Project
‹ Go back to overview

Mid-Term Review of the intervention ?Ubuzima Burambye? (Long Healthy Life)

Financer:
Belgian Technical Cooperation (BTC)
Country:
Rwanda
Field of Expertise:
Health Service Delivery; PHC/MNCH/RH/Nutrition/W&S; Basic Health Services / Primary health care
Narrative description of project:
Ubuzima Burambye (UB) is a Belgian bilateral health sector support programme implemented by the Belgian Technical Cooperation (BTC) in cooperation with the Rwandan government partners under a 'national execution' model. The general objective of UB is to strengthen the quality of primary health care and health services. A mid-term review was commissioned by the BTC to provide an in-depth analysis of strategies and activities and to assess the level of performance of the programme in order to provide strategic recommendations to the joint UB Steering Committee for the remaining programme period. The five 'result areas' that were assessed in the mid-term review were:

1. A quality assurance system is set up, integrated and functional in all hospitals
2. Mental health services are accessible in a sustainable way at all levels of care
3. Urban health service coverage is rationalised and extended in line with principles of the National Health Sector Policy
4. Leadership and governance in the health sector is reinforced especially at district level
5. The asset management system in the health sector is operational and cost-effective

Additional foci of the review were the programme governance with specific focus on the 'national execution' modality, as well as cross-cutting objectives of gender equality and environmental sustainability.
Description of services provided:
The hera team, comprised of a health systems expert, a public health expert and a biomedical engineer, assessed the performance of UB in the five result areas by applying the BTC performance monitoring tool consisting of 96 evaluation questions. An intended participative evaluation based on a realist evaluation methodology could not be implemented because the contracted time was taken up by the performance monitoring tasks. Data were collected through document reviews and individual and group interviews of programme partners and other key informants. Qualitative and quantitative data were triangulated to generate findings that contributed answers to the evaluation questions. The findings and recommendations were discussed individually with key stakeholders and presented for discussion to an extraordinary meeting of the UB Steering Committee.