BackgroundAmong the core principles of the 2030 agenda of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is the call to Leave no One behind (LNOB), a principle that gained resonance as the world contended with the COVID-19 pandemic. The south Indian state of Kerala received acclaim globally for its efforts in managing COVID-19 pandemic. Less attention has been paid, however, to how inclusive this management was, as well as if and how those “left behind” in testing, care, treatment, and vaccination efforts were identified and catered to. Filling this gap was the aim of our study.MethodsWe conducted In-depth interviews with 80 participants from four districts of Kerala from July to October 2021. Participants included elected local self-government members, medical and public health staff, as well as community leaders. Following written informed consent procedures, each interviewee was asked questions about whom they considered the most “vulnerable” in their areas. They were also asked if there were any special programmes/schemes to support the access of “vulnerable” groups to general and COVID related health services, as well as other needs. Recordings were transliterated into English and analysed thematically by a team of researchers using ATLAS.ti 9.1 software.ResultsThe age range of participants was between 35 and 60 years. Vulnerability was described differentially by geography and economic context; for e.g., fisherfolk were identified in coastal areas while migrant labourers were considered as vulnerable in semi-urban areas. In the context of COVID-19, some participants reflected that everyone was vulnerable. In most cases, vulnerable groups were already beneficiaries of various government schemes within and beyond the health sector. During COVID, the government prioritized access to COVID-19 testing and vaccination among marginalized population groups like palliative care patients, the elderly, migrant labourers, as well as Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes communities. Livelihood support like food kits, community kitchen, and patient transportation were provided by the LSGs to support these groups. This involved coordination between health and other departments, which may be formalised, streamlined and optimised in the future.ConclusionHealth system actors and local self-government members were aware of vulnerable populations prioritized under various schemes but did not describe vulnerable groups beyond this. Emphasis was placed on the broad range of services made available to these “left behind” groups through interdepartmental and multi-stakeholder collaboration. Further study (currently underway) may offer insights into how these communities – identified as vulnerable – perceive themselves, and whether/how they receive, and experience schemes designed for them. At the program level, inclusive and innovative identification and recruitment mechanisms need to be devised to identify populations who are currently left behind but may still be invisible to system actors and leaders.