| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | AA | AB | AC | AD | AE | AF | AG | AH | AI | AJ | AK | AL | AM | AN | AO | AP | AQ | AR | AS | AT | AU | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2 | IMPACT | IMPACT/LONG TERM INDICATOR | Indicator technical definition | Means of Verification | Disaggregation by sex | Disaggregation by stakeholders | Disaggregation by type of training | Disaggregation by core product | Disaggregated by co-developed/revised/approved/implemented/resourced and budgeted | Disaggregation by Country/Region | Disaggregation by IHR core capacity area | Baseline | Y1 Target (22/23) | Actual | Disaggregation by sex | Disaggregation by type of training | Disaggregation by core product | Disaggregated by co-developed/revised/approved/implemented/resourced and budgeted | Disaggregation by Country/Region | Disaggregation by IHR core capacity area | Y2 Target (23/24) | Actual (23/24) | Y3 Target (24/25) | Actual (24/25) | Total | Assumptions | ||||||||||||||||||||
3 | Increased compliance with IHR (2005) in partner countries and regions | Change in JEE capacity score in partner countries | Available JEE (overall average and domain-specific scores) scores within total project implementation period (over multiple funding cycles beginning 2017). Relevant capacities are those that the project directly supports. JEE is an external review of progress towards IHR core capacity* implementation, conducted once every 4-5 years (voluntary). *IHR Core Capacities as set out in the IHR 3rd edition (2005) | WHO JEE report | Y | JEE scores per country prior to 2017 | JEE has been completed and results available in 2025 SPAR self-assessment evaluation is carried out for all the partner countries and results available each year. Improvement in SPAR scoring annually leads to improved long-term JEE score. SPAR and JEE assessments collect valid and appropriate data. Any changes in SPAR/JEE assessment methodology or format still enables collection of comparable data over the lifecyle of the project. Strengthening national and regional health systems and structures will result in improved compliance with IHR (2005). The project makes a significant contribution to climate change adaptation efforts due to its primary focus on supporting countries to prepare, prevent, detect and respond to disease outbreaks and health threats and the proven links between climate change and an increased likelihood of these occurring. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
4 | Changes in how countries and regions prevented detected and responsed to public health events and emergencies | Qualitative indicator using bespoke evaluation approach undertaken by a third party evaluation supplier. | External Evaluation | TBC | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
5 | OUTCOME | OUTCOME INDICATORS | Indicator technical definition | Means of verification | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6 | Improved capacity to comply with the IHR (2005) in partner countries and regions | Change in SPAR scores. | SPAR scores related to the project's agreed core capacity areas (overall average and domain-specific scores). *IHR Core Capacities as set out in the IHR 3rd edition (2005) | 1) SPAR report. SPAR is a self-assessment tool undertaken by the national government. 2) External evaluation assessing how and why there has been a change in SPAR score. | Y | Y | SPAR scores in relevant domains for 21/22 for partner countries | Maintain or increase of one point in minimum of one technical capacity area in 4 countries | Ethipia: Labs, Chems, radiation Zambia: labs, RCCE Nigeria: HR Pakistan: Health Emergancy managment, RCCE | Maintain or increase of one point in minimum of one technical capacity area in 4 countries | Maintain or increase of one point in minimum of one technical capcity area in 4 countries | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
7 | Changes in country and regional capacity to prevent detect and respond to public health events and emergencies | Qualitative indicator using bespoke evaluation approach undertaken by a third party evaluation supplier. | 1) External Evaluation | Y | Y | xxxx | TBC | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
8 | OUTPUT 1 | INDICATOR 1.1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
9 | Strengthened technical capability in partner country and regional public health organisations | Number of partner country stakeholders trained in IHR core capacity* areas *IHR Core Capacities as set out in the IHR 3rd edition (2005). | Total number of stakeholders in partner countries, trained in IHR core capacity* areas by UKHSA Example of stakeholders include: laboratory staff, delegates from across regional partners, epidemiologists, public health professionals across country IHR core capacity areas are EPRR, OH, WD, RCE, Labs, surveillance, PoE Disaggregation includes type of training i.e., ToT, technical training, simulation exercise, mentorship *IHR Core Capacities as set our in the IHR 3rd edition etc. Where the same participants are trained multiple times (as part of a series), they should only be counted once. | The data will be taken from internal system and quarterly reports from the country teams | Y | Y | Y | Y | 1000 | 1100 | 3675 | M:2454; F:987: U:234 | After action reviews: 68 Simulation Exercise: 74 Technical training: 3345 Training of trainer (ToT): 188 | Africa CDC: 314 Ethiopia: 308 Nigeria: 257 Pakistan: 