after bridge construction was complete.

The surgeon, a friend of Dr. Mengistu’s, successfully released the scar tissue, known as a contracture, on Banchamlak’s arm. After undergoing physical therapy, she returned home with her brother but was scheduled to return for more surgery and skin grafts.

Web exclusive

Gallery: Bridges to prosperity   (Photographs of Ethiopia by Zoe Keone)

Bridges To Prosperity

Program Countries

A strategic focus in east africa.

Bridges to Prosperity's current efforts are centered in East Africa due to a compelling mix of need (with millions living in rural isolation due to impassable rivers), existing interest from national governments to invest, the region’s track record of safety and stability of leadership, and B2P’s long-standing relationships in the region. B2P currently has scaled programs in Rwanda and Ethiopia, a growing program with strong government leadership in Uganda, an emerging needs assessment effort in Kenya, and is in the process of launching a new program in Zambia, representing an expansion into Central Africa.

Rwanda represents B2P’s first scaled program and is currently in the second phase of an MOU with the national government to address rural access throughout the country. Under a 5-year MoU with several national-level ministries, B2P works with district governments in a reimbursement model to construct trail bridges across the country. B2P is partnering with a team of researchers to study the impacts of connectivity provided by B2P trail bridges in the rural context through a first-of-its-kind RCT study , which is currently underway. Under this program, B2P and the Government of Rwanda have completed more than 200 bridges that serve nearly 800,000 people.

In Uganda, we are partnering with the Ministry of Works and Transport to test the country coalition approach, organizing stakeholders to define the gaps in the rural access system and design a plan to address them. This work will begin with a three-year pilot phase, under which the group will determine coalition structure and governance, test an integrated asset management system, adapt community-led rural development models, and pilot new intervention designs and rehabilitation strategies for the full rural transport system. Through this program, we have cleared 10% of the rehab backlog in 4 districts, and 100% of the required new culverts, bridges, and hillside ladders have been constructed in 4 districts.

The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust has provided a generous grant supporting a three-year partnership between Helvetas and B2P in Ethiopia. The TRAIL Ethiopia program seeks to replicate Helvetas’ successful government-owned Amhara program in five additional regions, building the enabling environment to resource the construction of thousands of trail bridges and millions of kilometers of feeder trails in the country in the future and developing a global platform to share learnings and innovations. Through this program, there will be 150+ bridges built between 2022 and 2025, serving over 1.3 million people.

Emerging Program: Zambia

In February 2024, we launched our Zambia program, generously supported by the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust. This initiative addresses the critical issue of limited access faced by over 6.5 million Zambians residing in rural areas. Over three years, the project aims to connect over 65,000 rural Zambians while laying the foundation for a sustainable, government-owned rural access program. We’re currently finalizing a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development. Our existing Public-Private Development Framework (PPDF) partnerships are concentrated on two key technical working groups: Infrastructure & Construction and Transportation & Logistics. We’re integrating high return-on-investment rural transport projects into established programs by drawing inspiration from successful collaborations such as the Rwanda Rural Feeder Roads and Uganda National Roads Authority partnerships. Our initiatives include adopting standards, hands-on training sessions for government and private sector partners, comprehensive needs assessments, and prioritization efforts. Additionally, we’re gearing up for an April Fika Map Collect workshop with the government, enhancing our data collection capabilities and furthering our collaborative efforts.

Interested in learning more about our program countries?

We always value feedback on our work and are eager to share how you can get involved. Reach out to us today – we're excited to hear from you!

Sign up now for early access

Be the first to receive exclusive updates on Fika Map’s release date, new features, best practices, and more.

