Evaluation of Malaria, Jiggers and Typhoid Eradication Program in Shauri Yako County

Evaluation of Malaria, Jiggers and Typhoid Eradication Program in Shauri Yako County

Many objectives in diverse fields are always attained by launching specifically designed programs that are targeted at precise outcomes. However, the success of programs squarely rests upon their correct implementation and regular evaluation. Evaluation fundamentally enables the program teams to gauge whether an application is still on track or not (Guyadeen & Seasons, 2016). By gaining such knowledge, it becomes possible to make necessary adjustments that aid in the attainment of the intended goals. Thus, program evaluation is a central resource in the management and assessment of programs launched for specific purposes. Evaluation not only brings out the strengths weakness of a particular program but also points out the picture of the implemented plans (Guyadeen & Seasons, 2016). In this paper, a discussion of how two program evaluation approaches – logical framework approach and CIPP model – can be utilized in the evaluation of healthcare programs is presented. Herein, the government has introduced plans for the eradication of jiggers, typhoid and malaria in three sub-counties in Shauri Yako county. The discussion is centred on the evaluation of one of these programs for 6 months.

Logical Framework Approach

The Logical framework approach, also called Log-frame, is a highly effective strategic planning and project management methodology with full application in water management and sanitation programs (Myrick, 2013). The tools of the log frame are used in the analysis of a program. The ultimate product of this analysis is the log frame matrix which summarizes the intention of the project, the process of attaining the goals, the main assumptions of the project, and the process of monitoring and evaluating the outputs and results of the project. It allows for the understanding of the relationship that exists between the program objectives, the implementation process, and the results.

In the present case, the program goal is to eradicate jiggers, typhoid and malaria in the mentioned county. The ultimate objective is to reduce mortality and morbidity rates—one of the expected results ifs the reduction of maternal and childhood cases. The leading indicators measured here included the number of service providers trained on the matter and drug management, the number of people treated, and the number of facilities using the approaches developed. Here, it was assumed that all trained staff were retained, team use the recommended guidelines, and that patients complete treatment as stated. Activities done included 5-day training for healthcare staff, therapy according to defined guidelines, and training of the public on the need for prevention. Ultimately, following the evaluation of the activities undertaken, it was determined that the programs were highly useful to a tune of 80% based on the measured indices. The overall burden of the diseases reduced significantly, pointing to the attainment of the goals intended. However, a few cases were still reported, hence a need to tighten the programs.

The program also intended to strengthen preventive measures at all levels. In this regard, the indicators that were selected for the measurement of the success of this goal as in the log frame matrix included the amount and type of materials created and distributed, the number of volunteers trained to facilitate community education, the number of household visits done and the number of people receiving intermittent treatments for malaria, typhoid and jiggers. It was assumed that the people willingly accepted the programs, the trained volunteers remained active throughout, and that timely updates were submitted. The undertaken activities included training of staff t provide therapy and intermittent treatment of the questioned diseases, training of volunteers, distribution of nets, and community sensitization. In the end, upon evaluation by log frame matrix, it was sure that many profits had been distributed, the number of staff and patients on intermittent treatments increased, and the number of volunteers increased. Consequently, the disease burden reduced significantly hence confirming program efficiency.

CIPP Model

The CIPP model is another highly useful evaluation tool that is commonly used today in the evaluation of programs and projects in diverse fields of application. CIPP is an acronym that stands for Context, Input, Process and Product (Aziz, Mahmood & Rehman, 2018). Thus, it can basically be defined as an evaluation approach that bases on context, inputs, processes, and products as the common ground for judging the value of a program. It is a decision-based approach that stresses the systematic provision of information for the management and running of the program in question. The main goal in CIPP is the provision of analytic and rational grounds for decision making based on the planning, structuring, implementing and reviewing, and revising cycles (Aziz, Mahmood & Rehman, 2018). All these are examined based on the four main components of the approach – context, input, process and product. Thus, the methodology makes the evaluation relevant to the needs of the project team through the different phases of the project.

When applied in the evaluation of healthcare programs, the CIPP model is a precious resource that aids, in addition to understanding the progress of the project, in noting the key factors to consider in decision making. The four components primarily answer four basic questions (Aziz, Mahmood & Rehman, 2018). The element of context states what should be done by looking at the needs, goals, priorities and objectives. The component of inputs basically tells of how the things are to be done (Aziz, Mahmood & Rehman, 2018). The elements of process and product tell of whether the program is being done as it should be done, and whether or not the activities are working.

Simply put, programs aimed at eradicating diseases require the implementation of clear goals and well-designed activities if the objective is to be obtained. The needs, goals and priorities must always be defined first. Here, the needs or preferences are vector control for malaria, environmental and personal hygiene for typhoid, and flea control for jiggers. These are the ting s that need to be done. These can be done through diverse methods. For instance, chemicals, mosquito nets and environmental engineering can be used to mosquito control, handwashing and use of toilets in typhoid, and use of chemicals for jiggers. At this point, the project implementation team needs only to take care of the correct implementation of the strategies adopted in the project. If all these are done excellently well, satisfactory results will be obtained.

To evaluate the program, a review of data collected from the program, especially the number of people sensitized on the program, the mortality and morbidity rates of the disease, the prevalence before and after the program (within the six months) and the number of healthcare staff trained on the program are assessed. A data abstraction form may be used to gather this information. To evaluate the process, questionnaires were used to assess the general effectiveness of activities. The end results were mainly assessed based on the data collected. It was noted that the burden reduced significantly, thus pointing to program success.

References

Aziz, S., Mahmood, M., & Rehman, Z. (2018). Implementation of the CIPP Model for Quality Evaluation at School Level: A Case Study. Journal of Education and Educational Development, 5(1), 189. doi: 10.22555/joeed.v5i1.1553

Guyadeen, D., & Seasons, M. (2016). Evaluation Theory and Practice: Comparing Program Evaluation and Evaluation in Planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 38(1), 98-110. doi: 10.1177/0739456×16675930

Myrick, D. (2013). A Logical Framework for Monitoring and Evaluation: A Pragmatic Approach to M&E. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. doi: 10.5901/mjss.2013.v4n14p423