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

2. Session 4: Learning Objectives  Understand the 7 step approach to using data in decision making  Apply management and leadership practices to the 7 steps approach  Practice using the 7 steps  Create a management plan to apply the 7 steps to a program or policy question  Understand how to deal with data discrepancies

3. Session Overview  7 Steps of using data in decision making  Leadership and the 7 steps  Small group activity 1 – case example  Applying the Framework for Linking Data with Action  Small group activity 2 –Framework  Dealing with data discrepancies in your work

4. Why Use the 7 Step Approach  Provides concrete steps to data-informed decision making  Encourages more strategic and effective use of data  Ensures involvement of data users & producers

5. Seven Steps Approach  1 - Identify questions of interest  2 - Prioritize key questions of interest  3 - Identify data needs and potential sources

6. Seven Steps Approach  4 - Transform data into information  5 - Interpret information and draw conclusions  6 - Craft solutions and take action  7 - Continue to monitor key indicators

7. Applications of 7 Steps  New data is released that has programmatic relevance  Have an up coming decision that needs to be made or you have a specific question about your programs and/or populations

8. Step 1 – Identify questions No need to go fishing….instead answer question that respond to true needs and priorities

9. Example – Starting with the data  DHS 2010 – preliminary report

10. Knowledge of HIV prevention Percentage of women and men age 15-49 who, in response to prompted questions, say that people can reduce the risk of getting the AIDS virus by :

11. Women - Multiple sex partners & use of condoms Among all women age 15-49Among women who had 2+ partners in the past 12 months Percentage who had less than 2 partners in the past 12 months Percentage who reported NOT using a condom during last sexual intercourse

12. Men - Multiple sex partners & use of condoms Among all men age 15-49Among men who had 2+ partners in the past 12 months Percentage who had less than 2 partners in the past month Percentage who reported NOT using a condom during last sexual intercourse

13. The findings  About 10% of men & women did not using condoms can reduce the risk of HIV  85% women, 79% men knew that limiting sex to 1 uninfected partner can reduce the risk HIV  79% women, 74% men knew that using condoms and limiting sex to 1 uninfected partner can reduce the risk of HIV  Of the 4.2% of men with >2 partners, 25% didn’t use condoms at last sex  Of the 0.6% of women with >2 partners, 28.9% didn’t use condoms at last sex

14. Step 1 – Identify questions of interest XXXX XXXx x Is action required?

15. Step 1 – Identify Questions  What is the size problem?  What populations are affected?  How is it affecting HIV prevalence in those populations?

16. Step 2 – Prioritize Questions  Programmatic relevance  Answerable  Actionable  Timeliness

17. Step 3 – Identify Data Needs & Sources QuestionsData needs & sources What populations are affected (men & partners)? What is the prevalence in these populations? Engage data producers, start with data that already exist, consider the quality of the data

18. Step 4 – Transform Data Into Information  Isolate required indicators and/or data elements  Analyze the data and calculate the indicator  Depict data as a visual image (graph, chart, table)

19. Step 5 – Interpret Information and Draw Conclusions  Convene group of data users & producers  Review graphs, tables, and information  Discuss the meaning of these analyses for organizations, programs and facilities

20. Interpreting data

21.  Adding meaning to information by making connections and comparisons and exploring causes and consequences Relevance of finding Reasons for finding Consider other data Conduct further research

22. Interpretation – relevance of finding  Adding meaning to information by making connections and comparisons and exploring causes and consequences Relevance of finding Reasons for finding Consider other data Conduct further research

23. Interpretation – relevance of finding  Is there anything that surprises you in the data?  Are there any highs and lows in the data?  How does the indicator compare to other time periods, other facilities?  How does the indicator compare to the target/ideal?  How far from the target/ideal is it?

24. Relevance of finding Reasons for finding Consider other data Conduct further research Interpretation – possible causes? Supplement with expert opinion Others with knowledge of the program or target population

25. Relevance of finding Reasons for finding Consider other data Conduct further research Interpretation – consider other data Use existing data to clarify questions RHIS, DHS, surveys, census, surveillance, etc. calculate nurse-to-client ratio, review commodities data against client load, etc.