2542 Zambia: 254 | Chemical events:82 Emergency preparedness: 205 Emergency response operations: 13 Emergency response operations and emergency preparedness: 69 Human resources: 68 National laboratory system: 551 National laboratory system and human resources: 26 Surveillance:2576 Zoonotic events:85 | 2200 | Partner public health workforce support and share ownership of IHR-SP activities There is political will and partner absorptive capacity to implement the proposed IHR-SP activities Training, mentorship and simulation exercises are adopted and supported to upskill the public health workforce The project is able to reach the most appropriate representatives of the public health workforce A move to sustainable training approaches (eg. Train the trainer models) may result in a decrease in numbers of public health stakeholders directly trained by the IHR project As the IHR project trains a greater proportion of the public health workforce in partner countries/organisations the number of people trained may reduce Efforts to build capacity to comply with IHR, and IHR compliance, will lead to postive impacts in climate-related GHS. ForĀ risks, see the IHR-SP Risk Register | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
10 | INDICATOR 1.2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
11 | Number of core products co-developed in IHR core capacity* areas *IHR Core Capacities as set out in the IHR 3rd edition (2005). | Core products are all the documents created as a result of the IHR projects activities in core capacity areas. These products include: National action plans, strategies, SOPs, guidelines, and operational tools such as quality manuals, algorithms, implementation plans, learning management systems, workplans, etc. Core products recorded to include a description of IHR-SPs contribution to it's development IHR core capacity areas include EPRR, OH, WD, RCE, Lab, IDSR/PoE Co-developed products are defined as core technical products that are developed with equal engagement from partner country stakeholders. Disagregation includes level of finalisation with UKHSA support: revised, co-developed, approved, implemented or resourced/budgeted. Resourced/budgeted refers to activities that have an approved source of finance and resources. | The data will be taken from internal system and quarterly reports from the country teams | Y | Y | Y | Y | 25 | >30 | 63 | Guideline: 12 Implementation plan: 2 Learning management systems: 4 National action plan: 2 Quality manual: 4 Standard Operating Procedures: 22 Strategy: 9 Other: 8 | TBD following Q4 QA | Africa CDC: 2 Ethiopia: 8 Nigeria: 18 Pakistan: 15 Zambia: 20 | Chemical events: 1 Coordination and National Focal Point communications: 1 Emergency preparedness: 4 National laboratory system: 32 National laboratory system and surveillance: 2 Surveillance:15 Surveillance, emergency preparedness and emergency response operations: 2 Surveillance and Emergency response operations: 1 Zoonotic events: 5 | 45 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
12 | INDICATOR 1.3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
13 | Proportion (%) of trained stakeholders demonstrating new/improved technical skills or applying new/improved knowledge in IHR core capacity areas *IHR Core Capacities as set out in the IHR 3rd edition (2005). | Stakeholders that have been trained (captured in indicator 1.1) will be revisited 3-6 months after the training months or as appropriate for the activity. A standardised survey will be used to ascertain self-reported improvement and application of technical skills/knowledge in IHR capacity areas. Stakeholders will be surveyed on a quarterly basis or as appropriate for each network. Response rate will be determined for each survey and for all completed across the year | The data will be taken from internal system and quarterly reports from the country teams | Y | Y | Y | 0 | 60% | 90% | M: 91%, F: 94%, U: 100% | Nigeria: 96% Zambia: 82% Ethiopia: 100% Africa CDC: 100% Pakistan: 88% | Chemical events: 63% Human resources: 100% National Laboratory System: 94% Surveillance: 88% | 70% | 80% | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
14 | INDICATOR 1.4 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
15 | Changes in technical practices resulting from project's capability strengthening | This qualitative indicator uses an ordinal scale to demonstrate depth of change. The sample referred to in the target is the total number of participants (across countries and regions) who participated in a qualitative review. Changes will be assessed using a standardised scale (as below) which is refined per techincal area. Level 1 refers to change seen in individual/team (depending on activity) understanding and confidence in technical capacity area and the self-reported value of the activity. Level 2 refers to changes resulting from application of new technical skills/knowledge at an individual/team level. Level 3 refer to changes seen at the organisational level which embed new technical expertise/practices and move to sustainable approaches of increasing/sustaining technical capacity. Refer to qualitative scales on sheet 2 for further information on qualitative scale and illustrative example. | Internal annual review with quality assurance from GO MREL team | Y | Y | 0 | 40% of sample demonstrating level 3 change | 100% | Pakistan: 1 Ethiopia: 1 Zambia: 1 Nigeria: 1 | Surveillance: 1 Risk Assessment: 1 Emergency Response operations, Emergency Preparedness: 1 National Laboratory System: 1 | 60% of sample demonstrating level 3 change | 80% of sample demonstrating level 3 change | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
