Table 2 Side-by-side presentation of mixed methods interpretations

General Health-seeking Practices

90.8% used FCMs and satellite clinics; 12.8% accessed hospital ships for specialized care. 27.2% still relied on informal providers like quacks.

The community people were accustomed to obtaining services from Friendship due to easy access and quality services.

While quantitative data shows reliance on Friendship’s services, qualitative data reveals trust and perceived efficacy of the model’s offerings.

Experience and Perception of the Service Recipients and Stakeholders

83% of respondents were satisfied with the services; 82.4% appreciated the service environment at satellite clinics.

The respondents expressed satisfaction with organizing the courtyard session, collaborating with GoB, and specialized care.

Quantitative satisfaction levels are complemented by qualitative descriptions of community involvement and pride in the healthcare process.

Cost Benefits

Satellite clinic fees ranged from 0.05 to 0.09 USD, compared to 2.79 USD at private clinics. Transport costs to urban facilities were prohibitive (13.98–18.63 USD).

According to the participants, the community people received the services and medicine at a minimal cost without wasting extra time.

Cost analysis validates Friendship’s affordability, while qualitative accounts emphasize the importance of saving time and transport expenses.

Challenges

Absence of formal tracking systems for referred patients to govt. facilities or hospital ships

Heavy workload for service providers, as well as lack of training on skill development, indicated as challenges.

Both data streams underscore the need for a structured referral system to enhance continuity of care. Also, heavy workload and lack of training were highlighted in qualitative findings.