How to scale-up: a comparative case study of scaling up a district health management strengthening intervention in Ghana, Malawi and Uganda.

BACKGROUND: The need to scale up public health interventions in low- and middle-income countries to ensure equitable and sustainable impact is widely acknowledged. However, there has been little understanding of how projects have sought to address the importance of scale-up in the design and implementation of their initiatives. This paper aims to gain insight into the facilitators of the scale-up of a district-level health management strengthening intervention in Ghana, Malawi and Uganda. METHODS: The study took a comparative case study approach with two rounds of data collection (2019 and 2021) in which a combination of different qualitative methods was applied. Interviews and group discussions took place with district, regional and national stakeholders who were involved in the implementation and scale-up of the intervention. RESULTS: A shared vision among the different stakeholders about how to institutionalize the intervention into the existing system facilitated scale-up. The importance of champions was also identified, as they influence buy-in from key decision makers, and when decision makers are convinced, political and financial support for scale-up can increase. In two countries, a specific window of opportunity facilitated scale-up. Taking a flexible approach towards scale-up, allowing adaptations of the intervention and the scale-up strategy to the context, was also identified as a facilitator. The context of decentralization and the politics and power relations between stakeholders involved also influenced scale-up. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the identification of the facilitators of the scale-up, full integration of the intervention into the health system has proven challenging in all countries. Approaching scale-up from a systems change perspective could be useful in future scale-up efforts, as it focuses on sustainable systems change at scale (e.g. improving district health management) by testing a combination of interventions that could contribute to the envisaged change, rather than horizontally scaling up and trying to embed one particular intervention in the system.

Using a theory of change in monitoring, evaluating and steering scale-up of a district-level health management strengthening intervention in Ghana, Malawi, and Uganda - lessons from the PERFORM2Scale consortium.

BACKGROUND: Since 2017, PERFORM2Scale, a research consortium with partners from seven countries in Africa and Europe, has steered the implementation and scale-up of a district-level health management strengthening intervention in Ghana, Malawi and Uganda. This article presents PERFORM2Scale's theory of change (ToC) and reflections upon and adaptations of the ToC over time. The article aims to contribute to understanding the benefits and challenges of using a ToC-based approach for monitoring and evaluating the scale-up of health system strengthening interventions, because there is limited documentation of this in the literature. METHODS: The consortium held annual ToC reflections that entailed multiple participatory methods, including individual scoring exercises, country and consortium-wide group discussions and visualizations. The reflections were captured in detailed annual reports, on which this article is based. RESULTS: The PERFORM2Scale ToC describes how the management strengthening intervention, which targets district health management teams, was expected to improve health workforce performance and service delivery at scale, and which assumptions were instrumental to track over time. The annual ToC reflections proved valuable in gaining a nuanced understanding of how change did (and did not) happen. This helped in strategizing on actions to further steer the scale-up the intervention. It also led to adaptations of the ToC over time. Based on the annual reflections, these actions and adaptations related to: assessing the scalability of the intervention, documentation and dissemination of evidence about the effects of the intervention, understanding power relationships between key stakeholders, the importance of developing and monitoring a scale-up strategy and identification of opportunities to integrate (parts of) the intervention into existing structures and strategies. CONCLUSIONS: PERFORM2Scale's experience provides lessons for using ToCs to monitor and evaluate the scale-up of health system strengthening interventions. ToCs can help in establishing a common vision on intervention scale-up. ToC-based approaches should include a variety of stakeholders and require their continued commitment to reflection and learning on intervention implementation and scale-up. ToC-based approaches can help in adapting interventions as well as scale-up processes to be in tune with contextual changes and stakeholders involved, to potentially increase chances for successful scale-up.

Assessing the scalability of a health management-strengthening intervention at the district level: a qualitative study in Ghana, Malawi and Uganda.

BACKGROUND: The scale-up of successfully tested public health interventions is critical to achieving universal health coverage. To ensure optimal use of resources, assessment of the scalability of an intervention is recognized as a crucial step in the scale-up process. This study assessed the scalability of a tested health management-strengthening intervention (MSI) at the district level in Ghana, Malawi and Uganda. METHODS: Qualitative interviews were conducted with intervention users (district health management teams, DHMTs) and implementers of the scale-up of the intervention (national-level actors) in Ghana, Malawi and Uganda, before and 1 year after the scale-up had started. To assess the scalability of the intervention, the CORRECT criteria from WHO/ExpandNet were used during analysis. RESULTS: The MSI was seen as credible, as regional- and national-level Ministry of Health officials were championing the intervention. While documented evidence on intervention effectiveness was limited, district- and national-level stakeholders seemed to be convinced of the value of the intervention. This was based on its observed positive results regarding management competencies, teamwork and specific aspects of health workforce performance and service delivery. The perceived need for strengthening of management capacity and service delivery showed the relevance of the intervention, and relative advantages of the intervention were its participatory and sustainable nature. Turnover within the DHMTs and limited (initial) management capacity were factors complicating implementation. The intervention was not contested and was seen as compatible with (policy) priorities at the national level. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the MSI is scalable. However, to enhance its scalability, certain aspects should be adapted to better fit the context in which the intervention is being scaled up. Greater involvement of regional and national actors alongside improved documentation of results of the intervention can facilitate scale-up. Continuous assessment of the scalability of the intervention with all stakeholders involved is necessary, as context, stakeholders and priorities may change. Therefore, adaptations of the intervention might be required. The assessment of scalability, preferably as part of the monitoring of a scale-up strategy, enables critical reflections on next steps to make the intervention more scalable and the scale-up more successful.