16 | INDICATOR 1.5 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
17 | Number of IHR publications sharing evidence on improving IHR core capacities* *IHR Core Capacities as set out in the IHR 3rd edition (2005). | Total number of publications sharing evidence to improve IHR core competencies. Examples of publications include grey literature, journal publications, articles, presentations, etc. Publications should be sharing evidence to an external audience. This should not include internal updates such as internal civil service newsletters. The exception is if the newsletter is shared externally (e.g. the Global Health Network website, etc). | The data will be taken from internal system and quarterly reports from the country teams | Y | Y | 5 | >5 | 23 | Africa CDC: 7 EMR: 1 Ethiopia: 4 Nigeria: 10 Pakistan: 10 Zambia: 20 | Chemical events: 3 Coordination and National Focal Point Communications: 1 Coordination and National Focal Point communications, linking public health and security authorities: 1 Emergency preparedness: 1 Emergency preparedness and emergency response operations: 1 Emergency response operations: 2 Human resources: 9 National laboratory systems: 20 Surveillance: 9 Zoonotic events: 7 | 20 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
18 | INDICATOR 1.6 | Partner public health workforce support and share ownership of IHR-SP project activities There is political will and partner absorptive capacity to implement the proposed IHR-SP activities Public health workforce partners support in identifying and releasing appropriate trainees for development Partner public health workforces are able to successfully implement roles, responsibilities, strategies and plans National professionals with improved leadership capability will develop and promote effective public health systems A move to sustainable training approaches (eg. Train the trainer models) may result in a decrease in numbers of public health stakeholders directly trained by the IHR project As the IHR project trains a greater proportion of the public health workforce in partner countries/organisations the number of people trained may reduce For risks, see the IHR-SP Risk Register | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
19 | Number of IHR Events sharing Evidence on improving IHR core capacities* *IHR Core Capacities as set out in the IHR 3rd edition (2005). | Total number of events sharing evidence to improve IHR core competencies including but not limited to, conferences, webinars, etc. Events should be sharing evidence to an external audience. This should not include internal updates such internal presentations to UKHSA/the civil service. | The data will be taken from internal system and quarterly reports from the country teams | Y | y | 0 | 29 | 37 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
20 | OUTPUT 2 | INDICATOR 2.1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
21 | Enhanced leadership, workforce and organisational development in partner country and regional public health organisations | Number of partner country stakeholders trained/mentored in public health leadership skills and theory | Total number of all the stakeholders in partner countries, trained/mentored in leadership Example of stakeholders include: delegates from regional partners, public health professionals, public health institute's senior staff/staff, etc. Disaggregation includes type of training i.e., ToT, workforce training, mentorship, etc. | The data will be taken from internal system and quarterly reports from the country teams | Y | Y | Y | 100 | 150 | 216 | M: 121; F: 60; U: 35 | Technical training: 216 | Africa CDC: 55 Ethiopia:75 Nigeria:29 Pakistan: 17 Zambia: 40 | 220 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
22 | INDICATOR 2.2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
23 | Number of core products co-developed in workforce development | Core products are all the documents that are created as a result of the IHR-SP activities in leadership, workforce and organisational development. These products include: strategies, SOPs, guidelines, and operational tools such as syllabus, modules, workshop programme, organisational core values, workplans, etc. Core products recorded to include a description of IHR-SPs contribution to it's development Co-developed products are defined as core technical products that are developed with equal engagement from partner country stakeholders Disaggregation includes whether the core-product was revised, co-developed, approved, implemented or resourced/budgeted. Resourced/budgeted refers to activities that have an approved source of finance and resources Disaggregation includes whether the core-product was revised, co-developed, approved, implemented or resourced/budgeted. Resourced/budgeted refers to activities that have an approved source of finance and resources | The data will be taken from internal system and quarterly reports from the country teams | Y | Y | Y | 10 | >10 | 29 | Implementation: 6 Learning management systems: 2 Standard Operating Procedures: 1 Strategy: 7 Other: 13 | To be updated following Q4 QA | Ethiopia: 1 Nigeria: 23 Pakistan: 3 Zambia: 2 | >21 | >15 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