• Classroom Programme
• Interview Guidance
• Online Programme
• Drishti Store
• My Bookmarks
• My Progress
• Change Password
• From The Editor's Desk
• How To Use The New Website
• Help Centre

Achievers Corner

• Topper's Interview
• About Civil Services
• UPSC Prelims Syllabus
• GS Prelims Strategy
• Prelims Analysis
• GS Paper-I (Year Wise)
• GS Paper-I (Subject Wise)
• CSAT Strategy
• Previous Years Papers
• Practice Quiz
• Weekly Revision MCQs
• 60 Steps To Prelims
• Prelims Refresher Programme 2020

Mains & Interview

• Mains GS Syllabus
• Mains GS Strategy
• Mains Answer Writing Practice
• Essay Strategy
• Fodder For Essay
• Model Essays
• Drishti Essay Competition
• Ethics Strategy
• Ethics Case Studies
• Ethics Discussion
• Ethics Previous Years Q&As
• Papers By Years
• Papers By Subject
• Be MAINS Ready
• Awake Mains Examination 2020
• Interview Strategy
• Interview Guidance Programme

Current Affairs

• Daily News & Editorial
• Daily CA MCQs
• Sansad TV Discussions
• Monthly CA Consolidation
• Monthly Editorial Consolidation
• Monthly MCQ Consolidation

Drishti Specials

• To The Point
• Important Institutions
• Learning Through Maps
• PRS Capsule
• Summary Of Reports
• Gist Of Economic Survey

Study Material

• NCERT Books
• NIOS Study Material
• IGNOU Study Material
• Yojana & Kurukshetra
• Chhatisgarh
• Uttar Pradesh
• Madhya Pradesh

Test Series

• UPSC Prelims Test Series
• UPSC Mains Test Series
• UPPCS Prelims Test Series
• UPPCS Mains Test Series
• BPSC Prelims Test Series
• RAS/RTS Prelims Test Series
• Daily Editorial Analysis
• YouTube PDF Downloads
• Strategy By Toppers
• Ethics - Definition & Concepts
• Mastering Mains Answer Writing
• Places in News
• UPSC Mock Interview
• PCS Mock Interview
• Interview Insights
• Prelims 2019
• Product Promos

Make Your Note

Poverty Anywhere is a Threat to Prosperity Everywhere

• 24 Apr 2024
• 12 min read

Poverty is the Parent of Revolution and Crime.  

 —Aristotle.  

In our interconnected world shaped by technology, trade, and communication, the assertion   

that "Poverty in any corner poses a danger to prosperity everywhere" carries significant resonance. Despite poverty often appearing as a localized concern, its impact extends far beyond borders, influencing economies, social frameworks, and the overall welfare of humanity on a global scale.

The International Labour Organization (ILO) even has this principle enshrined in their Declaration of Philadelphia. While prosperity might evoke images of flourishing economies and a comfortable standard of living, it cannot exist in isolation from the realities of global poverty.  

One of the most direct threats poverty poses is to global economic stability. Impoverished regions often lack the resources to invest in infrastructure, education, and healthcare. This creates a cycle of limited economic opportunities, hindering their ability to participate effectively in the global market. Furthermore, widespread poverty translates to a diminished consumer base, impacting the profitability of businesses in prosperous nations that rely on exports.  

Poverty encompasses more than just a lack of material resources; it encompasses inadequate access to education, healthcare, sanitation, and opportunities for economic advancement. The World Bank defines extreme poverty as living on less than USD 2.15 USD/day , but poverty's dimensions extend beyond income thresholds to encompass multidimensional factors like education, health, and social exclusion. According to the NITI Aayog, the poverty line is set at 1,286 rupees per month for urban areas and 1,059.42 rupees per month for rural areas.  

At the local level, poverty manifests in various forms, including hunger, inadequate housing, and limited access to education and healthcare. In impoverished communities, individuals face heightened vulnerability to diseases, malnutrition, and exploitation. Children from poor households often lack access to quality education , perpetuating cycles of poverty across generations. Moreover, poverty can breed social unrest and crime, further destabilizing communities and hindering economic growth.  

Poverty takes a significant toll on economic development , both domestically and globally. In economically disadvantaged regions, productivity losses due to illness, malnutrition , and lack of education diminish human capital, hindering economic growth potential .   

