Presented at the 2016 ASTMH conference

1. Background
Ashley Garley1
, Erin Eckert2,
, Ali Sie3
, Maurice Ye3
, Keziah Malm4
, Edwin A. Afari4
, Mamadou Sawadogo5
, Samantha Herrera1
, Elizabeth Ivanovich6
, Yazoume Ye1
1
MEASURE Evaluation, ICF, 2
US Agency for International Development, President‘s Malaria Initiative, 3
Centre de Recherche en Sante de Nouna, 4
University of Ghana School of Public Health,
5
Centre de Recherche Internationale pour la Santé Université Ouaga 1 Professeur Joseph Ki Zerbo, 6
United Nations Foundation
Design and implementation
The intensification of malaria control interventions in most endemic countries in recent years requires a robust
monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system to measure progress and achievements. Providing national malaria control
program (NMCP) staff with appropriate skills will contribute to strengthening malaria M&E systems and will enhance data
and information use for program implementation. From 2010 to 2015, the USAID-funded MEASURE Evaluation project’s
capacity-strengthening efforts included regional in-person workshops for M&E of malaria programs for Anglophone and
Francophone countries in sub-Saharan Africa. Workshops were organized in collaboration with academic institutions
including the University of Ghana’s School of Public Health (UGSPH), for Anglophone countries, and the Centre de
Recherche en Santé de Nouna (CRSN) and the Centre de Recherche International pour la Santé, Université Ouaga 1
Professeur Joseph Ki Zerbo (CRIS/UO1) for Francophone countries.
Achievements
Conclusion
Results from a post-workshop follow-up assessment revealed that participants retained
M&E knowledge and skills for malaria programs; however, there is a need for a module on
malaria surveillance adapted to the pre-elimination context. The workshops were successful
because of the content of curriculum, quality of facilitation, and engagement of partner
institutions with training expertise. The success of the regional workshops generated
interest in country-specific workshops, which have been completed in Kenya (2011),
Democratic Republic of Congo (2013 and 2015), and Senegal (2016). The results from the
post-workshop follow-up assessment has guided the curriculum’s development and its
restructuring for the next phase of workshops.
Acknowledgments
This activity was the result of a collective effort between CRSN, UGSPH, USAID PMI, and MEASURE Evaluation. The
authors thank the facilitators who contributed to the curriculum design and workshop implementation.
Appreciation goes to organizations who provided funding for participants and alumni who encouraged others to
apply. Special thanks to Clara Burgert for providing the map. This work was supported by the US President’s
Malaria Initiative through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) under the terms of MEASURE
Evaluation cooperative agreement AIDOAA-L-14-00004. Views expressed are not necessarily those of PMI, USAID,
or the United States Government.
Monitoring and Evaluation Workshops:
An approach to improve malaria information systems and data use to better inform program implementation
Monitoring and Evaluation Workshops:
An approach to improve malaria information systems and data use to better inform program implementation
Figure 2: Applicants vs. Participants, 2010-2015
• Participants pay tuition and travel expenses
• Limited competitive fellowships
Table 2. Average pre-test and post-test scores, 2011-2015
Year Anglophone Francophone
Pre-test % (range) Post-test % (range) Pre-test % (range) Post-test % (range)
2011 59.3 (27.5-82.5) 76.0 (35.0-95.0) 70.9 (50.0-87.5) 75.8 (60.0-92.5)
2012 41.2 (12.6-61.1) 63.0 (44.7-88.4) 74.3 (50.0-93.3) 79.4 (60.8-88.3)
2013 51.0 (23.0-77.0) 73.0 (47.0-88.0) 61.1 (42.3-73.1) 67.6 (0.0-84.6)
2014 49.8 (17.0-85.0) 74.2 (45.0-90.0) 63.7 (46.2-92.3) 75.4 (57.9-96.2)
2015 51.6 (23.3-66.7) 68.8 (41.7-96.7) 69.9 (46.2-92.3) 79.4 (57.7-92.3)
Results from pre-and post-tests conducted on the first and last days of the
workshop indicated the knowledge gained with average scores (%) was higher
post-test compared to pre-test.
Knowledge Gained Post-workshop Follow-up
 Knowledge gained from the workshops was documented in six-
month and 1-year follow-up qualitative surveys.
