Table 3 Summary findings: ARHR- GHS partnership

Interviews conducted

2 NGO

2 GHS

- Initiated by ARHR with funding from CORDAID and formalized through signing of an MOU with GHS;

- GHS contributed technical expertise and existing health facilities.

- ARHR mobilized and educated project beneficiaries on their rights to demand and use existing state-provided services;

- ARHR had the GHS to organize district, sub-district and community- level interface meetings with various stakeholders, including the district assemblies to provide opportunity for community members to share their concerns regarding existing health care services and how to address them. Action plans, addressing issues were drawn and implemented with ARHR support.

- Projects evaluated through community feedback meetings for sharing information and project implementations issues.

- ARHR periodically engaged external assessors to do participatory evaluation with GHS, community members and other stakeholders.

- GHS recognized ARHR’s role as “gap filler” making-up for government deficits in health care through its resource mobilization capacities, innovative ideas, expertise, and timeliness in the delivery of programs.

- Effective reach of target populations with maternal and child health services (family planning, antenatal care and skilled delivery).

- Strengthening of ARHR’s advocacy and rights-based approaches to improving women’s health.

- Delays caused by long government bureaucratic procedures required to implement programs.

- Occasional tendency for some GHS staff to provide relatively unreliable data hardly useful for effective programming.

- Health systems’ challenges (e.g. shortage and inequities in the distribution of human resources and ill-equipped health facilities.

Driver of Collaboration

- Baseline study indicated inadequate access to women’s sexual and reproductive health services.

Time Frame

2007–2010