TY - JOUR
T1 - A Comprehensive Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for Evidence to Policy Networks
AU - Kuchenmüller, Tanja
AU - Chapman, Evelina
AU - Takahashi, Ryoko
AU - Lester, Louise
AU - Reinap, Marge
AU - Ellen, Moriah
AU - Haby, Michelle M
N1 - Funding Information:
Networks, such as the Evidence-informed Policy Network (EVIPNet) Europe, use a systems thinking approach ( Willis, Riley, Best, & Ongolo-Zogo, 2012 ) and play a critical role in facilitating KT processes ( Mendizabal, 2006; Perkin & Court, 2005 ). Other examples of KT networks include the global multi-year programme, Building Capacity to Use Research Evidence (BCURE). The BCURE programme developed organizational knowledge brokering projects in 12 low- and middle-income countries between 2013 and 2017 spanning beyond health. In addition, the Partnership for Evidence and Equity in Responsive Social Systems (PEERSS), funded by the International Development and Research Center (IDRC) and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, is aiming to advance evidence-informed policy-making (EIP) in the social systems. While these initiatives are multisectoral in nature, the Regional East African Community Health Policy Initiative (REACH-PI) ( Campbell, 2013; East African Community, 2006 ) is a subregional KT network that bridges the gap between health research and policy and decision making through the establishment of Knowledge Translation Platforms (KTPs) in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda. As a result of the similar mandate, REACH-PI and EVIPNet established a close interaction. The establishment of EVIPNet Africa was inspired by the preparatory work undertaken by REACH-PI, which then became a part of the EVIPNet Africa as a subregion ( Lavis & Panisset, 2010 ). EVIPNet Africa also explicitly supported the REACH-PI’s Rapid Response Service in Uganda, which was then rolled out into other countries within the African region and in other regions ( World Health Organization, 2016 ).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022
PY - 2022/4
Y1 - 2022/4
N2 - OBJECTIVE: To describe the development of a framework for monitoring and evaluating knowledge translation (KT) networks.METHOD: The framework was developed using mixed methods over four phases, including i) a targeted literature review of KT networks, activities and indicators, ii) two scoping reviews to further enhance the set of indicators, iii) peer-reviews by international KT experts and an online expert consultation, and iv) piloting.RESULTS: A comprehensive theory of change (ToC) and indicators, both for the Network Secretariat and its participating member countries, were identified to develop the monitoring and evaluation framework. The framework includes (i) a ToC, including three key indicator domains across the results chain (outputs, short term outcomes, intermediate outcomes), and (ii) indicators for the three key domains, that can be selected depending on the stage of network maturity, along with suggested data collection methods. The three key indicator domains are 1) KT capacity and skill building; 2) network (structure, governance and leadership); and 3) KT/evidence-informed policy value and culture.CONCLUSION: The monitoring and evaluation framework that links KT activities with policy and health outcomes fills an important gap in optimizing KT procedures, generating lessons learned and increasing accountability of major multipartner KT networks.
AB - OBJECTIVE: To describe the development of a framework for monitoring and evaluating knowledge translation (KT) networks.METHOD: The framework was developed using mixed methods over four phases, including i) a targeted literature review of KT networks, activities and indicators, ii) two scoping reviews to further enhance the set of indicators, iii) peer-reviews by international KT experts and an online expert consultation, and iv) piloting.RESULTS: A comprehensive theory of change (ToC) and indicators, both for the Network Secretariat and its participating member countries, were identified to develop the monitoring and evaluation framework. The framework includes (i) a ToC, including three key indicator domains across the results chain (outputs, short term outcomes, intermediate outcomes), and (ii) indicators for the three key domains, that can be selected depending on the stage of network maturity, along with suggested data collection methods. The three key indicator domains are 1) KT capacity and skill building; 2) network (structure, governance and leadership); and 3) KT/evidence-informed policy value and culture.CONCLUSION: The monitoring and evaluation framework that links KT activities with policy and health outcomes fills an important gap in optimizing KT procedures, generating lessons learned and increasing accountability of major multipartner KT networks.
KW - Evidence-informed policy
KW - Knowledge translation
KW - Monitoring and evaluation framework
KW - Network
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85126133392&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2022.102053
DO - 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2022.102053
M3 - Article
C2 - 35217289
SN - 0149-7189
VL - 91
JO - Evaluation and Program Planning
JF - Evaluation and Program Planning
M1 - 102053
ER -
