Table 3 Examples of operational results and indicators to be used to compare results from the accredited and non-accredited health facilities and communities
1. to assess the effect of the voucher program on increasing access to, quality of, and reducing inequities | ||
|---|---|---|
Results | Indicators | Data source |
Provision of services reported as acceptable by providers and clients | Clients received comprehensive ANC and PNC | Client exit |
| Â | Clients referred for complicated deliveries | Provider interview |
| Â | Clients referred for other services | Population survey |
Increase in clients using MNH/FP services including poor women | % clients accessing different service by socio-economic status | Service statistics Client exit & population survey |
Increase in FP clients accepting long term methods | % clients using LAPM | Service statistics |
| Â | Â | Client exit & population survey |
Improved attitudes of service providers towards poor women | % Providers indicating non discriminatory attitudes | Provider interview |
| Â | % Clients recommending services to others | Population survey |
2 Evaluate the impact of voucher program on RH behaviors, status and reducing inequities | ||
Results | Indicators | Data source |
Reduced incidence of unintended pregnancies | % women who become pregnant/%planned pregnancy | Client Exit |
| Â | % clients with correct knowledge of fertile period | Population survey |
Increased duration of contraceptive use among all women and poor women | Among all respondents and subgroups of poor: | Population survey |
|  | • Ever/Current use of FP method |  |
|  | • Discontinuation FP rates in 12 months |  |
|  | • Ability to achieve fertility goals |  |
Decreased stigmatization at community level of poor women | Perceived barriers to accessing services: costs, distance, quality, waiting times, stigma surrounding service | Population survey |