Reflections on Experience: Towards More Effective Polio Communication Reviews

"I have had the very real privilege of being involved in the Global Polio Eradication initiative (GPEI) for the past 7 or 8 years. My vantage point has been somewhat unique as someone who sits outside the main implementing organisations but has nevertheless had an opportunity to see the programme close up."

This blog from The Communication Initiative (CI)'s Chris Morry shares his personal reflections on: the importance of monitoring and evaluation as drivers in the GPEI's evolving strategies, the changing role communication reviews (held in Afghanistan, India, Nigeria, and Pakistan) have played in strengthening communication programmes, and lessons learned about what makes for an effective review process.

First held in 2005, communication reviews have been organised by national polio programmes, the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), and other partners, including The CI. According to Morry, these reviews have provided objective expert opinion on communication methods and initiatives, pointed out gaps where they exist, identified promising activities for scaling up, encouraged experience-sharing between programmes and partners, and made recommendations to improve programme impact and overcome challenges. Morry begins by outlining 6 components he has come to see as the critical components required for any effective review. In his words, the review should be:

1. Accountable: recommendations and findings need to be incorporated into established oversight mechanisms and structures to ensure monitoring, evaluation, and decisions for further action.
2. Independent: the review panelists need to be independent of the programme being reviewed to ensure objectivity and to give the review legitimacy.
3. Monitored: implementation of review recommendations need appropriate milestones and indicators for monitoring and reporting by oversight bodies.
4. Owned: reviews should focus on priority issues and challenges as identified by government, the programme, and its partners and be conducted in such a way that the review process is seen to be relevant and constructive.
5. Scheduled: reviews should be incorporated into a regular schedule as part of an annual planning process so they become part of each programme's normal planning culture.
6. Supported: reviews require considerable in-country support for logistics such as planning transportation, organising field visits, and preparing documentation.

Morry explains that local contexts and realities have led to different weights being given to these components in different countries and over time. To illustrate this, he looks closely at the way that communication reviews have been carried out in India, where UNICEF's central role "has been largely positive and in many ways necessary, but has resulted in a singular focus on UNICEF's own polio communication programme and led to reviews having less relevance to, and impact on, some key areas of the programme." In a table on pages 3-4 of the blog, Morry outlines the strengths and potential weaknesses associated with focusing the reviews on UNICEF activities and programme priorities. In short, he concludes that "India's approach to reviews has been extremely successful, though it is important to acknowledge that there has been some compromise in the areas of partner engagement and ownership, as well as independence."

Next, Morry shares lessons from communication reviews over the past several years in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Nigeria - noting that, because of their sporadic and infrequent nature, they have not been integrated into normal planning processes. He does identify several recent signs of positive change, such as in the area of ownership, which he says has increased - with greater involvement of in-country polio communication staff in developing review agendas and identifying priority areas of focus.

For Morry, the right balance within and across all 6 components is essential to effective communication reviews. He provides the following strategies for achieving that balance:

• Reviews need to be held within a structure of accountability that ensures reporting to and monitoring by bodies with a mandate for independent advice and/or oversight.
• Independence (i.e., not having team members drawn from the partner organisations being reviewed) is important.
• Reviews need to be an integral part of a process in which the review provides insight and recommendations for action; the programme then prioritises the recommendations and develops indicators and an implementation plan to be used by programme and oversight bodies to monitor progress and outcomes.
• Ownership should be understood as involving all partners with significant polio communication programmes and with the ability for review team members to follow independent investigations and to be active participants in developing agendas and terms of reference for each review.
• Reviews need to happen regularly and be appropriately scheduled to fit within each country's planning framework.
• In-country logistical and organisational support is essential and needs to incorporate identification and dissemination of pre-review intelligence and documentation and ensure that review team members are able to participate in setting agendas, comment on progress against previous recommendations, and have flexibility in field itineraries to follow evidence.

Morry concludes his reflection by stressing that communication reviews "have already contributed significantly to the building of evidence-based responses to communication challenges and have the capacity to contribute even more in the future....However, for communication reviews to become effective enough to meet the programme demands of the coming years, we will need to work at better integrating them into programme planning and monitoring cycles, placing them clearly within a system of accountability, and ensuring they have the independence to be viewed as objective external reflection."

Click here for the 6-page blog in PDF format.