The use of ICTs in programme evaluation (Tearfund HIV programme) Gamos May 2012

1. Digital Survey Method The use of ICTs in programme evaluation (Tearfund HIV programme) Gamos May 2012

2. KAP Surveys • Research • Assessments • Evaluation

3. Impact Surveys (evaluation) • Accountability – finding out what works – and proving it! • Two purposes of KAP surveys: • To understand what’s going on (formative learning) • To show changes that have taken place over duration of programme • Key features of methodology: • Large, randomly selected sample • Internationally tested and accepted indicators • Statistical tests for reliability

4. KAP Structure Example KAP – baseline and endline KAP surveys for Tearfund’s HIV programme in Ethiopia and Malawi.

5. KAP Relationships

6. KAP Findings Positive change in indicators linked to exposure to HIV information through Church partners

7. Revise instruments Create questionnaires & data entry Introductory workshop Survey process (paper) Recruitment Training Field preparations Design survey Conduct interviews Data entry Submit data Analysis & reporting

8. Review of ICTs for surveys Technology can assist with data entry: • Devices for data capture (CAPI software) – eliminates need for data transcription • Optical reading technologies – eliminate human errors in data entry activity; • Computer assisted data entry – reduces human errors

9. ICTs for surveys – data capture • Early experience with PDAs was not encouraging • Netbooks require PC skills (that are rare) • Mobile phones – good for data collection but screen too small for CAPI. • NOW tablets! Low cost, big screen, apps do not need computing skills, mobile phone skills are universal.

10. ICTs for surveys – data transcription • Optical reading technologies – too expensive; better to give budget to partners. • Computer assisted data entry – Gamos created bespoke software for each project.

11. Revise instruments Create questionnaires & data entry Introductory workshop Survey process - DigitalForms Recruitment Training Field preparations Design survey Conduct interviews Data entry Submit data Eliminates data entry Analysis & reporting

12. DigitalForms • Tearfund & Gamos decided to invest in digital technology – HIV IMPACT programme in Malawi • Key decisions: • Operating system: Android v. iOS (Apple) • Bespoke software v. Freeware (Android) • Devices as capital (asset) or expenditure (disposable) • Automatic or manual management of data files

13. DigitalForms Cost savings: • Data entry software – eliminate need for computer assisted data entry; • Data entry – no need to recruit data entry staff or to appoint supervisors. • Printing costs – no need to copy paper questionnaires. Additional costs: • Hardware – handheld devices • Writing software to run on the tablets Overall – no cost premium

14. DigitalForms – the product • Modules: • Household & respondent (poverty & social) • Children & pregnancy (contraception, ANC, delivery, PNC) • HIV/AIDS awareness (exposure to information, knowledge, attitudes) • Testing & counselling (as part of ANC and other) • Response of churches (activities, support, attitudes to PLWH) • HIV status (consent and disclosure) • Loops - household membership roster; child birth history

15. DigitalForms – the product • The kit: for enumerators: • Tablet • Mains charger • Micro SD card • Backup battery (not all kits) • Carrying case • For supervisors: • Car battery charger – enables 2 devices to be charged up from the car battery; • USB microSD card reader – for copying files onto a central laptop.

16. Experience to date • Training workshop – nothing to report; brief introduction to tap & swipe, then people got into it – seems quite intuitive. • Challenges from field experience: • enumerators want the ability to edit records – Gamos created checking software to help supervisors check (but not edit) submitted files; • Questions need to be numbered so that teams can discuss issues / edits; • field reports mentioned tablets running out of power (problems with backup batteries?). • Completion rates – only 1 question was ‘forced’, otherwise non-completion rates were typically around 2%.

17. Experience to date • Downloading of updated versions – workshop used beta version and demonstrated downloading software; teams downloaded release version successfully (1 error). • Android update - 4.30 on Friday afternoon (release date) Asus upgraded to Android 4.0.3 – panic! Fortunately, rollout did not extend to Malawi. • Clean data!

18. Next steps… • Complete user review process • Automatic data uploading (to server) • More comprehensive data validation • Develop more modules • Cheaper devices www.gamos.org

19. Supplementary slides

20. Baseline – endline analysis • Difference-in-differences method • Takes account of errors: • Beneficiaries may be different from others (selection bias); • Other changes may take place over time

21. Church based: Information – heard public talks (e.g. sermons), seen or heard information at a religious institution relating to HIV; Participation in AIDS related activities organised by churches; Personal contact – talked about AIDS or multiple sexual partnerships with church members or leaders. Others: Broadcast media – radio, TV Health services – antenatal care Health services - HIV tests (not antenatal care) Exposure to HIV/AIDS messaging

22. Definition of links (impact?)

23. Value of approach Generated data on: • Access to information on HIV/AIDS • Responses of churches - HIV activities, stigma within church, promote testing, policies • HIV knowledge – protection, PPTCT • Stigmatising attitudes • Attitudes towards sex, women’s sexual rights, • Access to ANC – male involvement • Testing • Sexual behaviour – age at debut, MCPs, condoms • Outcomes – changes in behaviour, care and support, intentions