Building M&E Capacity of Community Based Programs in Tanzania


Published on

Published in: Health & Medicine
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Depending on the setting, community programs provide a range of assistance and services.Training for LGAs, CSOs and volunteersEconomic, nutritional and psychosocial support to households made vulnerable by HIV and AIDSIndividual support to eligible children and othersHome-based care Community awareness-raising around HIV prevention, care and support, child protection and other social and legal issues
  • In the name of sustainability, USAID/Tanzania is pushing for less direct service delivery by international IPs and more local CSO involvement.CSOs typically cover a district and are located in the district capital.Day-to-day services in the communities are typically provided by unpaid community volunteers.
  • Most of these have to be disaggregated by age and sex
  • Assessment: Rely primarily on the Data Quality Assessment approachM&E systems, procedures, staff in placeInformation flow and consolidation from service point to HQInformation audit: trace-and-verify, compares services data captured at delivery point with data reported up the chainTraining, mentoring and technical assistanceWorkshops tailored to DQA results, group IPs by service areas and common M&E issues.Individualized mentoring and capacity-building plansGIS, DDU workshops for advanced IPsRe-assessment: mini-DQAWere changes seen in areas selected for strengthening?
  • Data collection:Primary data collectors are often unpaid volunteersLow literacy levels and aggregation skills of primary data collectorsData entry:Transport issues to get the data from village level to ward/districtStorage/filing issuesLack of time to input data into databases due to workloadLack of computers or computer knowledgeData analysis and use:Lack of understanding as to why the data are collected and how they can be important to them
  • Spot checks during Data Quality Assessments revealed that OVC were not receiving the services written in the registers (poor data quality for the routine data)There is little systematized supervision/checks of volunteers who delivered services to OVC
  • Uses low literacy toolsTakes a day to implement the first time Creates ownership of information at community levelSets the stage for progress monitoring for quarterly or semi-annual follow-up
  • Building M&E Capacity of Community Based Programs in Tanzania

    1. 1. Building M&E Capacity ofCommunity Based Programs in Tanzania Dawne Walker MEASURE Evaluation Resident Advisor, Tanzania January 2012
    2. 2. What do community programsprovide? Training and capacity-building Support to households Support to individuals Home-based care Community awareness-raising …
    3. 3. How are these services provided? Directly by international Implementing Partners (IPs) Through subgrants to civil society organizations (CS0s) and smaller NGOs By unpaid community volunteers
    4. 4. What are community programsrequired to report? Number of eligible clients who received food and/or nutrition services Number of eligible OVC who received a minimum of one CORE care service Number of eligible adults and children provided with home-based care services Number of vulnerable households with at least one OVC/MVC or PLHIV provided a minimum of one economic opportunity/strengthening support
    5. 5. MEASURE Evaluation approach toM&E capacity-buildingThree-step process: 1. Assessment 2. Training, mentoring and technical assistance 3. Re-assessment
    6. 6. Community-based programs are expected to produce comparable data to facility-based programs, but without comparable physicalinfrastructure andhuman resources
    7. 7. Multiple levels of data qualityissues Data collection Data entry Data analysis and use
    8. 8. Responding to the special needsof community-based programs Shortcomings of trace-and-verify methodology Developed Community Trace and Verify (CTV)
    9. 9. Community Trace and Verify (CTV) Covers minimum package of services Short (10-minute) survey of caretakers LQAS sampling methodology Pass-fail scoring
    10. 10. 005 Does [Name] have a birth certificate? Yes…1 No…2 → 007 Don’t know …3006 Could you show us the birth certificate? Yes, birth certificate shown…1 No…2007 Is the family enrolled with the Community Yes…1 Health Fund? No…2 → 011 Don’t know …3 → 011008 Does the family have a Community Health Yes…1 Fund card? No…2 → 009 Don’t know …3 → 009009 Could you show me the community health Yes, card shown…1 → 011 fund card? No…2010 Could you show me the receipt? Yes, receipt shown…1 No…2011 Have you heard about the Most Vulnerable Yes…1 Child Committee? No…2 Don’t know …3012 Has [Name] been visited by a Most Yes…1 vulnerable Child Committee member or No…2 → 014 Volunteer in the past six months? Don’t know …3 → 014
    11. 11. CTV in Practice Piloted with Africare Introduced to WEI TA to other OVC IPs Incorporated into the Department of Social Welfare MVC M&E Plan
    12. 12. Responding to the special needsof community-based programs Fostering data demand and use Developing participatory monitoring and evaluation (PM&E)
    13. 13. Participatory M&ELow literacy tool Community identifies priorities Establishes progress indicators CBO assists with regular monitoring
    14. 14. Establishing priorities Seed (lowest priority) Sapling Tree Fruiting tree (highest priority)
    15. 15. Step 1: Vote Objectives/ ValuesCommunity Home based Care Service 2 4 3 1 Providers availability when neededClients recovery from lost to follow up 4 0 2 4PLWHA trained on nutritional aspects 3 3 3 1 and food preparation Availability of pain killer drugs 4 2 3 1 Availability of antifungal drugs 1 0 7 2 PLWHA received economic 2 3 2 3 strengthening support Stigma and discrimination has been 5 2 3 0 reduced
    16. 16. Step 2: Score and rank Average % Highest priority Objectives/ Values Score Rank Score RankCommunity Home based Care Service 2.3 8 10% 8 Providers availability when neededClients recovery from lost to follow up 2.8 3 40% 2PLWHA trained on nutritional aspects 2.2 9 10% 9 and food preparation Availability of pain killer drugs 2.1 10 10% 10 Availability of antifungal drugs 3.0 2 20% 5 PLWHA received economic 2.6 6 30% 4 strengthening support Stigma and discrimination has been 1.8 12 0% 12 reduced
    17. 17. Participatory M&E Easy to implement Creates community ownership of information Sets the stage for follow- up
    18. 18. Measurable changes Increased M&E budgets More M&E staff IPs conducting their own DQAs Supportive supervision and capacity building
    19. 19. Challenges abound! Pressure to expand services vs. attention to M&E Data collection: the weak link in the chain Overly-ambitious targets High-level demands for detailed reporting data
    20. 20. Can (should?) communityprograms ever report monthly?Alternatives to the facility model  Simple forms for case management  Semi-annual or annual cluster-sample surveys to track coverage  Representative population surveys to measure changes in status
    21. 21. MEASURE Evaluation is a MEASURE project funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development and implemented by theCarolina Population Center at the University of North Carolina atChapel Hill in partnership with Futures Group International, ICF Macro, John Snow, Inc., Management Sciences for Health, and Tulane University. Views expressed in this presentation do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the U.S. Government. MEASURE Evaluation is the USAID Global Health Bureausprimary vehicle for supporting improvements in monitoring and evaluation in population, health, and nutrition worldwide. Visit us online at