What is a TAG – opportunity to bring experienced practitioners and researchers together to explore and answer key implementation questions Differentiate from SOTA Closed, invitation only meeting Concrete outputs Previous CG TAG 2010
Most of the work at this point was with sub-national programs with up to 220,000 beneficiaries Environment with increased focus on government CHWs and how Care Group volunteers and structure could complement and extend this Scale experience was mainly with Rwanda integrating CGs and government CHWs; Burundi starting to experiment with less-resource intensive model with CHWs supervising CGs
Outputs: Key messages for scale up including barriers and enablers, roles and responsibilities Recommendation for step-by-step facilitators guide to be developed to support scale up (FH CG Training Manual for Program Design and Implementation available now) Research and information gaps Advocacy and communication – packaging the definition, minimum criteria and outcome data for consistent messaging; differentiation of approach and when it should be considered;
Why now – session at CORE 2013 Spring meeting brought out recent peer-reviewed journal articles and that results coming in from various experiences and OR efforts in next year; Expansion of experience beyond CSHGP to Title II programming and FAFSA-2 evaluation with CGs as promising model Therefore opportune time to bring people together to discuss implications. CORE then applied for TOPS microgrant Very happy to be able to bring in several field-based implementers
Agenda topics – emerged from discussions with steering committee (and USAID) and focused on topics where there was enough evidence base to facilitate good discussion and consensus building; omitted interesting experiences without enough experience to draw conclusions – these could lend themselves well to webinars with a larger audience
Steering committee: Karen LeBan, CORE Mary DeCoster, TOPS Jennifer Burns, IMC Alexandra Rutishauser-Perera, IMC Jennifer Weiss, Concern Worldwide Henry Perry, JHU Carolyn Wetzel, FH Tom Davis, Feed the Children Cindy Pfitzenmaier, PCI
Potentially directed at donors on effectiveness of CGs and rationale for further investment (to be developed into a submission to a peer-reviewed journal)
Sharon Tobing will be taking notes Henry Perry will write a position paper
Care Group Technical Advisory Group (TAG) Meeting
Technical Advisory Group
2010 TAG Goal
Assess various enablers and barriers
to the use of sustainable Care Groups
at scale in various settings and
develop guidance for the design of “at
scale” Care Group programs.
1. Review the evidence base regarding the Care Group
2. Explore experiences with national adoption and scaling up
especially in the food security context
3. Explore the implications of recent innovations and
evaluations for programming efforts
4. Identify recommendations for effective training and quality
control approaches to ensure that Care Groups maintain a
participatory, peer learning environment for achieving
5. Identify next steps, including recommendations for a
research agenda and opportunities for informing donor and
implementer audiences about experiences with Care Groups
in various contexts and sectors
• Position paper that reviews the
implications of current innovations, scale
up and research on Care Groups in Title II
programs and other programs.
• Country (if not US)
• Experience with Care Groups
Questions on national adoption
1. What do we know about merging traditional CGs into government
2. What specific issues are problematic for MOH and need to be
resolved in order to facilitate national adoption (ex. who serves as
the promoter, who pays the promoter)?
3. How do the Care Groups relate to other national Community
Health Worker programs?
4. At what point do the modifications for national adoption evolve
into a different approach from Care Groups? What are the
implications of this (if any)?
5. How do we build MOH capacity to implement and expand Care
6. What would be the role of NGOs as the MOH incorporates Care
7. What is the vision for Care Group scale-up?
8. What are the overall recommendations related to national
adoption and scale-up?