RESUMEN
Abstract-In 2014, Nigeria shifted its malaria policy and strategy from control to elimination. Studies show that data-driven decision making is essential to achieving elimination. It is therefore important that policy makers have access to and use good quality and relevant data to inform program decisions. This article presents findings from an assessment of availability, quality, and use of malaria data in three states in Nigeria, namely, Akwa-Ibom, Cross River, and Niger, as part of a larger study on how organizational structure affects outcomes of malaria programs. A literature search to determine the availability and range of malaria data in Nigeria was conducted, followed by 65 key informant interviews to understand how malaria data are used in the study states. It was observed that the District Health Information System (DHIS) was the major source of data used in managing programs; however, the range of malaria indicators in the DHIS is limited, lacking indicators such as active case detection and entomological data, which are important for surveillance and decision making toward malaria elimination. On data quality, routine data from the DHIS were reviewed using the national protocol for data quality assessment. Data quality was found to be suboptimal, with quality scores ranging from 54% to 64% compared to the national target of 80%. DHIS data were reportedly used most often for performance and/or supply chain management. Overall, the study demonstrates gaps in data availability and quality and highlights the need for more data sources and improved quality data to inform decision making toward malaria elimination in Nigeria.
RESUMEN
Abstract-Studies have found links between organizational structure and performance of public organizations. Considering the wide variation in uptake of malaria interventions and outcomes across Nigeria, this exploratory study examined how differences in administrative location (a dimension of organizational structure), the effectiveness of administrative processes (earmarking and financial control, and communication), leadership (use of data in decision making, state ownership, political will, and resourcefulness), and external influences (donor influence) might explain variations in performance of state malaria programs in Nigeria. We hypothesized that states with malaria program administrative structures closer to state governors will have greater access to resources, greater political support, and greater administrative flexibility and will therefore perform better. To assess these relationships, we conducted semistructured interviews across three states with different program administrative locations: Akwa-Ibom, Cross River, and Niger. Sixty-five participants were identified through a snowballing approach. Data were analyzed using a thematic framework. State program performance was assessed across three malaria service delivery domains (prevention, diagnosis, and treatment) using indicators from Nigeria Demographic and Health Surveys conducted in 2008 and 2013. Cross River State was best performing based on 2013 prevention data (usage of insecticide-treated bednets), and Niger State ranked highest in diagnosis and treatment and showed the greatest improvement between 2008 and 2013. We found that organizational structure (administrative location) did not appear to be determinative of performance but rather that the effectiveness of administrative processes (earmarking and financial control), strong leadership (assertion of state ownership and resourcefulness of leaders in overcoming bottlenecks), and donor influences differed across the three assessed states and may explain the observed varying outcomes.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Three global health initiatives (GHIs) - the US President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, and the World Bank Multi-Country HIV/AIDS Program - finance most HIV services in Nigeria. Critics assert that GHIs burden fragile health systems in resource-poor countries and that health system limitations in these countries constrain the achievement of the objectives of GHIs. This study analyzed interactions between HIV GHIs and the Nigerian Health System and explored how the impact of the GHIs could be optimized. METHODS: A country case study was conducted using qualitative methods, including: semi-structured interviews, direct observation, and archival review. Semi-structured interviews were held with key informants selected to reach a broad range of stakeholders including policymakers, program managers, service providers, representatives of donor agencies and their implementing partners; the WHO country office in Nigeria; independent consultants; and civil society organizations involved in HIV work. The fieldwork was conducted between June and August 2013. FINDINGS: HIV GHIs have had a mixed impact on the health system. They have enhanced availability of and access to HIV services, improved quality of services, and strengthened health information systems and the role of non-state actors in health care. On the negative end, HIV donor funding has increased dependency on foreign aid, widened disparities in access to HIV services, done little to address the sustainability of the services, crowded out non-HIV health services, and led to the development of a parallel supply management system. They have also not invested significantly in the production of new health workers and have not addressed maldistribution problems, but have rather contributed to internal brain drain by luring health workers from the public sector to non-governmental organizations and have increased workload for existing health workers. There is poor policy direction, strategic planning and coordination, and regulation of externally-financed HIV programs by the government and this poses a great limitation to the optimal use of HIV-specific foreign aid in Nigeria. CONCLUSIONS: A few reforms are necessary to improve the strengthening effect of GHIs and to minimize their negative and unintended consequences. This will require stronger leadership from the Nigerian government with regards to better coordination of externally-financed health programs. Also, donors need to play a greater role in addressing the negative consequences of foreign aid. The findings highlight important unintended consequences and system-wide impacts that get little attention in traditional program evaluation.