This paper argues on ethical and practical grounds for more widespread use of an integrated approach to refugee healthcare, and proposes a basic model of assessment for integrated systems. A defining element of an integrated approach is an equal ability by refugee and host nationals to access the same healthcare resources from the same providers. This differs fundamentally from parallel care, currently the predominant practice in Africa. The authors put forward a general model for evaluation of integrated healthcare with four criteria: (1) improved health outcomes for both hosts and refugees, (2) increased social integration, (3) increased equitable use of healthcare resources, and (4) no undermining of protection. Historical examples of integrated care in Ethiopia and Uganda are examined in light of these criteria to illustrate how this evaluative model would generate evidence currently lacking in debates on the merit of integrated healthcare.