Evaluating malaria programmes in moderate- and low-transmission settings: practical ways to generate robust evidence

• Published in: Malaria Journal
• Main Authors: Ruth A. Ashton, Debra Prosnitz, Andrew Andrada, Samantha Herrera, Yazoumé Yé
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2020
• Subjects: Process evaluation; Impact evaluation; Routine health information systems (RHIS); Surveillance; Monitoring evaluation; Decision-making; Arctic medicine. Tropical medicine; RC955-962; Infectious and parasitic diseases; RC109-216; Arctic
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-020-03158-z; https://doaj.org/article/f322f5ce508d4079adac1e25501ab4b4

Abstract Background Many countries have made substantial progress in scaling-up and sustaining malaria intervention coverage, leading to more focalized and heterogeneous transmission in many settings. Evaluation provides valuable information for programmes to understand if interventions have been implemented as planned and with quality, if the programme had the intended impact on malaria burden, and to guide programmatic decision-making. Low-, moderate-, and heterogeneous-transmission settings present unique evaluation challenges because of dynamic and targeted intervention strategies. This paper provides illustration of evaluation approaches and methodologies for these transmission settings, and suggests how to answer evaluation questions specific to the local context. Methods The Roll Back Malaria Monitoring and Evaluation Reference Group formed a task force in October 2017 to lead development of this framework. The task force includes representatives from National Malaria Programmes, funding agencies, and malaria research and implementing partners. The framework builds on existing guidance for process and outcome evaluations and impact evaluations specifically in high transmission settings. Results The theory of change describes how evaluation questions asked by national malaria programmes in different contexts influence evaluation design. The transmission setting, existing stratification, and data quality and availability are also key considerations. The framework is intended for adaption by countries to their local context, and use for evaluation at sub-national level. Confirmed malaria incidence is recommended as the primary impact indicator due to its sensitivity to detect changes in low-transmission settings. It is expected that process evaluations provide sufficient evidence for programme monitoring and improvement, while impact evaluations are needed following adoption of new mixes of interventions, operational strategies, tools or policies, particularly in contexts of changing malaria epidemiology. ...