CAPACITY ASSESSMENTS: methodological approach,

key findings and our reflections

Dr Tolib Mirzoev, University of Leedst.mirzoev@leeds.ac.uk

www.hpsa-africa.org

@hpsa_africa

www.slideshare.net/hpsa_africa

Key messages1. CHEPSAA used a structured approach to capacity

assessments, which involved self-assessments followed by comparative analysis

2. There is growing though still limited demand for HPSR+A research and teaching by African universities

3. All seven African partners have different capacity assets to build upon; however, capacity levels varied and there are also different capacity needs

4. Overall, despite challenges faced, capacity assessments were a positive experience, itself being capacity strengthening

5. More details are available in different products (country and comparative papers, methodology handbook, reports from seven partners, comparative synthesis)

2

Presentation structure

1. Understanding capacity2. Our approach and methodology3. Key findings4. Reflections

3

Capacity is……the ability of individuals or groups/networks to conduct specific tasks (e.g. perform functions, solve problems and set and achieve objectives) in a sustainable manner.

based on: Potter and Brough, 2004; Green and Bennett 2007; UNDP, 2006

Key conceptual issues:

• Capacity of whom and to do what?

• Three levels (individual, organisational, system)

• Multiple elements (e.g. skills, tools, structures)

• Applied/visible vs potential capacity4

Capacity strengthening is…

…the process whereby people, organisations and society as a whole unleash, strengthen, create, adapt and maintain capacity over time

Development Assistance Committee, 2006 p.12.

Key conceptual issues:

• Continuous nature

• Build vs strengthen vs unleash

• Context-specificity5

Capacity assessments in CHEPSAA

Objectives were to: a) inform project activity planning and b) contribute to building the HPSR+A field

General approach:

1. Focus on HPSR+A groups in seven African universities

2. Assessed all three capacity levels

3. Assets plus needs

4. Semi-standardised (i.e. generic tools for adaptation)

5. Phased and incremental

6. Self-assessments followed by comparative synthesis

7. Collaborative work though led by one partner

Capacity assessment process

Step 1: shared understanding of key concepts

• Draft concept note

• Exchange and discussion

Step 2: Context mapping

• Broad guidance for adaptation

• Partner reports• Comparative synthesis project meeting

Step 3: Assessing org + indiv. levels

• Broad guidance for adaptation

• Data collection and analysis by each partner

• Partner reports

Step 4: comparative synthesis

• Drafted by Univ. of Leeds

• Partner review, discussion at workshop

• Final synthesis

7

Feb 2011

May 2011

Sept 2011

March 2012

Methods used• Reviews of key org and policy documents• In-depth interviews with key actors (within

universities and wider)• Focus group discussions• Staff survey• Student survey (TICH-GLUK)

Wider context including demand for HPSR+A

Thematic areas for capacity assessments

Resources (staff numbers and skills, funding, infrastructure)

Leadership and Governance

Nature of organisations

Quality assurance for Research & Teaching

Research Teaching

Networking and GRIPP

Scope of HPSR+A activities

9

Capacity requirements in each thematic area

Nat

ure

of

orga

nisa

tion

Scop

e of

H

PSR+

A w

ork

Cont

ext

Leadership and governance

Organisation’s resources

HPSR+A teaching and research, including quality assurance

Communication, GRIPP and networking

Demand for HPSR+A work

Resource environment

Thematic area

CAPACITYTO...

...take account of resource environment

... lead and govern

... effectively communicate and network

...take account of

wider context

...ensure quality research and

teaching

...generate + use organisation’s

resources

Capacity requirements

CAPACITY ASSETS CAPACITY NEEDS

10

Country Nigeria Tanzania Kenya Ghana South AfricaPartner HPRG-

COMUNECIDS-UDSM TICH-GLUK

 SPH-UG CHP-WITS SOPH-UWC

 HPSP / HEU-

UCT  

Relation with University

Unit reports to College

Institute within Uni

Institute within Uni

School within University

Centre within School

School within Faculty

Prog/unit within School

Group’s vision

Health research & teaching

Importance of health to development

Sustainable Health and development

HPSR+A implicit but recognised

Explicit focus on HPSR+A

Explicit focus incl. HSPR+A

Explicit focus on HPSR+A

Academics 7  4 10 35 9 13 12acad w/PhDs

3 3 2 25 4 4 9

senior vs junior acad.