26. Interpretation – conduct further research  Data gap conduct further research  Methodology depends on questions being asked and resources available Relevance of finding Reasons for finding Consider other data Conduct further research

27. The findings  About 10% of men & women did not using condoms can reduce the risk of HIV  85% women, 79% men knew that limiting sex to 1 uninfected partner can reduce the risk HIV  79% women, 74% men knew that using condoms and limiting sex to 1 uninfected partner can reduce the risk of HIV  Of the 4.2% of men with >2 partners, 25% didn’t use condoms at last sex  Of the 0.6% of women with >2 partners, 28.9% didn’t use condoms at last sex

28. Step 6 – Craft Solutions and Take Action  Engage variety of stakeholders to craft solutions  Discuss conclusions from interpretation  Brainstorm potential solutions  Further specify, craft and prioritize these solutions  Develop an action plan

29. Step 7 – Continue to Monitor Key Indicators  Monitor implementation of action plan  Consider frequency and duration of monitoring  Develop tool for monitoring

30. Seven Steps Approach  1 - Identify questions of interest  2 - Prioritize key questions of interest  3 - Identify data needs and potential sources  4 - Transform data into information  5 - Interpret information and draw conclusions  6 - Craft solutions and take action  7 - Continue to monitor key indicators

31. Group Exercise  Which province does your team recommend DANIDA support with additional funds?  Why was this province selected (refer to available data )?  What activities do you recommend to improve services for FCSWs?  What are at least 2 indicators to monitor performance?

32. Building Data Use into Your Work  PLAN PLAN PLAN !  Engage in dialogue with stakeholders to fully understand the:  decisions they make  information they need  best way to present that information

33. Building Data Use into Your Work Implement organizational supports:  Regularly scheduled meetings  Appoint a committee or champion  Revise job descriptions  Develop policies or guidance

34. Building Data Use into Your Work Use & institutionalize DDU tools & approaches  Stakeholder Engagement, Information Use Map, Priority Questions Scoring Worksheet, and the 7 Steps to Use Information to Improve Programs.  Framework for Linking Data with Action

35. Framework for Linking Data with Action  Creates a time-bound plan for data-informed decision making  Encourages greater use of existing information  Monitors the use of information in decision making  Functions as a management tool

36. Framework for Linking Data with Action Program/ Policy Question Data Source Indicator/ Data Timeline (Analysis) (Decision) Decision Maker, Other Stakehol ders Decision / Action Commu- nication Channel What pop.’s are affected (men & partners)? What is the prevalence of HIV in these pop.’s?

37. Framework for Linking Data with Action Program/ Policy Question Data Source Indicator/ Data Timeline (Analysis) (Decision) Decision Maker, Other Stakehol ders Decision / Action Commu- nication Channel What is the size and scope of high risk behaviors (2+ partners & condom use) M&W15- 49 DHS BSS National HMIS

38. 38 What is the problem? What are the contributing factors? What interventions and resources are needed? What interventions can work (efficacy & effectiveness)? Are we implementing the program as planned? What are we doing? Are we doing it right? Are interventions working/making a difference? Are collective efforts being implemented on a large enough scale to impact the epidemic? Understanding Potential Responses Monitoring & Evaluating National Programs Determining Collective Effectiveness A Public Health Questions Approach (Rugg D, et al. Global advances in HIV /AIDS monitoring and evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation 103, 2004) Are we doing the right things? Are we doing them right? Are we doing them on a large enough scale? Problem Identification

39. This research has been supported by the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) under the terms of MEASURE Evaluation cooperative agreement GHA-A-00-08-00003-00 which is implemented by the Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill with Futures Group, ICF International, John Snow, Inc., Management Sciences for Health, and Tulane University. Views expressed are not necessarily those of PEPFAR, USAID, or the United States government.