24 | INDICATOR 2.3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
25 | Proportion (%) of trained staff demonstrating new/improved leadership skills or applying new/improved governance processes | Stakeholders that have been trained (captured in indicator 2.1) will be revisited 3-6 months after the training or as appropriate for the activity. Stakeholders will be surveyed on a quarterly basis or as appropriate for each network. Response rate will be determined for each survey and for all completed across the year A standardised survey will be used to ascertain self-reported improvement and application of leadership theory and skills and/or governance processes. | The data will be taken from internal system and quarterly reports from the country teams | Y | Y | 0 | 60% | 96% | Male: 100% Female: 75% Undisclosed: 100% | Nigeria: 100% Ethiopia: 95% | 70% | 80% | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
26 | INDICATOR 2.4 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
27 | Changes in workforce and leadership practices resulting from project's activities | This qualitative indicator uses an ordinal scale to demonstrate the depth of change The sample referred to in the target is the total number of participants (across countries and regions) who participated in a qualitative review. Changes will be assessed using a standardised scale (as below) which is refined per techincal area. Level 1 refers to change seen in individual/team (depending on activity) understanding and confidence in leadership skills/theory and the self-reported value of the leadership training activity. Level 2 refers to changes resulting from application of new leadership skills/knowledge at an individual/team level. Level 3 refer to changes seen at the organisational level which embed new technical expertise/practices and move to sustainable approaches of increasing/sustaining technical capacity. Refer to qualitative scales on sheet 2 for further information on qualitative scale and illustrative example. | Internal annual review wth quality assurance from GO MREL | Y | 0 | 1 example of level 3 change (1 cohort due to operational constraints) | 1 | Ethiopia: 1 | 60% of sample demonstrating level 3 change | 80% of sample demonstrating level 3 change | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
28 | INDICATOR 2.5 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
29 | Number of IHR publications sharing evidence on improving workforce and Leadership | Total number of publications sharing evidence to improve workforce and leadership. Examples of publications include grey literature, journal publications, articles, poster presentations, etc. | The data will be taken from internal system and quarterly reports from the country teams | Y | 0 | 0 | 5 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
30 | INDICATOR 2.6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
31 | Number of IHR Events sharing evidence on improving workforce and Leadership | Total number of r events sharing evidence to improvewokforce and leadership including but not limited to, conferences, webinars, etc. | The data will be taken from internal system and quarterly reports from the country teams | Y | 0 | 0 | 10 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
32 | OUTPUT 3 | INDICATOR 3.1 | There is political will to promote IHR-SP activities on strengthening networks Supported networks create a forum for enhancing ways of working, including multi-sectoral collaboration There is a shared understanding among the network on what a partnership is and the roles of the partners in the partnership. Supported networks develop and promote effective public health systems The partnership and networks will provide sustainable added value to public health systems ForĀ risks, see the IHR Project Risk Register | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
33 | Strengthened public health networks at national and regional level | Number of public health networks supported across country, regional and global levels | The quantitative data assesses the total number of new, existing, emerging networks that are supported across country, regional and global levels. Networks are defined as formal (i.e., TORs, formal membership, secretariat, etc.) or informal (i.e., community of practise, nascent group, etc.) groups interacting together to achieve a shared vision related to public health Supported is defined as activities around creation, co-ordination, expansion and sustenance of existing and new networks. Examples include but are not limited to co-facilitation and training, digital support, admin support, core products development, new network creation, embedding a network within local system, chairing meetings, etc. 'Support' implies ongoing continuation of these activities, not a one-off delivery/support instance. Being an invited member of a network does not equal 'support' - unless one of the 'support' activities above is also conducted continually. | The data will be taken from internal system and quarterly reports from the country teams | Y | Y | 0 | >3 new networks supported | 28 new networks supported (53 supported overall in Y1) | Africa CDC: 5 EMR: 1 Ethiopia: 4 Nigeria: 23 Pakistan: 11 Zambia: 8 | Chemical events: 1 Coordination and National Focal Point communications: 23 Emergency response operations: 1 Human resources: 3 Linking public health and security authorities: 1 National laboratory system: 14 Risk communication: 2 Surveillance: 3 Zoonotic events: 4 | 13 | >3 new networks supported | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
