Enhancing the Quality of Humanitarian Assistance: Taking Stock and Future Initiatives

During the last five years, the debate on the performance of humanitarian assistance has intensified. The motivation to "do better” has come both from within the humanitarian agencies as well as from pressure exerted by the donors and the media. Paradoxically, until now, the voice of those who are to benefit from this assistance has not been heard. This paper is an overview of the most important initiatives to increase the quality of humanitarian assistance. The introduction of the logical framework and the increasing body of knowledge made available through guidelines have improved project management by measuring process and outcomes. Increasingly, evaluations are used to give account and to learn from experiences. But, current evaluation practice must develop in a wider variety of approaches more appropriate to create change of the operations in the field. Some agencies oppose new developments like the Sphere and the Humanitarian Accountability Projects, arguing that standards and regulation would undermine necessary flexibility to adjust responses to the local context, or be a threat to their independence. Nonetheless, standards are considered to be a prerequisite as reference to assess performance. Furthermore, it is hoped that a new breakthrough will be achieved by improved accountability towards beneficiaries. An option to address some of the gaps in the current quality assessment tools was to widen the perspective on performance from projects to the organisations behind them. Quality management models may provide the required framework, and they also can be used to embed current initiatives by organisations. Humanitarian organisations may want to develop forms of self-regulation rather than waiting for accreditation by donors. Another area in which progress is needed is a system-wide approach to performance. At this level, the influence of political actors, donors, national governments, and other representatives of the parties in a conflict also should be assessed. It is their legal obligation to protect the basic right to assistance of persons affected by disasters, as enshrined in international la

Implementing a Basic Package of Health Services in post-conflict Liberia: perceptions of key stakeholders.

Recovery of the health sector in post-conflict countries is increasingly initiated through a Basic Package of Health Services (BPHS) approach. The country government and partners, including international donors, typically contract international and local NGOs to deliver the BPHS. Evidence from routine data suggests that a BPHS approach results in rapid increases in service coverage, coordination, equity, and efficiency. However, studies also show progress may then slow down, the cause of which is not immediately obvious from routine data. Qualitative research can provide insight into possible barriers in the implementation process, particularly the role of health workers delivering the BPHS services. The aim of this study was to explore perceptions of health service providers and policy makers on the implementation of the BPHS in post-conflict Liberia, using SRH services as a tracer and Lipsky's work on "street-level bureaucrats" as a theoretical framework. In July-October 2010, 63 interviews were conducted with midwives, officers-in-charge, and supervisors in two counties of Liberia, and with policy makers in Monrovia. The findings suggest health workers had a limited understanding of the BPHS and associated it with low salaries, difficult working conditions, and limited support from policy makers. Health workers responded by sub-optimal delivery of certain services (such as facility-based deliveries), parallel private services, and leaving their posts. These responses risk distorting and undermining the BPHS implementation. There were also clear differences in the perspectives of health workers and policy makers on the BPHS implementation. The findings suggest the need for greater dialogue between policy makers and health workers to improve understanding of the BPHS and recognition of the working conditions in order to help achieve the potential benefits of the BPHS in Liberia

Strengths and weaknesses of the humanitarian Cluster Approach in relation to sexual and reproductive health services in northern Uganda.

Implementation of the Cluster Approach has been a major recent development in the humanitarian system. The aim of this study was to explore the strengths and weaknesses of the humanitarian Cluster Approach in relation to services for sexual and reproductive health (SRH) [including gender-based violence (GBV)] in northern Uganda, which is recovering from over 20 years of armed conflict. Face-to-face and telephone, semistructured, qualitative interviews were conducted in 2009 with purposively selected key informants from governmental, non-governmental, United Nations and donor agencies working in northern Uganda. Respondents noted a number of contributions of the Cluster Approach, including improved co-ordination of SRH services and stronger advocacy. However, concerns were raised about the low prioritisation, limited leadership and capacity, and standard setting for SRH services. Concerns were also raised about limited planning and capacity for dissolution of the Clusters in the transition to recovery and development in northern Uganda. Despite a number of contributions made by the Cluster Approach, particularly for responding to GBV, there were many concerns about its limited influence on SRH services. There were also concerns that the transition to recovery and development in northern Uganda may not result in reproductive health services being sufficiently strengthened

Health systems research in fragile and conflict affected states: a qualitative study of associated challenges.