3:4 3:1 4:6 22:13 5:4 4:9 3:9

support / admin staff

4 8 4 13 3 14 5

Group’s thematic expertise

Health policy and financing

Health policy

Health Policy and Planning& HS

HR, Maternal Health

Finance, HR, UHC, HS and policy

HR, HS and policy, HMIS

HS + policy, economics, governance

Research projects

5 3 3 5 14 16 10

HPSR+A teaching courses

MSc and PG diploma

MA in Dev-t Studies

MA in Comm. Health and Dev-t

MPH programme

MPH programme

MPH and PG diploma, short courses

MPH and PG diploma

HPSR+A modules

9 1 2 8 4 20 7

Nature of organisations

All (except IDS) are health-specific , internationally-recognised groups within wider universities

Leadership and governance• Vision for HPSR+A exists and relates to wider institutional

purpose• Variety of structures and processes• HPSR+A ‘champions’ exist but succession challenges

Resources• Staff shortages especially senior• Different income patterns incl. unpredictable external

funding• Infrastructural constraints in East/West but not South Africa.12

Scope of HPSR+A activities

HPSR+A work• All are engaged in research and teaching• Lack of clarity on identity of HPSR+A

Quality Assurance• teaching – clear links with institutional guidelines• research – attention on proposal and output and less on

process

Communication, Networking, GRIPP• Different GRIPP mechanisms are used• Multiple research networks BUT less HPSR+A teaching

networks

13

Wider context

Demand for HPSR+A Research & Teaching

• Growing, but limited, demand for HPSR+A research and teaching– organisational funding for teaching is primarily from

government

– limited domestic funding for research

– research priorities may be skewed by reliance on international funding

• Few systematic opportunities for researcher-practitioner engagement– lack of coordinated HPSR+A research priorities

– limited uptake of evidence by decision-makers

14

Some reflections on processes

1. Enthusiasm, interest2. Useful process for:

capacity strengthening, raising awareness developing shared views of capacity, HPSR+A

3. Feasible scope, existing research skills (though ambitious timetable)

4. Difference in nature of outputs between partners (format, approach)

5. Enjoyable experience

15

Considerations for future capacity assessments

1. Self-assessments can be empowering and awareness-raising, though consider bias

2. Use familiar methods and tools

3. Consider both capacity assets and needs

4. Explore capacity at all three levels (incl. links between the levels)

5. Deploy phased and incremental approach to manage workload and conduct analysis alongside collection

6. Consult CHEPSAA resources

More details - at www.hpsa-africa.org

Thank you!• Questions?• Comments

?• Reflections

?

Copyright

Funding

You are free:To Share – to copy, distribute and transmit the workTo Remix – to adapt the work

Under the following conditions:Attribution. You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work)Non-commercial. You may not use this work for commercial purposesShare Alike. If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work but only under the same or similar license to this one

Other conditions:For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work

Nothing in this license impairs or restricts the authors’ moral rights

Nothing in this license impairs or restricts the rights of authors whose work is referenced in this document

Cited works used in this document must be cited following usual academic conventions

Citation of this work must follow normal academic conventions

This document is an output from a project funded by the European Commission (EC) FP7-Africa (Grant no. 265482). The views expressed are not necessarily those of the EC.

The CHEPSAA partners

University of Dar Es SalaamInstitute of Development Studies

University of the WitwatersrandCentre for Health Policy

University of GhanaSchool of Public Health, Department of Health Policy, Planning and Management

University of LeedsNuffield Centre for International Health and Development

University of Nigeria Enugu Health Policy Research Group & the Department of Health Administration and Management

London School of Hygiene and Tropical MedicineHealth Economics and Systems Analysis Group, Depart of Global Health & Dev.

Great Lakes University of KisumuTropical Institute of Community Health and Development

Karolinska InstitutetHealth Systems and Policy Group, Department of Public Health Sciences

University of Cape TownHealth Policy and Systems Programme, Health Economics Unit

Swiss Tropical and Public Health InstituteHealth Systems Research Group

University of the Western CapeSchool of Public Health