Moreover, poverty restricts market opportunities and consumer spending, stifling demand and hindering economic expansion. In the global context, poverty undermines international trade and investment, contributing to economic disparities between nations and impeding efforts toward global economic integration.  

In a local slum , families may be forced to live in overcrowded, unsanitary housing with limited access to clean water and proper sanitation. This can lead to the spread of diseases and exacerbate existing health problems.  The high cost of rent might force multiple families to share a single unit, limiting privacy and hindering hygiene. For example, Dharavi serves as a stark reminder of the living conditions faced by many families in slums worldwide. Overcrowding, inadequate sanitation, and limited resources continue to be pressing issues that need attention and solutions. Efforts to improve living conditions and provide better opportunities for slum dwellers are crucial for creating a more equitable society.   

The social consequences of poverty are profound and far-reaching. Poverty exacerbates social inequalities, marginalizing vulnerable groups and perpetuating cycles of deprivation. Moreover, poverty undermines social cohesion and stability , fueling resentment and discord within communities. In extreme cases, poverty can give rise to social unrest, conflict, and mass migration, with implications for regional stability and global security. For example, Afghanistan faces a severe humanitarian crisis and poverty, with nearly 28.8 million people in urgent need of support. The economic collapse, exacerbated by decades, has left millions of Afghans struggling against poverty and to meet their basic needs. Food insecurity is a critical issue, with 17.2 million people facing crisis or worse levels of food insecurity.  

A 2019 study by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) found a strong correlation between poverty, inequality, and violent conflict. This instability disrupts economies, hinders investment, and forces people to flee their homes, creating a refugee crisis that further burdens developed nations. For example, the Syrian Civil War, fueled in part by poverty and social inequality, led to a mass exodus of refugees to Europe, placing a strain on social services and security forces in host countries.  

Access to healthcare is a fundamental human right, yet poverty often deprives individuals of this essential service. In impoverished communities, limited access to healthcare facilities, medications, and trained healthcare professionals exacerbates health disparities and increases the prevalence of preventable diseases. Furthermore, poverty undermines public health interventions, hindering efforts to combat infectious diseases and promote maternal and child health. In many rural areas of Sub-Saharan Africa , poverty limits access to healthcare facilities. These regions often lack well-equipped clinics, hospitals, and trained medical professionals.  

Rural communities in India face a severe shortage of access to healthcare services. Public spending on healthcare is limited, and private healthcare primarily serves urban areas. Those in rural areas often travel long distances (up to 100 km) to access healthcare services. India suffers from a significant lack of qualified medical personnel in rural areas. The absence of efficient public health systems exacerbates the problem. High rates of poverty hinder access to healthcare. Nearly 90% of the population is not covered by insurance, and most costs are paid out of pocket or through loans. Rural areas experience disparities in health indicators due to poverty, including high rates of infant mortality, malnutrition, maternal mortality, low vaccination rates, and low life expectancy.   

Poverty creates a ripple effect that impacts many aspects of life, including education. Children from low-income families may not be able to afford good school, uniforms, or transportation, expenditure even if public education is free. This can prevent them from enrolling or fully participating in school.  

This lack of resources can hinder a child's ability to learn and keep them from achieving their full potential. It can also perpetuate the cycle of poverty, as children who don't receive a quality education may have fewer job opportunities later in life.  

Poverty and environmental degradation are closely intertwined, forming a vicious cycle of deprivation and ecological decline. Impoverished communities often rely on natural resources for their livelihoods, leading to overexploitation and environmental degradation. Moreover, inadequate infrastructure and sanitation facilities contribute to pollution and environmental health hazards, further exacerbating the burden on vulnerable populations.   

India's forests are under immense pressure due to deforestation driven by various factors, including agricultural expansion, logging, and infrastructure development. Tribal communities, often among the poorest in India, rely heavily on forests for their livelihoods, including for fuelwood, food, and medicinal plants. As forests shrink, these communities face increased poverty and loss of traditional knowledge , leading to a vicious cycle of deprivation and ecological decline. The struggle for survival can sometimes force them into unsustainable practices like illegal logging or encroachment on protected areas, further exacerbating environmental degradation.  

