Welcome to the Publication Archives of USAID-funded Health Policy Projects.

Browse POLICY Project (1995-2006) Materials

↑ top

Files will load from www.policyproject.com.

List entries are alphabetical by title and contain the title, abstract, language, and then the filename which is hyperlinked and will open in a new browser window. Many files are PDFs but some of the older ones are Word documents.


HP+ More recent Evaluation publications are available.

  • The objective of POLICY’s HIV/AIDS Program in Mexico is “to support the government’s effort to enhance the quality and sustainability of HIV/AIDS/STI services in targeted states.” The focus of the project in the three initial states of Yucatán, Guerrero and Mexico has been to promote coalition building and a participatory strategic planning process among diverse stakeholders. POLICY has worked in Mexico at the bequest of and in close collaboration with CENSIDA, the national agency responsible for oversight of HIV/AIDS services and prevention programs in Mexico. The principal purposes of the evaluation were to understand what worked well, where POLICY’s tools have been most successful, and what could be learned from mistakes. The evaluation was also an opportunity to elicit some lessons learned from the Multisectoral Citizens’ Groups (MCGs) in the first three states where the project has been active and to codify some common principles from POLICY’s process from the varied experiences in different states. Another area of inquiry focused on identifying other complementary processes that POLICY and CENSIDA could employ to strengthen the effectiveness of governmental and nongovernmental groups in transforming the policy process in targeted states. There was general agreement among all of the project’s stakeholders that they had made significant contributions to improvements in HIV/AIDS prevention activities and in the quality of services in Mexico by supporting local initiatives. Similarly, there was strong praise for the quality and dedication of the POLICY staff. In particular, the clients in the three states interviewed during the evaluation expressed an overwhelmingly positive experience with the project. The project has supported the formation of active MCGs in three states (Guerrero, Mexico, and Yucatán). Project staff also tried to organize a similar group in the Federal District (D.F.) but found that it was difficult to build the same level of commitment and coordination. Instead of supporting the formation of a MCG in the D.F., POLICY helped to develop a local council for HIV/AIDS prevention (CODFSIDA). Toward the end of 2001 POLICY had expanded its work to Campeche, Chiapas, Oaxaca, Quintana Roo, and Veracruz. The MCG in Yucatán will work with the groups in Campeche and Quintana Roo. This represents a new phase in the project whereby older groups provide technical assistance for the formation of new groups. Another innovation is that local groups in the newly participating states are conducted by the members of the multisectoral groups rather than by outside consultants.
  • The 1994 ICPD in Cairo shifted family planning program attention from a focus on achieving demographic targets to meeting individual needs of women for family planning and reproductive health services. Several governments in developing countries are responding by placing increased emphasis on program quality, meeting the expressed needs of clients, and placing less emphasis on achieving quantitative indicators of program performance. This report summarizes some of the changes in performance monitoring taking place in selected countries. There is considerable variability in how countries are making this transition. While Indonesia has been one of the most successful developing countries to meet its demographic objectives, it has recently made great strides in shifting the focus of its family planning program from a target-driven program to one based on the concept of understanding and fulfilling the needs and preferences of the family. Work is now underway to operationalize the policy at the field level, incorporate the approach in national and local planning, and devise strategies for collecting information that will allow assessment of its success. • In the Philippines, focus is placed on improving maternal and child health and meeting the reproductive intentions of women. Work is proceeding to improve the national MIS, make better use of existing data from a variety of sources to produce an annual status report for the Philippine Family Planning Program, as well as to strengthen monitoring systems at the local level. There is currently a lot of variability in capabilities by local government unit (LGU). While pilot approaches are being tested in a few LGUs, it is unclear to what extent these will be endorsed by either the Department of Health or other LGUs. • In Zimbabwe, greater attention is being paid to reproductive health in service provision, particularly STD treatment and prevention. A new report form is being tested to ascertain more clearly the quality of care provided and patterns of method switching. The next five-year plan, to be developed during 1996, is expected to formalize the new reproductive health strategy. • Increased emphasis is being placed on reproductive health in Mexico, although it's too early to know how the performance monitoring system will evolve to address these new concerns. While experience is beginning to accumulate, shifting from advocacy for a reproductive health approach to program implementation at national, subnational, and local levels will require much new work to obtain timely, accurate information for planning, implementation, and monitoring of reproductive health programs.
