This document summarizes M&E approaches for key population programs in Ghana from 2004-2016. It discusses the perils and pitfalls faced in early projects like SHARP that focused on general population data due to limited key population data. Later projects like SHARPER and LINKAGES standardized M&E tools and developed promising practices like using evidence-based data to better target services, conducting key population bio-behavioral surveys, and establishing a national key population technical working group. The document stresses the importance of handling sensitive key population data carefully and gaining community trust to ensure proper data can be used for effective decision making.

1. Key Population Data for Decision Making
Nana Fosua Clement, FHI360, Ghana.
December 4, 2015
Washington, DC
M & E approaches for key population programs: perils,
pitfalls, and promising practices
Ghana : SHARP, SHARPER into LINKAGES

2. Outline
• Background
• Perils and pitfalls
• Promising practices
• Lesson learnt

3. Background
SHARP, SHARPER unto LINKAGES
• USAID-funded projects for KP HIV interventions in
Ghana
• Strong component of M & E design for interventions
• M & E design fit within country context for effective
collaboration from relevant stakeholders and
smooth execution.
• Projects led by FHI360

4. Perils and pitfalls (SHARP: 2004 – 2009)
Country context – limited KP data so focus on general
population for HIV intervention
• FSW data available for programming
• Very limited data on MSM so few development
partners and CSO implementing KP interventions.
• Country focus on general pop HIV (known/available
data)
• First bio-behavioural study on MSM - homophobic
environment, chased out from community, study on
hold for 3 months
• M & E tools developed for effective data collection –
time consuming and slow

5. Perils and pitfalls (SHARPER: 2010 – 2014)
Country context - Quality mechanisms for
standardized M&E for programing
• KP – stigma, discrimination, fear
• Utilization of evidence-based data available from
M & E
o public health facilities
o CSO community
o KP community
• Interest in KP program increase thus need to
standardize intervention including M&E (good and
bad)

6. Perils and pitfalls (LINKAGES:2015 –2016)
Country context – UNAIDS 90-90-90 strategy
• Community KP prevention intervention with
running M & E system, CST services tracked for
general population at public health facilities
• M & E system to merge both – data for decision
making and effective programming
• Transition period vrs. national M & E system
launch

7. Promising practices
• Performance monitoring to include performance-
based feedback, dialogue and funding - strengthens the
capacity of implementers to implement improved interventions
and to show greater accountability.
• KP IBBSS : FSW - 3 completed, 1 underway; MSM – 1
completed, 1 underway
• Development/Standardized data collection tools and
strategic documents for effective programming
o KP SOP, KP Strategic Plan (SP) and National SP
o Community mapping - Better target services to KP
hotspots
o National KP data collection tools

8. Promising practices
• Effective M & E result in ‘branding’ and ownership
of program by KP community
• National KP TWG to coordinate KP interventions
including M & E issues
• UIC – data collection and access to services without
fear
I am someone’s hope - FSW It’s my turn - MSM

9. Lesson learnt
• Very careful with HOW, WHEN, WHERE, and
TO WHOM sensitive KP information is
released.
• Be particularly wary of the press – gain trust
with the KP community and stakeholders
Result - proper KP data for decision making.
»

10. Stay Connected with LINKAGES
• Follow LINKAGES on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/LINKAGESproject
• Like the project on Facebook:
www.facebook.com/LINKAGESproject
• Subscribe to the LINKAGES blog
www.linkagesproject.wordpress.com
• Subscribe to The LINK, LINKAGES’s quarterly
project e-newsletter
• Check out LINKAGES’s quarterly research digest

11. Acknowledgements