In an increasingly interconnected world, the impacts of poverty transcend national borders, reverberating across continents through trade, migration, and communication networks. Globalization has intensified economic interdependence, making prosperity contingent on the well-being of nations at all levels of development. Economic downturns in one region can have cascading effects on global markets, highlighting the interconnected nature of modern economies.  

Addressing poverty requires concerted efforts at the local, national, and international levels. International cooperation is essential for mobilizing resources, sharing expertise, and implementing effective poverty alleviation strategies . Initiatives like the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provide a framework for collective action, aiming to eradicate poverty and promote shared prosperity by 2030. Moreover, international aid and development assistance play a crucial role in supporting impoverished communities and building resilient societies.  

Effective poverty alleviation strategies empower communities to become agents of change in their own development. Empowering marginalized groups, including women, indigenous peoples, and rural populations, is crucial for fostering inclusive growth and sustainable development. By investing in education, healthcare, and livelihood opportunities, communities can break free from the cycle of poverty and contribute to broader economic and social progress.  

"Poverty anywhere is a threat to prosperity everywhere" encapsulates the profound interconnectedness of global societies and economies. Poverty undermines human dignity, economic progress, and social cohesion, posing a threat to prosperity at both local and global levels. Addressing poverty requires holistic approaches that tackle its multidimensional manifestations, from economic deprivation to social exclusion and environmental degradation. By prioritizing poverty alleviation and fostering international cooperation, we can build a more equitable and prosperous world for all. As global citizens, we must recognize our shared responsibility in combating poverty and promoting sustainable development for future generations.   

Poverty is the Worst form of Violence.  

 —Mahatma Gandhi  

EL Education Curriculum

You are here.

• ELA 2019 G6:M2:U3:L3

Collaborative Problem-Solution Essay: Draft Introduction

In this lesson, daily learning targets, ongoing assessment.

• Technology and Multimedia

Supporting English Language Learners

Materials from previous lessons, new materials, closing & assessments, you are here:.

• ELA 2019 Grade 6
• ELA 2019 G6:M2
• ELA 2019 G6:M2:U3

Like what you see?

Order printed materials, teacher guides and more.

How to order

Help us improve!

Tell us how the curriculum is working in your classroom and send us corrections or suggestions for improving it.

Leave feedback

Focus Standards:  These are the standards the instruction addresses.

• W.6.2a, W.6.4, W.6.5, SL.6.2

Supporting Standards:  These are the standards that are incidental—no direct instruction in this lesson, but practice of these standards occurs as a result of addressing the focus standards.

• RI.6.1, RI.6.7, W.6.8, W.6.9b, SL.6.1, L.6.6
• I can analyze the structure of the model essay introduction. (W.6.2a)
• I can determine the characteristics of an effective focus statement by analyzing the model. (W.6.2a)
• I can collaboratively write an introduction with a strong focus statement for a problem-solution essay about William. (W.6.2a)
• Work Time A: Introduction Sentence Strips (W.6.2a)
• Work Time B: Draft Collaborative Introduction (RI.6.1, RI.6.7, W.6.2a, W.6.2c, W.6.2d, W.6.2e, W.6.4, W.6.5, W.6.8, W.6.9b, SL.6.2, L.6.6)

• Prepare Organize the Model: Introduction strips for Work Time A. Cut them out in advance to save time during class.
• Review the Informative Writing checklist from Unit 3, Lesson 1 to become familiar with what will be required of students over the remainder of the unit.
• Review the student tasks and example answers to get familiar with what students will be required to do in the lesson (see Materials list).
• Prepare copies of handouts for students, including the entrance ticket (see Materials list).
• Post the learning targets and applicable anchor charts (see Materials list).

