Integration of Community Based Services It seems like a good idea, but how to make it work? Molly Cannon Palladium/MEASURE Evaluation September 28, 2015.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Violence Against Women and Girls A Compendium of Monitoring and Evaluation Indicators.

Advertisements

DATA DEMAND AND USE: S HARING I NFORMATION AND P ROVIDING F EEDBACK Session 5.

Nigeria Case Study HIVAIDS Specific Slides. ANALYZING AND INTERPRETING DATA.

Rwanda Case Study Additional Slides on Stakeholder Involvement.

GENERATING DEMAND FOR DATA Module 1. Session Objectives  Understand the importance of improving data-informed decision making  Understand the role of.

Understanding the role of child marriage on reproductive health outcomes: evidence from a multi- country study in South Asia Deepali Godha, David Hotchkiss,

Begin with the End in Mind

Contraceptive discontinuation in urban Honduras Janine Barden-O’Fallon, PhD Ilene Speizer, PhD University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA 29 September.

LINKING DATA TO ACTION Session 6. Session Objectives By the end of this session, you will be able to:  Identify priority decisions and programmatic questions.

Dissemination and Use of Results from OVC Program Evaluations Florence Nyangara, PhD MEASURE Evaluation/Futures Group Dissemination Meeting, September.

DETERMINANTS OF DATA USE Session 2. Session Objectives  Explain the data-use conceptual framework  Highlight the determinants of data use  List potential.

UNDERSTANDING DATA AND INFORMATION FLOW Session 4.

Evaluating impact of OVC programs: standardizing our methods Jenifer Chapman, PhD Futures Group/MEASURE Evaluation.

Technical Approach to and Experiences from Strengthening National Monitoring and Evaluation System for Most Vulnerable Children Program in Tanzania Prisca.

MEASURE Evaluation DATIM Data Exchange Denise Johnson

Business as Unusual: Changing the Approach to Monitoring OVC Programs Karen G. Fleischman Foreit, PhD Futures Group/MEASURE Evaluation.

Case management versus M&E in the context of OVC programs: What have we learned? Jenifer Chapman, PhD Futures Group/MEASURE Evaluation.

Linking Data with Action Part 1: Seven Steps of Using Information for Decision Making.

Introduction to Monitoring and Evaluation. Learning Objectives By the end of the session, participants will be able to: Define program components Define.

Violence Against Women and Girls A Compendium of Monitoring and Evaluation Indicators By Shelah S. Bloom Presented by: Anupa Deshpande.

Unmet Need Exercise  Review the trends in CPR. What do you conclude about the performance of the FP program in each country?  Review trends in unmet.

Day 4: Field Practicum This presentation has been supported by the U.S President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) through the U.S. Agency for.

MEASURE Evaluation Data Quality Assurance Workshop Session 3 Introduction to Routine Data Quality Assessment.

MEASURE EVALUATION Session: 7 Developing Action Plans Based on Results Data Quality Assurance Workshop.

MER Essential Survey Indicators Jenifer Chapman, PhD & Lisa Parker, PhD February 2, 2015.

Data Use for Gender-Aware Health Programming Welcome and Introductions.

Monitoring & Evaluation Capacity Strengthening Workshop WORKSHOP INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW.

Introduction ROUTINE HEALTH INFORMATION SYSTEMS MODULE 9:

Community Health Information System in Action in SSNPR/Ethiopia

Difference-in-Differences Models

Data Quality Assurance Workshop

Introduction MODULE 2: Indicators and Data Collection and Reporting

Introduction ROUTINE HEALTH INFORMATION SYSTEMS MODULE 5:

Session: 5 Using the RDQA tool for System Assessment

Using Data to Inform Community-Level Management

Session: 8 Disseminating Results

Community Health Information System in Action in SNNPR/Ethiopia

Introduction MODULE 6: RHIS Data Demand and Use

Right-sized Evaluation

Fundamentals of Monitoring and Evaluation

The PLACE Mapping Tool Becky Wilkes, MS, GISP Marc Peterson, MA, GISP

Training of Trainers on the OVC Household Vulnerability Prioritization Tool.

