Communicating through Partnership

A good idea

BUT

does it work in practice?

Background to AHRTAG

Formed in 1977 Recognised for newsletters Practical, accurate and relevant Excellent distribution Sophisticated feedback mechanisms

Improved health in the community

Improved health worker practice

Health workers better informed

Healthlink produces and distributes accurate, relevant and practical newsletters

Healthlink staff have expertise in health themes and management of information

Healthlink Resource Centre serves as a model to others

Local Resource Centres established based on Healthlink model

Contact with other agencies with relevant expertise

Feedback on needs and information gaps

Information Dissemination Model

Click for larger picture

But….

Is Western ‘expertise’ relevant? Are ‘messages’ always appropriate/needed? Are newsletters the best way of communicating? Is information the main constraint to improved

practice? Are resource centres accessible to health workers? Is health worker performance the main determinant of

community health?

Learning from Experience (1)

Evaluation of Child Health Dialogue 1998 Evaluation of Health Action 1998 Evaluation of AIDS Action 1998 Evaluation of resource centre project with

KANCO 1997 Evaluation of Middle East Programme

1996

Learning from Experience (2) Importance of network of international contacts and feedback

from various levels Value of newsletters as resource for training Strong call for more locally-tailored content and decentralised

production Continued need for print media Role for partners beyond translation only Northern informational input may undermine Southern capacity

development Healthlink’s role to be support and capacity building

Positive Examples

Middle East Programme - no international newsletter. Focus on training of resource centre staff, university course in primary health care and in-country production of materials and health information systems

A Brazilian partner (ABIA) working on HIV/AIDS produced a lot of their own materials including photographs, descriptions of local experiences and lists of local support services

Improved health in the community

Improved health worker practice

Supportive state policies

Resources made available

Varied Communications

Advocacy

Increased capacity of Southern partners

Network of partners

Links with international agencies

Healthlink staff are skilled in capacity building

Feedback identified needs and gaps

Work with other sectors e.g. education

Work with other development workers e.g. HIV/AIDS, disability

Communicating through Partnership Model

Click for larger picture

Is this all spin?

Changing funding environment Lower priority given to print media Difficult to get funding for newsletters Is this because of greater emphasis on

electronic media? Difficulties of demonstrating impact? Failure to link print to other programmes, e.g.

training?

All change...

Major restructure in April 2000 Cessation of international newsletters Merger of London resource centre with CICH to

form Source Abolition of thematic, vertical programmes Formation of regionalised partner support team Greater emphasis on electronic media Shift from ‘message delivery’ to ‘giving voice’

Focus on...

‘Source’ material - Reuters-like approach

Signposting

Reversed coffee filter

Reversed ‘coffee filter’

Healthlink acts as a “filter”

Northern knowledge and

information

Southern organisations and

grass roots workers

Northern opinion leaders

Southern knowledge

and information

Information Dissemination Model Advocacy Model

Click for larger picture

Experience to date (1)

Allowed difficult questions to be asked Required key symbols of the organisation

to be questioned, e.g newsletters Established ways of working within

Healthlink and partners Need to build understanding and

confidence of staff members

Experience to date (2)

‘Locked into’ funding agreements Lack of unrestricted funding, e.g. for

partner to participate in this meeting Pressure from funders for short-term

‘products’ UK costs of capacity building perceived

‘expensive’

Experience to date (3)

Identified other sources for support for staff development, e.g. Investors in People

Doesn’t suit all partners - consider starting capacity

Attracted other new partners, e.g. SAfAIDS

Experience to date (4)

Affects selection of new partners Some partners, e.g. HAIN have found it harder

than expected Greater need for skills sharing Tensions involved with partners driving project

design more Allows more scope for interaction with

international agencies, e.g. WHO IMD

Experience to date (5)

Many partners have responded positively, e.g. KANCO seeking to recruit new staff

Key difficulty - moving beyond description to analysis and principle identification

Importance of linking information materials with other activities, e.g. training

Importance of learning and reflection, monitoring and evaluation, feedback mechanisms

New funded projects

Strengthening HIV/AIDS care initiatives in Latin America and the Caribbean (2001)

Strengthening civil society in Palestine (2001) Information for mental health: Influencing

policy and practice (Palestine) (2001) Strengthening voice of vulnerable groups in

India (2002)

Conclusion

It is a good idea

It does work

BUT

It’s hard work and quite a struggle