Module 10 PPT Session 3
Module 10 PPT Session 3
MODULE 10:
RHIS Design and Reform
SESSION 3.
RHIS Reform in the Context of Scalability and
Sustainability
The complete RHIS curriculum is available here:
https://www.measureevaluation.org/our-work/ routine-health-information-systems/rhis-curriculum
1
Session 3: RHIS Reform in the Context of Scalability
and Sustainability
Learning Objectives
By the end of this module, participants will be able to:
• Describe data requirements and data collection and reporting tools at
different levels (including ICT)
• Describe key considerations in the design of data recording and reporting
tools (especially in the context of scalability and sustainability)
• Explain the core elements of an RHIS strengthening/scale-up plan
2
Session 3: RHIS Reform in the Context of Scalability
and Sustainability
Topics Covered
• Key considerations for data collection and reporting tools (including ICT)
• Match data requirements to data sources/tools
• Translate an assessment result into an action plan
3
Examples of Key Considerations in the Design of RHIS Data Collection and
Reporting Tools
4
Exercise: Design of RHIS Data Collection and Reporting Tools
5
Core Processes of RHIS Strengthening/Scale-Up
6
Problem Statement
7
Problem Statement: Examples
HIS Performance
Problem Statement
and Processes
Data quality Data quality is 70%, but the target was 90%+5%, indicating a gap of 20%.
Information use is 40%, but the target was 60%+5%, indicating a gap of
Use of information
20%.
Management
The information is collected through different channels, creating
information needs/
duplication, redundancies, and waste of time.
indicators
70% of the facilities filled out all data cells/items in the monthly report
Data collection
form, but the target was 95%, indicating a gap of 25%.
80% of the facilities submitted their report on time, but the target was
Data transmission
95%, indicating a gap of 15%.
70% of the districts have two or more people trained in data entry, but the
Data processing
target was 100%, indicating a gap of 30%.
8
Problem Statements: Examples
HIS Performance
Problem Statement
and Processes
40% of the facilities displayed updated information, but the target was
Information display
70%, indicating a gap of 30%.
40% of the facilities carried out data quality checks before submitting
reports, but the target was 80%.
Data quality check
No tool exists for checking data quality at district or higher levels.
20% of the districts carry out data quality assessments on a quarterly basis.
Feedback 10% of the districts provide feedback reports on a monthly basis, but9the
target was 100%.
What Makes a Good Management Objective?
10
Guidance to Write Objectives
To [action] What
The [specify what knowledge,
attitudes, skills, behaviors]
Among [specify population or Who
segment]
From–to [from baseline to desired How much
level]
Or by [x percent]
Or to [specific level]
By [timeframe] When
11
Deciding Solutions/Interventions
12
Prioritizing Solutions and Interventions
Availability of resource
1= least; 3=most available
Total
13
Interventions to Improve RHIS Performance
• Technical interventions
• Organizational interventions
• Behavioral interventions
14
Examples of Technical Interventions
15
Examples of Technical Interventions
16
Examples of Organizational and Behavioral
Interventions
17
Examples of Organizational and Behavioral
Interventions
18
Advocacy for RHIS Improvement
19
Advocacy Chart for Improving Data Quality
HIS information for Expected outcomes Whom to Strategy
advocacy (specify what you influence (who (how to
want) will bring the influence the
desired decision maker)
outcome)
20
RHIS Implementation
21
M&E of RHIS Scale-Up
22
Group Work: Effect of RHIS Strengthening on RHIS Performance in Liberia
ICT support
DONORS • GLOBAL INITIATIVES • CIVIL/POLITICAL UNREST • DECENTRALIZATION • DISEASE OUTBREAKS • SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS • NATURAL DISASTERS • UTILITIES 24
ROUTINE HEALTH INFORMATION SYSTEMS
A Curriculum on Basic Concepts and Practice
This presentation was produced with the support of the United States Agency for International
Development (USAID) under the terms of MEASURE Evaluation cooperative agreement AID-OAA-L-
14-00004. MEASURE Evaluation is implemented by the Carolina Population Center, University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partnership with ICF International; John Snow, Inc.; Management
Sciences for Health; Palladium; and Tulane University. The views expressed in this presentation do not
necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States government.
25