Resumen

Palabras clave

Background

Limitations

Recommendations

Conclusions

References

Abstract

The improvement of health in the twenty-first century is inextricably linked to research for health. In response to growing international appealto address regional health needs,the PanAmerican Health Organization (PAHO) and its Member States approved the Policy on Research for Health (CD49/10) in 2009. This document represents the flagship regional policy on research for health and outlines how health systems and services in the region can be strengthened through research. It has been implemented by the two components of PAHO —the Member States and the Pan American Sanitary Bureau. The policy contained a specific directive mandating PAHO to report on its implementation, development of subsequent strategies, and action plans targeting its governing bodies. The Americas are the first World Health Organization (WHO) region to issue a regional Policy on Research for Health, which was harmonized with WHO’s Strategy on Research for Health, approved in 2010. Attending to the recommendations issued by PAHO’s Advisory Committee on Health Research and WHO’s Advisory Committee on Health Research,the PAHO Department of Knowledge Management, Bioethics and Research set out to advance the assessment of the implementation of the Policy on Research for Health through the creation of a monitoring and evaluation Scorecard. Indicators relevant to the Policy on Research for Health objectives were mapped from the Compendium of Impact and Outcome Indicators, with new indicators created. A practical framework based on available indicator data was proposed to generate a baseline policy assessment and incorporate a means of incrementally enhancing the measurements. In this case study, we outline the iterations of the PAHO Policy on Research for Health Scorecard, as well as the lessons learned throughout the development process that may be a valuable guide for health research entities monitoring and evaluating the progress of their own policies.

Conclusions

The PAHO Department of Knowledge Management, Bioethics and Research designed a practical way to use available institutional indicators as a means of assessing the implementation of the Policy on Research for Health (CD49/10). Our experiences are likely to be relevant to other WHO regional offices and research entities that are dealing with health and engaged in measuring the progress of their own mandates, policies or strategies and likely to encounter similar journeys in striving for feasible policy monitoring and evaluation. The task of monitoring and evaluating the implementation of a policy is a complex phenomenon yet criticalto the policy process. There is a delicate balance between comprehensiveness, accuracy, and feasibility throughout the policy evaluation process that is to be striven for.