Strengthening HIV/AIDS Information Systems at Subnational Levels

Strengthening HIV/AIDS Information Systems at Subnational Levels

• 1.
  Strengthening HIV/AIDS Information Systemsat Subnational levels Jeph Oluwagbemiga, Tobi Adeogo Presentation made at the MEASURE Evaluation Phase III EoPD Meeting, June 18, 2014
• 2.
  Rationale:  Weak linkbetween the National and the State M&E Systems (National M&E system Assessment , 2009)  Government of Nigeria in conjunction with the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) selected 3 States for MEASURE Evaluation to improve their M&E System and strengthen their link with the National M&E System.
• 3.
  Where we worked.
• 4.
  Strategy  Signed BilateralMOU with detailed roles and responsibilities with State Governments  Deployed State M&E Technical Advisors (SMETAs) with State officials involved in the process  Positioned the SMETAs in the government offices (SACA/ SMOH) to provide technical support to relevant officers in M&E processes through mentoring, trainings etc.  Adopted the use of advocacy and participation in strategic activities such as TWG meetings, partners forum etc.  Established functional partnership with other Implementing Partners
• 5.
  What we did(Activities):  Provided technical assistance (training and mentorship) to stakeholders at the State, LGA and health facility levels  Collaborated with relevant Ministries, Directorates and Agencies (MDAs) and IPs to ensure availability of national data collection tools and improve data reporting and analysis.
• 6.
   Supported thetransition of the Kano State SACA from committee to agency  Supported the establishment of functional M&E unit and TWG in Kano SMOH  Provided routine mentoring of staff at all levels of data flow on generating quality data and timely submission of data summary. What we did (Activities): cont’d
• 7.
   Provided mentorshipon M&E Supportive Supervision and RDQA process to promote oversight functions of the State and LGA Officers on data quality improvement.  Supported the production of data factsheet to promote data awareness and use. What we did (Activities): cont’d
• 8.
  Results/ Accomplishments  Supportedthe States to develop M&E plan and costed workplan.  Anambra State data reporting status improved from 25 facilities in only 5 LGAs to 392 in the 21 LGAs.  Kano SACA DHIS database for ART services was populated from 0% in 2012 to 57% in 2013  Lagos State NHMIS reporting rate on the national DHIS platform improved from 47% in Sep 2013 to 51% in April 2014  Improved local capacities on M&E roles and responsibilities among
• 9.
  Lessons Learned  Positioningtechnical staff in the State office promotes government involvement, ownership and enhances sustainability.  The donors and the State benefit more when IPs work closely together with the State as this prevents waste of resources due to duplication of efforts and produces more sustainable results.
• 10.
  THANK YOU! MEASURE Evaluationis a MEASURE project funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development and implemented by the Carolina Population Center at the University of North Carolina at Chapel 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 Bureau's primary vehicle for supporting improvements in monitoring and evaluation in population, health and nutrition worldwide. Visit us online at http://www.cpc.unc.edu/measure