Cited by 5Health Policy Implementation ScienceGlobal Health Workforce IssuesHealthcare Systems and Reforms

Stakeholder’s perspective: Sustainability of a community health worker program in Afghanistan

Najafizada, Said Ahmad Maisam, Labonté, Ronald, Bourgeault, Ivy Lynn·2017·Evaluation and Program Planning

Abstract

Objectives The objectives of this study were two-fold: 1) to examine how different stakeholders define sustainability, and 2) to identify barriers to and facilitators of the sustainability of the Afghan CHW program.Method We interviewed 63 individual key informants, and conducted 11 focus groups [35 people] with policymakers, health managers, community health workers, and community members across Afghanistan. The participants were purposefully selected to provide a wide range of perspectives.Finding Different stakeholders define sustainability differently. Policymakers emphasize financial resources; health managers, organizational operations; and community-level stakeholders, routine frontline activities. The facilitators they identify include integration into the health system, community support, and capable human resources. Barriers they noted include lack of financial resources, poor program design and implementation, and poor quality of services. Measures to ensure sustainability could be national revenue allocation, health-specific taxation, and community financing.Conclusion Sustainability is complicated and has multiple facets. The plurality of understanding of sustainability among stakeholders should be addressed explicitly in the program design. To ensure sustainability, there is a need for a coordinated effort amongst all stakeholders.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.11.004

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Studies in low- and middle-income countries indicate the importance of strategic partnerships and the impact of broader social context and health system weaknesses as influences on sustainability.

    “Such studies indicate the importance of strategic partnerships (89, 112) and the impact of the broader social context and of health system weaknesses (15, 63) as important influences on sustainability.”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 18 · Cited by 5

Authors
Najafizada, S. A. M., Labonté, R., & Bourgeault, I. L.
Affiliations
University of Ottawa (CA)
Venue
Evaluation and Program Planning
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-02
Volume
60
Pages
123-129
ISSN
0149-7189 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2551625718
Cited by
5
References
18
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1
FWCI
1.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Evaluation and Program Planning (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
International Development Research Centre
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Global Health Workforce Issues
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Healthcare Systems and Reforms
Keywords
community health workers, program sustainability, stakeholder perspectives, Afghanistan, health system integration, community funding, health care financing, barriers and facilitators, health workforce capacity, health policy
MeSH terms
Administrative Personnel, Afghanistan, Community Health Workers, Community Health Services, Community Participation, Financing, Organized, Humans, Program Evaluation, Program Development, Focus Groups, Qualitative Research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review