School Nurses' Experiences of Organizational Support During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

School nurses encountered many workplace struggles while providing care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Several struggles involved organizational support, including having sufficient time, resources, compensation, and school leadership support. The purpose of this mixed methods study was to explore the experiences of school nurses working during the COVID-19 pandemic as they related to sufficient time to complete COVID-related activities, sufficient COVID-19 resources, compensation, and perceived organizational (school leadership) support. We obtained data from 1,564 National Association of School Nurses members regarding respondent characteristics, school characteristics, measures of organizational support, and qualitative perceived organizational support using a 17-question survey. Perceptions of having sufficient time to complete COVID-related tasks and infringement of these tasks on routine activities were worse for those with greater years of experience and education. Compensation for additional COVID-related work was more favorable for LPNs. School leaders should be aware of their role in bolstering organizational support and its impact.

Comparing program supervision with an external RADAR evaluation of quality of care in integrated community case management for childhood illnesses in Mali.

BACKGROUND: Many countries have adopted integrated community case management (iCCM) to reduce mortality among children under five years from common childhood illnesses. The 2016-2020 Malian Red Cross iCCM program trained 441 Community Health Workers (CHWs) to treat malaria, pneumonia, diarrhea, and malnutrition for children under five years of age in six districts. Implementation strength and quality of care (QoC) were assessed through the program's supervision function, using the Malian Ministry of Health's system. OBJECTIVE: This paper compares methods and results of program supervision data and an independent evaluation to assess the effectiveness of program implementation and supervision and inform program improvement. It also presents the benefits and limitations of each method. METHOD: An independent QoC evaluation was conducted using tools developed by the Real Accountability: Data Analysis for Results (RADAR) project, hereafter referred to as the RADAR evaluation. RADAR evaluation data collected in July and August 2018 were compared with program supervision data collected mostly between May and December 2018. RESULTS: The RADAR evaluation provided detailed findings on correct assessment, classification, and treatment per illness, medication type, and dosage. Program supervision combined the findings for all illnesses, medication type, and dosage due to limitations in the data collection process. Six indicators were comparable between both methods. Findings were similar for temperature and mid-upper arm circumference measurements but diverged between program supervision and the RADAR evaluation, respectively, on correct classification for all illnesses (87.1% vs. 65.3%), correct treatment for all illnesses (69.5% vs. 39.8%), correct respiratory rate counting (88.5% vs. 54.7%), and administering the first dose by CHW (75.4% vs. 65.0%). Findings from the RADAR evaluation guided improvements in program supervision. CONCLUSIONS: A robust program supervision system can serve as a credible method to assess QoC. However, a rigorous independent QoC evaluation provides a valuable benchmark to gauge the effectiveness of the supervisory process.