BACKGROUND: High quality health systems research (HSR) in fragile and conflict-affected states (FCAS) is essential to guiding the policies and programmes that will improve access to health services and, ultimately, health outcomes. Yet, conducting HSR in FCAS is challenging. An understanding of these challenges is essential to tackling them and to supporting research conducted in these complex environments. Led by the Thematic Working Group on Health Systems in FCAS, the primary aim of this study was to develop a research agenda on HSR in FCAS. The secondary aim was to identify the challenges associated with conducting HSR in these contexts. This paper presents these challenges. METHODS: Guided by a purposely-selected steering group, this qualitative study collected respondents' perspectives through an online survey (n = 61) and a group discussion at the Third Global Symposium on HSR in September 2014 (n = 11). Respondents with knowledge and/or experience of HSR in FCAS were intentionally recruited. RESULTS: Of those ever involved in HSR in FCAS (45/61, 75%), almost all (98%) experienced challenges in conducting their research. Challenges fall under three broad thematic areas: (1) lack of appropriate support; (2) complex local research environment, including access constraints, weak local research capacity, collaboration challenges and lack of trust in the research process; and (3) limited research application, including rapidly outdated findings and lack of engagement with the research process and results. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that those familiar with HSR in FCAS face many challenges in gaining support for and in conducting and applying high-quality research. There is a need for more sustainable support, including commitment to and long-term funding of HSR in FCAS; investment in capacity building within FCAS to meet the challenges related to implementation of research in these complex environments; relationship and trust building among stakeholders involved in HSR, particularly between local and international researchers and between researchers and participants; and innovative and flexible approaches to research design and implementation in these insecure and rapidly changing contexts

Mass fatality management following the South Asian tsunami disaster: case studies in Thailand, Indonesia, and Sri Lanka.

BACKGROUND: Following natural disasters, mismanagement of the dead has consequences for the psychological well-being of survivors. However, no technical guidelines currently exist for managing mass fatalities following large natural disasters. Existing methods of mass fatality management are not directly transferable as they are designed for transport accidents and acts of terrorism. Furthermore, no information is currently available about post-disaster management of the dead following previous large natural disasters. METHODS AND FINDINGS: After the tsunami disaster on 26 December 2004, we conducted three descriptive case studies to systematically document how the dead were managed in Thailand, Indonesia, and Sri Lanka. We considered the following parameters: body recovery and storage, identification, disposal of human remains, and health risks from dead bodies. We used participant observations as members of post-tsunami response teams, conducted semi-structured interviews with key informants, and collected information from published and unpublished documents. Refrigeration for preserving human remains was not available soon enough after the disaster, necessitating the use of other methods such as dry ice or temporary burial. No country had sufficient forensic capacity to identify thousands of victims. Rapid decomposition made visual identification almost impossible after 24-48 h. In Thailand, most forensic identification was made using dental and fingerprint data. Few victims were identified from DNA. Lack of national or local mass fatality plans further limited the quality and timeliness of response, a problem which was exacerbated by the absence of practical field guidelines or an international agency providing technical support. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency response should not add to the distress of affected communities by inappropriately disposing of the victims. The rights of survivors to see their dead treated with dignity and respect requires practical guidelines and technical support. Mass fatality management following natural disasters needs to be informed by further field research and supported by a network of regional and international forensic institutes and agencies