From PERFORM to PERFORM2Scale: lessons from scaling-up a health management strengthening intervention to support Universal Health Coverage in three African countries.

Strengthening management and leadership competencies among district and local health managers has emerged as a common approach for health systems strengthening and to achieve Universal Health Coverage (UHC). While the literature is rich with localized examples of initiatives that aim to strengthen the capacity of district or local health managers, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, considerably less attention is paid to the science of 'how' to scale-up these initiatives. The aim of this paper is thus to examine the 'process' of scaling-up a management strengthening intervention (MSI) and identify new knowledge and key lessons learned that can be used to inform the scale-up process of other complex health interventions, in support of UHC. Qualitative methods were used to identify lessons learned from scaling-up the MSI in Ghana, Malawi and Uganda. We conducted 14 interviews with district health management team (DHMT) members, three scale-up assessments with 20 scale-up stakeholders, and three reflection discussions with 11 research team members. We also kept records of activities throughout MSI and scale-up implementation. Data were recorded, transcribed and analysed against the Theory of Change to identify both scale-up outcomes and the factors affecting these outcomes. The MSI was ultimately scaled-up across 27 districts. Repeated MSI cycles over time were found to foster greater feelings of autonomy among DHMTs to address longstanding local problems, a more innovative use of existing resources without relying on additional funding and improved teamwork. The use of 'resource teams' and the emergence of MSI 'champions' were instrumental in supporting scale-up efforts. Challenges to the sustainability of the MSI include limited government buy-in and lack of sustained financial investment.

How district health decision-making is shaped within decentralised contexts: A qualitative research in Malawi, Uganda and Ghana.

District Health Management Teams (DHMTs) are often entry points for the implementation of health interventions. Insight into decision-making and power relationships at district level could assist DHMTs to make better use of their decision space. This study explored how district-level health system decision-making is shaped by power dynamics in different decentralised contexts in Ghana, Malawi and Uganda. In-depth interviews took place with national- and district-level stakeholders. To unravel how power dynamics influence decision-making, the Arts and Van Tatenhove (2004) framework was applied. In Ghana and Malawi, the national-level Ministry of Health substantially influenced district-level decision-making, because of dispositional power based on financial resources and hierarchy. In Uganda and Malawi, devolution led to decision-making being strongly influenced by relational power, in the form of politics, particularly by district-level political bodies. Structural power based on societal structures was less visible, however, the origin, ethnicity or gender of decision-makers could make them more or less credible, thereby influencing distribution of power. As a result of these different power dynamics, DHMTs experienced a narrow decision space and expressed feelings of disempowerment. DHMTs' decision-making power can be expanded through using their unique insights into the health realities of their districts and through joint collaborations with political bodies.

Factors influencing the scale-up of public health interventions in low- and middle-income countries: a qualitative systematic literature review.

To achieve universal health coverage, the scale-up of high impact public health interventions is essential. However, scale-up is challenging and often not successful. Therefore, a systematic review was conducted to provide insights into the factors influencing the scale-up of public health interventions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Two databases were searched for studies with a qualitative research component. The GRADE-CERQual approach was applied to assess the confidence in the evidence for each key review finding. A multi-level perspective on transition was applied to ensure a focus on vertical scale-up for sustainability. According to this theory, changes in the way of organizing (structure), doing (practice) and thinking (culture) need to take place to ensure the scale-up of an intervention. Among the most prominent factors influencing scale-up through changes in structure was the availability of financial, human and material resources. Inadequate supply chains were often barriers to scale-up. Advocacy activities positively influenced scale-up, and changes in the policy environment hindered or facilitated scale-up. The most outstanding factors influencing scale-up through changes in practice were the availability of a strategic plan for scale-up and the way in which training and supervision was conducted. Furthermore, collaborations such as community participation and partnerships facilitated scale-up, as well as the availability of research and monitoring and evaluation data. Factors influencing scale-up through a change in culture were less prominent in the literature. While some studies articulated the acceptability of the intervention in a given sociocultural environment, more emphasis was placed on the importance of stakeholders feeling a need for a specific intervention to facilitate its scale-up. All identified factors should be taken into account when scaling up public health interventions in LMICs. The different factors are strongly interlinked, and most of them are related to one crucial first step: the development of a scale-up strategy before scaling up.

Advocating safe abortion: outcomes of a multi-country needs assessment on the potential role of national societies of obstetrics and gynecology.

In 2019 the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) embarked on an initiative that aims to strengthen the capacity of 10 national societies of obstetrics and gynecology (ObGyn) in advocacy for safe abortion. In 2018 needs assessments that entailed a desk study, interviews, and stakeholder workshops were conducted in Benin, Cameroon, Côte d'Ivoire, Kenya, Mali, Mozambique, Panama, Peru, Uganda, and Zambia. The general aim of the needs assessments was to gain a deeper understanding of the contextual situation and identify the needs of ObGyn societies in relation to safe abortion advocacy. This paper provides a cross-country analysis of the outcomes of the needs assessments and reflects on the capabilities, barriers, and opportunities to strengthen this role of ObGyn societies. Common barriers, such as unavailability of services, lack of technical guidance, unawareness and ambiguity about the legal framework, provider attitudes, and abortion stigma, pose challenges for ObGyn societies to work constructively on safe abortion advocacy. However, ObGyn societies have a strong position due to their strategic networks and technical credibility and can be a facilitator in healthcare providers' advocacy role. Five strategies were developed to strengthen the capacity of ObGyn societies in safe abortion advocacy.