Tech and Multimedia

• Work Time B: Display and replay the TED Talk: Avery Bang: "Building Bridges and Connecting Communities," setting a new purpose for each viewing. For this lesson, ask students to listen specifically for the information that should be included in the introduction.

Supports guided in part by CA ELD Standards 6.I.A.1, 6.I.A.4, 6.I.B.6, 6.I.B.7, 6.I.C.10, 6.I.C.11, 6.I.C.12, 6.II.A.1, 6.II.A.2, 6.II.B.5, 6.II.C.6, and 6.II.C.7.

Important Points in the Lesson Itself

• To support ELLs, this lesson invites students to first engage with the introduction of the Model Problem-Solution Essay: "Bridges to Prosperity" by rearranging sentence strips to reproduce the introduction before reading it aloud together as a class. This exercise hones student attention to smaller and more manageable amounts of text at a time, improves awareness of paragraph structure by allowing students to easily move around sentences to understand their function in a sentence, and unites reading and speaking skills by requiring active reading and collaboration.
• ELLs may find it challenging to draft the introductions of their essays. Make Work Time B more focused and/or more playful by inviting students to simulate the sentence strips activity from Work Time A. Provide blank strips to each pair, and encourage them to draft their introduction, one sentence at a time, on the strips, before piecing them together. Allocating attention to one sentence at a time may help students feel less overwhelmed. This exercise may also reinforce the idea that each sentence in the introduction serves a related, but distinct, purpose and should not simply repeat information.
• Model Problem-Solution Essay: "Bridges to Prosperity" (example for teacher reference) (from Module 2, Unit 3, Lesson 1, Work Time A)
• Informative Writing checklist (example for teacher reference) (from Module 2, Unit 3, Lesson 2, Closing and Assessment A)
• Criteria for Effective Informative Writing anchor chart (one for display; from Module 1, Unit 2, Lesson 8, Work Time B)
• Design Solution: William note-catcher (example for teacher reference) (from Module 2, Unit 1, Lesson 13, Work Time A)
• Problem-Solution Writing Planner: William (example for teacher reference) (from Module 2, Unit 3, Lesson 2, Work Time B)
• Work to Become Effective Learners anchor chart (one for display; from Module 1, Unit 1, Lesson 1, Work Time A)
• Work to Become Ethical People anchor chart (one for display; from Module 1, Unit 1, Lesson 1, Work Time A)
• Work to Contribute to a Better World anchor chart (one for display; from Module 1, Unit 3, Lesson 8, Closing and Assessment A)
• Problem-Solution Writing Planner: William (one per student; from Module 2, Unit 3, Lesson 2, Work Time B)
• Model Problem-Solution Essay: "Bridges to Prosperity" (one per student; from Module 2, Unit 3, Lesson 1, Work Time A)
• Informative Writing checklist (one per student; from Module 2, Unit 3, Lesson 1, Closing and Assessment A)
• Design Solution: William note-catcher (one per student; from Module 2, Unit 1, Lesson 13, Work Time A)
• Dance cards (one per student; from Module 2, Unit 1, Lesson 5, Closing and Assessment A)
• Independent reading journal (one per student; begun in Module 1, Unit 1, Lesson 6, Work Time B)
• Problem-Solution Essay: William (example for teacher reference)
• Entrance Ticket: Unit 3, Lesson 3 (one per student)
• Organize the Model: Introduction strips (one per pair)
• Scissors (optional; one per partnership)
• Lined paper or devices with word-processing software (one per partnership)

Each unit in the 6-8 Language Arts Curriculum has two standards-based assessments built in, one mid-unit assessment and one end of unit assessment. The module concludes with a performance task at the end of Unit 3 to synthesize students' understanding of what they accomplished through supported, standards-based writing.

Copyright © 2013-2024 by EL Education, New York, NY.

Get updates about our new K-5 curriculum as new materials and tools debut.

Help us improve our curriculum..

Tell us what’s going well, share your concerns and feedback.

Terms of use . To learn more about EL Education, visit  eleducation.org