Mental health care utilisation and access among refugees and asylum seekers in Europe: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Refugees and asylum seekers often have increased mental health needs, yet may face barriers in accessing mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) services in destination countries. The aim of this systematic review is to examine evidence on MHPSS service utilisation and access among refugees and asylum seekers in European Union Single Market countries. METHODS: Four peer-reviewed and eight grey literature databases were searched for quantitative and qualitative literature from 2007 to 2017. Access was categorised according to Penchansky and Thomas' framework and descriptive analyses were conducted. Quality of studies was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. RESULTS: Twenty-seven articles were included. The findings suggest inadequate MHPSS utilisation. Major barriers to accessing care included language, help-seeking behaviours, lack of awareness, stigma, and negative attitudes towards and by providers. CONCLUSIONS: Refugees and asylum seekers have high mental health needs but under-utilise services in European host countries. This underutilisation may be explained by cultural-specific barriers which need to be tackled to increase treatment demand. Training health providers on cultural models of mental illness may facilitate appropriate identification, referral, and care. Based on these findings, it is crucial to review policies regarding MHPSS provision across the EU

The reliability and validity of the SF-8 with a conflict-affected population in northern Uganda

BACKGROUND: The SF-8 is a health-related quality of life instrument that could provide a useful means of assessing general physical and mental health amongst populations affected by conflict. The purpose of this study was to test the validity and reliability of the SF-8 with a conflict-affected population in northern Uganda. METHODS: A cross-sectional multi-staged, random cluster survey was conducted with 1206 adults in camps for internally displaced persons in Gulu and Amuru districts of northern Uganda. Data quality was assessed by analysing the number of incomplete responses to SF-8 items. Response distribution was analysed using aggregate endorsement frequency. Test-retest reliability was assessed in a separate smaller survey using the intraclass correlation test. Construct validity was measured using principal component analysis, and the Pearson Correlation test for item-summary score correlation and inter-instrument correlations. Known groups validity was assessed using a two sample t-test to evaluates the ability of the SF-8 to discriminate between groups known to have, and not have, physical and mental health problems. RESULTS: The SF-8 showed excellent data quality. It showed acceptable item response distribution based upon analysis of aggregate endorsement frequencies. Test-retest showed a good intraclass correlation of 0.61 for PCS and 0.68 for MCS. The principal component analysis indicated strong construct validity and concurred with the results of the validity tests by the SF-8 developers. The SF-8 also showed strong construct validity between the 8 items and PCS and MCS summary score, moderate inter-instrument validity, and strong known groups validity. CONCLUSION: This study provides evidence on the reliability and validity of the SF-8 amongst IDPs in northern Uganda

Additional file 2: of Health systems research in fragile and conflict-affected states: a research agenda-setting exercise

An online survey used during stage 2 of the study to consult on health system research needs in Fragile and conflict-affected states (FCAS). The survey was developed and distributed via the Bristol Online Survey tool

Health systems research in fragile and conflict-affected states: a research agenda-setting exercise

Background: There is increasing interest amongst donors in investing in the health sectors of fragile and conflict-affected states, although there is limited research evidence and research funding to support this. Agreeing priority areas is therefore critical. This paper describes an 18-month process to develop a consultative research agenda and questions for health systems research, providing reflections on the process as well as its output. Methods: After a scoping review had been conducted, primary data was collected from August 2014 to September 2015. Data was collected using a mixture of methods, including an online survey (n = 61), two face-to-face group sessions (one with 11 participants; one with 17), email consultation (n = 18), a webinar (n = 65), and feedback via LinkedIn. Two steering committees of purposively selected experts guided the research process - a core steering committee (n = 10) and broad steering committee (n = 20). The process moved from developing broad topics and lists of research needs to grouping and honing them down into a smaller, prioritised agenda, with specific research questions associated to each topic. Results: An initial list of 146 topics was honed down to 25 research needs through this process, grouped thematically under transition and sustainability, resilience and fragility, gender and equity, accessibility, capacity building, actors and accountability, community, healthcare delivery, health workforce, and health financing. They were not ranked, as all health system areas are interdependent. The research agenda forms a starting point for local contextualisation and is not definitive. Conclusions: A wide range of stakeholders participated in the different stages of this exercise, which produced a useful starting point for health systems research agenda setting in fragile and conflict-affected states. The process of engagement may have been as valuable for building a community of researchers as the product. It is now important to drive forward the research agenda. Without both a higher profile and deeper focus for this area, there is a real risk that fragile and conflict-affected states will continue to fall behind in global health and development goals. 2016 The Author(s).sch_iih14pub4455pub