Programmatic evaluations

The mandate of the International Coordinating Group on Vaccine Provision is the management of global emergency vaccine stockpiles to assure equitable access to, as well as rapid and timely allocation of, vaccines using evidence-based criteria during outbreaks and humanitarian crises. Covering the period 2006–2017, the purpose of the external evaluation was to inform decisions aimed at improving the Group’s governance, its mechanism related to the management and accessibility of disease-specific emergency vaccine stockpiles and their composition, the transparency of decision-making processes, as well as the Group’s internal and external communication.

An external evaluation of the EU-Luxembourg-WHO Universal Health Coverage Partnership 2011-2016 was conducted to assess its results and achievements and its contribution in strengthening WHO’s capacity to support ministries of health in the 20 countries covered by the Partnership. Specifically, the evaluation assessed how the Partnership succeeded in: (i) supporting the development and implementation of robust national health policies, strategies and plans to increase coverage with essential health services, financial risk protection and health equity; (ii) improving technical and institutional capacities, knowledge and information for health systems and services adaptation and related policy dialogue, mainly at country level; and (iii) ensuring that international and national stakeholders are increasingly aligned around national health policies, strategies and plans, and adhere to other aid effectiveness principles.

The Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Partnership Contribution model is a new initiative within WHO which is taking a new and innovative approach to partnerships to build pandemic preparedness.

The objectives of this external evaluation were to:

• assess the progress made towards achieving the outputs and outcomes set out in the High Level Implementation Plan, 2013-2016;
• measure the short-, medium- and longer-term impact of the Partnership Contribution funds to determine how these have helped prepare the global community for pandemic influenza; and
• identify lessons learned that can improve implementation of PIP PC funds in the future.

The Pandemic Influenza Preparedness (PIP) Framework was reviewed by the 2016 PIP Framework Review Group after five years of implementation. The Review addressed the following questions: 

1. What are the achievements since the PIP Framework was adopted?
2. Has implementation of the PIP Framework improved global pandemic influenza preparedness, including interpandemic surveillance, and capacity to respond?
3. What are the challenges, and possible ways of addressing them?

The Review Group’s report was considered by the Seventieth World Health Assembly in 2016 which adopted decision WHA70(10), requesting the Director-General inter alia, “to take forward expeditiously the recommendations in the report of the 2016 PIP Framework Review Group” and “to report to the Seventy-First World Health Assembly, on progress in implementing this decision, including by indicating the status of the response to the recommendations contained in the report of the 2016 PIP Framework Review Group”.

This 6th external review of TDR, conducted in 2015, was requested by the Joint Coordinating Board. The mandate was to investigate and analyse the strategic direction of TDR and its specific niche, in order to contribute to the strategy for the period 2017 onwards.

The main purpose of the review of the Medicines Transparency Alliance programme, phase II, was to provide in-depth information with regard to the achievements and challenges of phase II of this programme, as well as to inform the WHO strategy for future work in transparency and good governance in the pharmaceutical sector in countries.

The objective of the Strategic Approach is the sound management of chemicals and hazardous wastes throughout their life cycle so that, by 2020, chemicals are produced and used in ways that minimize significant adverse impacts on human health and the environment. The objective of the Quick Start Programme is to support initial enabling capacity-building and implementation activities to support attaining the 2020 goal in a range of vulnerable target countries. This external impact evaluation of the Quick Start Programme focused on the impact of its projects on the ground, including good practices and lessons learned.

The Pilot Programme on Climate Change Adaptation to Protect Human Health was funded by the Global Environment Facility, whose statutes require both a mid-term and a terminal external evaluation for all projects funded. This global project was designed to increase the adaptive capacity of national health system institutions to prepare for and respond to the health risks of climate variability and change. It was developed in collaboration between UNDP and WHO, with the former being the implementing agency and the latter the executing agency. This terminal evaluation was commissioned by WHO, following a mid-term evaluation in May 2013, and carried out by an external evaluator.

WHO established the Immunization Practices Advisory Committee in 2010 under the auspices of its Expanded Programme on Immunization in order to provide independent evidence- and experience-based advice and recommendations to strengthen and improve the delivery of immunization programmes at the country level. In 2014, the Immunization Practices Advisory Committee shifted to a new operating modality and it was considered timely and relevant that the Committee’s mandate, structure, evolution and processes be re-examined and evaluated to ensure its continued relevance and utility.

The objective of the WHO global strategy for the surveillance and monitoring of HIV drug resistance was to monitor the emergence and transmission of HIV drug resistance in resource-limited settings where antiretroviral therapy was being scaled up. An end-of-grant evaluation was commissioned in 2014.

The principal purpose of the first comprehensive evaluation of the World Health Organization Good Governance for Medicines (GGM) programme covering the period 2004–2012 was to analyse experiences and identify in-country lessons after eight years of implementation. Given the WHO commitment to the goal of universal health coverage, and the central role of good governance in its achievement, the basic objectives of the GGM programme are highly pertinent and timely.

The external evaluation of the Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction reviewed the overall relevance and effectiveness of the special programme, particularly in terms of producing global public health goods, and the efficiency and effectiveness of its governance, management and administration.

The overall objective of this external evaluation was to review the first five years of the Alliance and its activities for health workforce development since its launch in 2006 and to identify recommendations for the future work of GHWA.