Table 2 Summary of Findings, by thematic area
Thematic area | Specific area | Key findings |
|---|---|---|
Quantification | -All programmes conduct annual quantification exercises to produce supply needs -Both population estimates as well as facility consumption data are used to produce LLIN quantifications -Poor data quality at the facility level results in national-level estimations that may have errors | |
Logistics systems | Distribution management | -LLIN distribution managed separately from other commodities -Ideal scenario is integrated distribution; practical solution is separate -Bulk of nets was not identified as a major challenge for distribution -Heavily led by partner organizations |
Supply and restock | -Each country had a different frequency of restock -Commodities with dedicated funding and distribution most reliable supply chain (e.g. HIV, EPI, LLIN) -Order placed primarily top-down “push” not bottom-up | |
Stock-outs | Occurrence | -All countries had reported stock-outs by facilities |
Remedy | -Make-shift stock-out corrections -No clear stock-out guidelines in any country | |
Training | -Lack of funding available -Focused on new staff | |
Data management | Collection | -Overwhelming amount of registers and report forms for health workers to fill out at the facility level -Missing data were common in registers that were reviewed -Special LLIN distribution register produced by partner organizations |
Use | -Facilities rarely used data for progress tracking -National and sub-national programme staff used facility reported data -National malaria programme conducted surveys in addition to routine data to track programme impact |