Monitoring and Evaluating the Transition of Large-Scale Programs in Global Health

Monitoring and evaluating large-scale global health program transitions can strengthen accountability, facilitate stakeholder engagement, and promote learning about the transition process and how best to manage it. We propose a conceptual framework with 4 main domains relevant to transitions—leadership, financing, programming, and service delivery—along with guiding questions and illustrative indicators to guide users through key aspects of monitoring and evaluating transition. We argue that monitoring and evaluating transitions can bring conceptual clarity to the transition process, provide a mechanism for accountability, facilitate engagement with local stakeholders, and inform the management of transition through learning. Monitoring and evaluating large-scale global health program transitions can strengthen accountability, facilitate stakeholder engagement, and promote learning about the transition process and how best to manage it. We propose a conceptual framework with 4 main domains relevant to transitions—leadership, financing, programming, and service delivery—along with guiding questions and illustrative indicators to guide users through key aspects of monitoring and evaluating transition. We argue that monitoring and evaluating transitions can bring conceptual clarity to the transition process, provide a mechanism for accountability, facilitate engagement with local stakeholders, and inform the management of transition through learning. Purpose: Donors are increasingly interested in the transition and sustainability of global health programs as priorities shift and external funding declines. Systematic and high-quality monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of such processes is rare. We propose a framework and related guiding questions to systematize the M&E of global health program transitions. Methods: We conducted stakeholder interviews, searched the peer-reviewed and gray literature, gathered feedback from key informants, and reflected on author experiences to build a framework on M&E of transition and to develop guiding questions. Findings: The conceptual framework models transition as a process spanning pre-transition and transition itself and extending into sustained services and outcomes. Key transition domains include leadership, financing, programming, and service delivery, and relevant activities that drive the transition in these domains forward include sustaining a supportive policy environment, creating financial sustainability, developing local stakeholder capacity, communicating to all stakeholders, and aligning programs. Ideally transition monitoring would begin prior to transition processes being implemented and continue for some time after transition has been completed. As no set of indicators will be applicable across all types of health program transitions, we instead propose guiding questions and illustrative quantitative and qualitative indicators to be considered and adapted based on the transition domains identified as most important to the particular health program transition. The M&E of transition faces new and unique challenges, requiring measuring constructs to which evaluators may not be accustomed. Many domains hinge on measuring “intangibles” such as the management of relationships. Monitoring these constructs may require a compromise between rigorous data collection and the involvement of key stakeholders. Conclusion: Monitoring and evaluating transitions in global health programs can bring conceptual clarity to the transition process, provide a mechanism for accountability, facilitate engagement with local stakeholders, and inform the management of transition through learning. Further investment and stronger methodological work are needed.