Building the Capacity of Health Professionals in Monitoring and Evaluation in a Public Health Institution: Experience of the National Institute of Public Health (NIPH) of Côte d’Ivoire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: In the context of the fight against HIV, a lack of skills in monitoring and evaluating the personnel in charge of activities has been identified at the national level. It was the subject of a priority axis of the national plan for monitoring and evaluating the fight against HIV (2006-2010) that was aimed at strengthening the capacities of actors in this area. To increase the critical mass of competent human resources in the short term, the National Institute of Public Health (NIPH) of Côte d’Ivoire organized monitoring and evaluation training sessions for healthcare professionals from 2011 to 2016. Methods: A single case study with multiple levels of analysis was carried out, combining a qualitative survey and a literature review. An evaluation was carried out six months after each training session. In addition, the results of the pre- and post-tests and of the daily and final evaluations that accompanied the various training sessions were used to provide further information. The qualitative data collected were analyzed using INVIVO 15 software. Results: Some 89 health professionals (69% men and 31% women) working at the national level (51% at the central level, including 58% in health programs) and in development partner agencies (37%) participated in this capacity building program. Most participants were senior health managers (56%), data managers (23%), and statisticians and computer scientists (10%). Almost all the trainings were financed by 16 technical and financial partners (85%), mainly the MEASURE Evaluation project (27%). Conclusion: M&E training, despite all its imperfections, has made it possible to identify M&E training needs at the national level and to increase the critical mass of national skills and to have some culture in M&E.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.052 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".