34 | INDICATOR 3.2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
35 | Proportion of network stakeholders who report value in network activities. | Stakeholders are all the individuals who are part of the network. Stakeholders will be surveyed on a quarterly basis or as appropriate for each network. Response rate will be determined for each survey and for all completed across the year | The data will be taken from internal system and quarterly reports from the country teams | Y | Y | Y | 0 | 60% | 95% | Nigeria: 95% | Y | 70% | 80% | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
36 | INDICATOR 3.3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
37 | Changes in practices resulting from public health networks | This is an qualitative indicator using bespoke annual evaluation with a sample of stakeholders to assess the changes in public health practices resulting from project activities. The sample referred to in the target is the total number of participants (across countries and regions) who participated in a qualitative review. Changes will be assessed using a standardised scale (as below). Level 1 refers to change focusses on changes related to improved coordination and knowledge exchange. Level 2 refers to changes focusses on changes related to evidence generation, and new activity opportunities (eg. trainings) Level 3 refer to changes in stakeholder organisations or increased regional impact resulting from network activities. Refer to qualitative scales on sheet 2 for further details | Internal annual review wth quality assurance from GO MREL | Y | 0 | 1 example of level 3 change (1 cohort due to operational constraints) | 1 | Zambia: 1 | 60% of sample reporting level 3 change | 80% of sample reporting level 3 change | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
38 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
39 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
40 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
41 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
42 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
43 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
44 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
45 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
46 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
47 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
48 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
49 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
50 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
51 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
52 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
53 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
54 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
55 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
56 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
57 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
58 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
59 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
60 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
61 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
62 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
63 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
64 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
65 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
66 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
67 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
68 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
69 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
70 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
71 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
72 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
73 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
74 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
75 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
76 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
77 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
78 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
79 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
80 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
81 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
82 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
83 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
84 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
85 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
86 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
87 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
88 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
89 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
90 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
91 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
92 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
93 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
94 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
95 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
96 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
97 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
98 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
99 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
100 |