  • After the return to civilian rule and “re-certification” for USAID programs, the POLICY Project was among the first of USAID’s implementing partners to establish a program in Nigeria. The POLICY Project’s purpose was to strengthen the policy process in population, reproductive health, and HIV/AIDS as a basis for improved services. The project began working in Nigeria in late 1999, and set up an office with local staff by mid-2000. In 2002, the scope of the project was expanded from HIV/AIDS, population, and reproductive health to include child survival. POLICY’s principal partners in government were federal line ministries, two national commissions (planning and population), and the National Action Committee on AIDS(NACA), a multisectoral committee that develops and coordinates the national response to HIV/AIDS. Outside government, POLICY engaged in policy development, advocacy, and targeted public information activities with several national and regional Christian and Islamic bodies and numerous non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and community-based organizations(CBOs), including six NGO networks and one network of HIV/AIDS researchers. The project also worked at the state level by advocating for national policies in several states, developing an adolescent reproductive health policy and strategic plan in Edo State, and focusing on the northern states through activities with both federal ministry and NGO partners. Collaboration with donor agencies included communication and attendance at each other’s meetings on shared concerns, and technical or financial input on specific tasks such as assessments for donor program planning and co-sponsorship of conferences and events. POLICY and some donors also participated as stakeholders in NACA and in activities such as advocacy visits to states.
  • During its five-year term (1995-2000), the POLICY Project improved the policy environment for FP/RH programs and advanced ICPD objectives worldwide. Working in 36 countries and with USAID three regional organizations, POLICY collaborated with scores of institutional partners, including NGOs, research institutions, government agencies, consulting firms, media companies, and universities. By the end of the project, POLICY employed 152 overseas staff and consultants, who provided continuous in-country technical support to project activities. At the same time, there were approximately 80 U.S.-based staff members working on POLICY.
  • This document contains a listing of results at the SO and IR levels achieved over the life of the POLICY I Project. Table 1A shows a tally of results by country and region. Each individual check denotes achievement of a result in that country. The column totals in the table represent the number of countries in which a result at that level occurred. Overall, POLICY achieved 88 SO level results in 33 countries and 149 IR level results in 36 countries. The detailed text of results by country follows Table 1A.
  • Policy change is influenced by several factors, including the issue, context, process, and actors. This paper presents case studies of networks in 11 countries assisted by the POLICY Project to demonstrate how reproductive health advocacy networks were influential actors that played a role in fostering significant policy changes over the past decade. In 1995, with the launch of the POLICY Project, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) sought to put the principles of meaningful participation and civil society engagement in family planning/reproductive health (FP/RH) policymaking—as articulated during the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development—into practice. The objective of POLICY was to create an enabling environment for the formulation and implementation of policies and plans that promote and sustain access to high-quality FP/RH, HIV, and maternal health services. USAID and POLICY recognized that civil society-led networks and coalitions could play a significant role in encouraging political commitment for FP/RH, facilitating broader stakeholder participation in policy processes, and ensuring improved quality of and equitable access to services. Reproductive health advocacy networks, therefore, became a critical mechanism for POLICY in its efforts to promote participation of civil society groups and other partners in the health policy arena.
    Networking Paper POLCY EOP report_FINAL.pdf
  • This report summarizes the POLICY Project in Nepal from 2002-2006. This report addresses the policy environment when the project began, major accomplishments, and remaining challenges to the enabling evironment for HIV and AIDS programming in Nepal.
    Strengthening the HIV & AIDS Policy Environment in Nepal- Nepal Final Report.pdf