IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v31y2007i4p364-390.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Four Criteria to Evaluate Providers' Service-Delivery Response to New Contraceptive Introduction

Author

Listed:
  • Federico R. León

    (Georgetown University Institute for Reproductive Health, frleon@amauta.rcp.net.pe)

  • Marcos Arévalo

    (Georgetown University Institute for Reproductive Health)

  • Rebecka Lundgren

    (Georgetown University Institute for Reproductive Health)

  • Victoria Jennings

    (Georgetown University Institute for Reproductive Health)

  • Ana Huapaya

    (Instituto para la Salud Reproductiva, Lima, Peru)

  • Rosario Panfichi

    (Instituto para la Salud Reproductiva, Lima, Peru)

Abstract

This article presents an evaluation framework developed to assess the first-level effects of introducing the Standard Days Method (SDM) in Peru Ministry of Health clinics. Four questions are asked: 1) To what extent do providers routinely achieve SDM service delivery standards? 2) Is the time invested in SDM delivery consistent with program norms? 3) How does SDM delivery compare with delivery of established methods? and 4) How does SDM introduction affect delivery of established methods? A study at 62 clinics demonstrated the framework's usefulness. The Standard Days Method introduction had positive overall effects on the quality of care but provider training needed adjustments.

Suggested Citation

  • Federico R. León & Marcos Arévalo & Rebecka Lundgren & Victoria Jennings & Ana Huapaya & Rosario Panfichi, 2007. "Four Criteria to Evaluate Providers' Service-Delivery Response to New Contraceptive Introduction," Evaluation Review, , vol. 31(4), pages 364-390, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:31:y:2007:i:4:p:364-390
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X07301202
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X07301202
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X07301202?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:31:y:2007:i:4:p:364-390. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.