ROUTINE HEALTH INFORMATION SYSTEMS

MEASURE Evaluation Using a Primary Health Care Lens Gabriela Escudero

Presenting an Information Needs Framework for PEPFAR OVC Programs

Introduction to Comprehensive Evaluation

Introduction ROUTINE HEALTH INFORMATION SYSTEMS MODULE 4:

Overview of the RHIS Rapid Assessment Tool

Session: 4 Using the RDQA tool for Data Verification

Use of Community Health Data for Shared Accountability

Community Health Information System in Action in SNNPR/Ethiopia

Training Content and Orientation

Introduction ROUTINE HEALTH INFORMATION SYSTEMS MODULE 3:

Introduction to Health Informatics:

Introduction to the PRISM Framework

Information Systems for Health:

Process Improvement, System Design, and Usability Evaluation

Information Systems for Health:

Introduction to Health Informatics:

Session: 6 Understanding & Using the RDQA Tool Output

Introduction MODULE 7: RHIS Governance and Management of Resources

Process Improvement, System Design, and Usability Evaluation

Siân Curtis, PhD OVC Evaluation Dissemination Meeting,

Data and Interoperability:

Use of Information for Decision Making

Introduction to Health Informatics

Session: 9 On-going Monitoring & Follow Up

Process Improvement, System Design, and Usability Evaluation

EHRs and Privacy Protection in LMICs

Willis Odek, PhD Chief of Party/Senior Technical Advisor,

Presentation transcript:

Integration of Community Based Services It seems like a good idea, but how to make it work? Molly Cannon Palladium/MEASURE Evaluation September 28, 2015

The Story: A Family in Mozambique

PEPFAR Supported Community Based Programming Orphan and Vulnerable Children - MMAS Home Based Care (HBC) - MOH

Community View Community Based Organization Health Facility

MEASURE Evaluation’s Role Purpose - Study aiming to understand how integration was working and what integration of services meant for children at different client phases. Methods – Cross sectional mixed methods. Volunteer survey (47) Household survey (350) Stakeholder interviews (24) Focus group discussions (37) Conducted data interpretation and use with our Framework for Linking Data with Action

What did we Find? Stakeholders reported: The integrated model was not formally adopted at the national level. At the sub-national level, involved coordination between MMAS, MISAU HBC existed first in many CBOs and were adding OVC programming. CBO’s had different approaches for targeting OVC Programs report vertically - no joint planning, different government and program reporting lines. Activistas reported: Being more prepared to provide care and support to HBC clients (93 percent) than OVC (71 percent). Having a mixed caseload of beneficiary houses – though rare to provide care to OVC only households. Spending more time with HBC clients (66%) than OVC clients and serving sick HBC clients before children.

What did we Find? Household interviews revealed: Only 10% of HHs were OVC only 22% of HHs did not have any children visited 1:1 in the last 12 months 80% of HHs reported receiving at least one HH service at last visit. Odds Ratios for household and child characteristics Province Province or CBO # of children Active vs transitioning Graduating vs. transitioning SexAge Manica (n=423) NS.6**2.0*.1**NS2.1** Sofala (n=339).5**.8**2.7**1.8*NS Total (n=762)1.5*.7**3.3**.6NS1.9** NS=not statistically significant *statistically significant at.05; **statistically significant at.01

Conclusion Conclusion - Home based care is driver of OVC services in these settings; some OVC households could be missed, and kids in need of care may not be receiving it due to pressing needs of HBC clients.

Recommendations Integration of HBC and OVC may indeed work, but it would be important to consider the following recommendations: Policy – Integration needs to be nationally adopted Organizational Supports – guidance documents and checklists for targeting, home visits, service delivery; forms and family folders, reporting, joint supervision Reconfigure delivery - reconsider case load and training Measurement – develop a specific measure of integrated services, in order to monitor the progress of integration, assess data quality, periodic assessment to fidelity of implementation

Contact Information Molly Cannon: MEASURE Evaluation OVC Page:

MEASURE Evaluation is funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) under terms of Cooperative Agreement AID-OAA-L and implemented by the Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partnership with Futures Group, ICF International, John Snow, Inc., Management Sciences for Health, and Tulane University. The views expressed in this presentation do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States government.