 Findings suggested that the workshops contributed to or helped
alumni in their work.
Table 1: Workshop content and benefits
Module Name Benefit to participant
Overview of malaria in sub-
Saharan Africa
Provides knowledge of malaria epidemiology, current global targets,
and new trends and interventions.
Basic concepts of M&E Provides correct understanding of malaria M&E terminology.
Role of data in decision making Provides practical explanation of the importance and usefulness of
M&E for a malaria program.
Design and implement a M&E
plan
Provides tools and resources to design a M&E plan.
Frameworks Provides the importance and usefulness of various frameworks.
Indicators Explains the importance of indicators and how they fit in the broad
view of malaria M&E.
Data sources and systems Explains the usefulness of various data sources.
Data quality Explains the importance of data quality in the improvement of the
health information system.
Evaluation designs Discusses evaluation methods including detailed examples of current
evaluations of malaria programs.
Data management Provides tools for correctly managing a health information system.
Data presentation,
interpretation, and use
Teaches practical techniques for presenting, interpreting and using
data.
Workshop quality was reflected in the overall workshop scores, showing
overall improvement from 7.7 in 2010 to 8.94 in 2015 on a scale of 1 (poor)
to 10 (excellent) for the Anglophone course. The Francophone course results
improved from 8.5 in 2011 to 9.3 in 2014 with a decrease to 8.1 in 2015.
“…immediately after the workshop I was part of a team that was
assigned to review our project M&E plan … and most of my
contributions to the process were based on what I learnt from the
workshop. To be specific, when it came to developing an indicator
reference sheet/matrix, we actually used the template developed by
my workshop group members as an example.”
“Currently, all M&E plans for the implementing partners I work with
have been approved. The elements learned during the M&E training
helped me guide the partners in the development of good M&E plans.”
“I've mainstreamed M&E principles into program implementation and
based on principles I've developed an SOP [standard operating
procedures] checklist to maintain regular conduct of routine
assessment throughout the program period.”
“I introduced a malaria data review meeting at the provincial level and
have been able to train more than 150 ministry of health workers on
basic M&E skills.”
-Workshop participants
“…immediately after the workshop I was part of a team that was
assigned to review our project M&E plan … and most of my
contributions to the process were based on what I learnt from the
workshop. To be specific, when it came to developing an indicator
reference sheet/matrix, we actually used the template developed by
my workshop group members as an example.”
“Currently, all M&E plans for the implementing partners I work with
have been approved. The elements learned during the M&E training
helped me guide the partners in the development of good M&E plans.”
“I've mainstreamed M&E principles into program implementation and
based on principles I've developed an SOP [standard operating
procedures] checklist to maintain regular conduct of routine
assessment throughout the program period.”
“I introduced a malaria data review meeting at the provincial level and
have been able to train more than 150 ministry of health workers on
basic M&E skills.”
-Workshop participants
Objectives
• Train participants in fundamental concepts and
practical approaches to M&E of malaria programs
• Discuss applications of tools and data systems used
to monitor and evaluate malaria programs
• Provide a venue for participants to exchange
country experiences
• Provide participants with hands-on experience in
developing M&E plans
Figure 1: Workshop implementation framework Target Audience
• NMCP staff
• Funding and technical partners
• Other professionals with interest in malaria M&E
• 10-day workshop
• Participants’ knowledge assessment (pre- and
post-test)
• Plenary sessions and discussions
• Continuous and final evaluation of workshop
• Group work (Each group develops an M&E plan
for a malaria intervention)
• Data analysis
• Field visit
• Final group presentation
Teaching approach
Fee structure
Quality of Workshop
Resources
Open-source online M&E for malaria courses in English and French
https://www.measureevaluation.org/resources/publications/ms-16-110
https://www.measureevaluation.org/resources/publications/ms-16-110-fr
Of them, 28% were female.
Participants came from
NGOs (36%), ministries of
health (27%), NMCPs
(25%), development
partners (8%), universities
(2%), and private
institutions (2%).
Participants Trained
Of the 494 applications received, 218 participants from 28 countries
completed the regional workshops.
Figure 3: No. of Participants by Country, 2010-2015