Tackling the tensions in evaluating capacity strengthening for health research in low- and middle-income countries

Article English OPEN
Bates, Imelda ; Boyd, Alan ; Aslanyan, Garry ; Cole, Donald C (2014)
  • Publisher: Oxford University Press
  • Journal: Health Policy and Planning, volume 30, issue 3, pages 334-344 (issn: 0268-1080, eissn: 1460-2237)
  • Related identifiers: doi: 10.1093/heapol/czu016, pmc: PMC4353897
  • Subject: f0e481db | capacity strengthening | wa_20_5 | Original Articles | wa_30 | health | Low- and middle-income countries | research
    mesheuropmc: macromolecular substances

Strengthening research capacity in low- and middle-income countries is one of the most effective ways of advancing their health and development but the complexity and heterogeneity of health research capacity strengthening (RCS) initiatives means it is difficult to evaluate their effectiveness. Our study aimed to enhance understanding about these difficulties and to make recommendations about how to make health RCS evaluations more effective. Through discussions and surveys of health RCS funders, including the ESSENCE on Health Research initiative, we identified themes that were important to health RCS funders and used these to guide a systematic analysis of their evaluation reports. Eighteen reports, produced between 2000 and 2013, representing 12 evaluations, were purposefully selected from 54 reports provided by the funders to provide maximum variety. Text from the reports was extracted independently by two authors against a pre-designed framework. Information about the health RCS approaches, tensions and suggested solutions was re-constructed into a narrative. Throughout the process contacts in the health RCS funder agencies were involved in helping us to validate and interpret our results. The focus of the health RCS evaluations ranged from individuals and institutions to national, regional and global levels. Our analysis identified tensions around how much stakeholders should participate in an evaluation, the appropriate balance between measuring and learning and between a focus on short-term processes vs longer-term impact and sustainability. Suggested solutions to these tensions included early and ongoing stakeholder engagement in planning and evaluating health RCS, modelling of impact pathways and rapid assimilation of lessons learned for continuous improvement of decision making and programming. The use of developmental approaches could improve health RCS evaluations by addressing common tensions and promoting sustainability. Sharing learning about how to do robust and useful health RCS evaluations should happen alongside, not after, health RCS efforts.
  • References (44)
    44 references, page 1 of 5

    Agyepong I, Kitua A, Borleffs J. 2008. Mid-term Evaluation Report, NACCAP Programmes First Call: INTERACT. The Hague: NACCAP.

    Bates I, Taegtmeyer M, Squire SB et al. 2011. Indicators of sustainable capacity building for health research: analysis of four African case studies. Health Research Policy and Systems 9: 1-9.

    Bennett S, Paina L, Kim C et al. 2010. What must be done to enhance capacity for Health Systems Research? In: World Health Organization (ed). Background papers commissioned by the Symposium Secretariat for the First Global Symposium on Health Systems Research, November 16-19, 2010, Montreux, Switzerland. http://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/uploads/files/c4ccb675-f6f8- 47de-8552-e032d4c3fc20.pdf, accessed 3 March 2014.

    Boyd A, Cole DC, Cho DB, Aslanyan G, Bates I. 2013. A comparison of frameworks for evaluating health research capacity strengthening: what can we learn? Health Research Policy and Systems 11: 46.

    Breman JG, Bridbord K, Kupfer LE, Glass RI. 2011. Global health: the Fogarty International Center, National Institutes of Health: vision and mission, programs, and accomplishments. Infectious Disease Clinics of North America 25: 511-36.

    Cole DC, Kakuma R, Fonn S et al. 2012. Evaluations of health research capacity development: a review of the evidence. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 87(5 Suppl. 1):801.

    Day R, Stackhouse J, Geddes N. 2009. Evaluating Commonwealth Scholarships in the United Kingdom: Assessing Impact in Key Priority Areas. London: Commonwealth Scholarship Commission in the UK. http://cscuk.dfid.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/evaluationimpact-key-report.pdf, accessed 26 April 2013.

    Erlandsson B, Gunnarsson V. 2005. Evaluation of HEPNet in SSA. Stockholm: Sida. http://www.sida.se/Publications/Import/pdf/sv/ Evaluation-of-HEPNet-in-SSA.pdf, accessed 26 April 2013.

    ESSENCE on Health Research. 2011. Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for Capacity Strengthening in Health Research. Geneva: ESSENCE on Health Research. http://www.who.int/tdr/publica tions/non-tdr-publications/essence-framework/en/index.html, accessed 26 April 2013.

    European Union. 2008. Developing Evaluation Capacity: Final Report on the Framework to Analyze the Development of Evaluation Capacity in the EU Member States. 2nd edn. Luxembourg: European Union. http://ec. europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/evaluation/pdf/report_ integrated_2007.pdf, accessed 26 April 2013.

  • Similar Research Results (3)
  • Metrics
    No metrics available
Share - Bookmark