Applying the UNAIDS HIV Prevention Evaluation Guidelines in Ghana andRwanda: Initial Experiences, Lessons      Learned, an...
Team Northern               Southern  hemisphere              hemisphere   Beth Sutherland        Ghana AIDS   Drew K...
Background 2008 UNAIDS MERG called for guidance  evaluating HIV prevention programs Identified need for     Evaluation ...
UNAIDS.                                                   Strategic                                                   Guid...
Public health questions approach for HIV     monitoring and evaluationAdapted from Operational Guidelines for Monitoringan...
http://www.cpc.unc.edu/measure/publications/ms-11-49
Applying approach in differentcontexts Rwanda               Ghana   MDG 6 goal            2011 NSP with clear   3 tar...
Steps in Rwanda and Ghana In-country orientation to approach Map M&E activities to staircase Develop program logic mode...
Levels of evaluation evidence
Lessons learned Need strong national coordinating body  committed to evidence based programming and  M&E and evaluation (...
Next steps Finalize research questions and decision needs Data mapping workshop (Rw) Write evaluation plan Will someon...
MEASURE Evaluation is funded by the U.S. Agency forInternational Development and is implemented by theCarolina Population ...
Discussion questions Would this approach have potential to be applied  in other countries? How does it complement and bu...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Applying the UNAIDS HIV Prevention Evaluation Guidelines in Ghana and Rwanda: Initial Experiences, Lessons Learned, and Next Steps

719 views
548 views

Published on

Published in: Health & Medicine
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
719
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • 3HIV-45 “Applying the UNAIDS HIV Prevention Guidelines”Started in Year 3
  • Applying the UNAIDS HIV Prevention Evaluation Guidelines in Ghana and Rwanda: Initial Experiences, Lessons Learned, and Next Steps

    1. 1. Applying the UNAIDS HIV Prevention Evaluation Guidelines in Ghana andRwanda: Initial Experiences, Lessons Learned, and Next Steps Heidi Reynolds RA meeting 11 Jan 2012
    2. 2. Team Northern  Southern hemisphere hemisphere  Beth Sutherland  Ghana AIDS  Drew Koleros Commission & MARP TWG  Jessica Fehringer  Rwanda HIV  Andrew Inglis prevention TWG &  Heidi steering committee
    3. 3. Background 2008 UNAIDS MERG called for guidance evaluating HIV prevention programs Identified need for  Evaluation unified with M&E system (for decision making)  Dynamic approach grounded in field realities Workshop then Think Tank in 2009 2010 Guidance Need for application and experience Output: Develop evaluation plans
    4. 4. UNAIDS. Strategic Guidance for Evaluating HIV Prevention Programmes. June 2010http://www.unaids.org/en/media/unaids/contentassets/documents/document/2010/12_7_MERG_Guidance_Evaluating%20HIV_PreventionProgrammes.pdf
    5. 5. Public health questions approach for HIV monitoring and evaluationAdapted from Operational Guidelines for Monitoringand Evaluation of HIV Programmes for Sex Workers,Men who have sex with Men, and TransgenderPeople.
    6. 6. http://www.cpc.unc.edu/measure/publications/ms-11-49
    7. 7. Applying approach in differentcontexts Rwanda  Ghana  MDG 6 goal  2011 NSP with clear  3 target groups MARP strategy and Op Plan  M/Eval TA (field funding) to M&E plan  Major implementer and and mid-NSP review GAC increasing central guidance  Multiple programs and partners  Less M&E Plan coordination and depends on in-country processes
    8. 8. Steps in Rwanda and Ghana In-country orientation to approach Map M&E activities to staircase Develop program logic model Articulate major research questions, information needs, decisions needed Identify gaps in indicators & data sources  Dependent on country M&E processes Write evaluation plan  M/Eval output Assign R&R, obtain funding and carry out evaluation
    9. 9. Levels of evaluation evidence
    10. 10. Lessons learned Need strong national coordinating body committed to evidence based programming and M&E and evaluation (country owned, led) This is a new way of thinking  How M&E pieces fit together  Plausibility evaluation  Not “being evaluated” but info to improve national program
    11. 11. Next steps Finalize research questions and decision needs Data mapping workshop (Rw) Write evaluation plan Will someone fund it? Will partners work together to carry it out?
    12. 12. MEASURE Evaluation is funded by the U.S. Agency forInternational Development and is implemented by theCarolina Population Center at the University of NorthCarolina at Chapel Hill in partnership with Futures GroupInternational, ICF Macro, John Snow, Inc., ManagementSciences for Health, and Tulane University. The viewsexpressed in this presentation do not necessarily reflectthe views of USAID or the United States Government.
    13. 13. Discussion questions Would this approach have potential to be applied in other countries? How does it complement and build on other activities in our portfolio? Does it contribute to building “Evaluation oriented M&E systems”?

    ×