Improving immunization coverage and equity - technical resources
Comparing Resources
Tip: You can share the address of this page to allow others to view your comparison
| Resource | A Guide for conducting an Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI) Review |
|---|---|
| Purpose | A comprehensive assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of an immunization programme. Provides evidence for the programme’s strategic directions and priority activities. |
| Content | Provides guidance, tools and templates to implement the five stages: (1) developing concept; (2) planning and preparing; (3) conducting the review; (4) synthesizing findings; (5) translating into action. The EPI Review should be a comprehensive assessment of all seven basic immunization topics: programme management and financing; human resources management; vaccine supply, quality and logistics; service delivery; immunization coverage and AEFI Monitoring; Disease Surveillance; Demand Generation. The review can also put emphasis on any other special area that is relevant, for example, gaps between survey and administratively reported data, EVM management scenario, urbanization and equity, human resources capability for surveillance. The reports evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each of the immunization components, often include a SWOT analysis, and outline recommendations for the changes and adjustments needed to improve the immunization programme. Information on barriers may appear in different parts of the report. |
| Expected outcomes | Evidence and recommendations to inform multi-year planning, development and implementation, including identification of sustainable sources of financing. |
| Use | •To be used if report available at the country level. •Does not require user input. This is an assessment that would have been conducted before. It shouldn't be conducted just for the purposes of informing a criterion in decision-making (e.g. in CAPACITI decision-support tool), as it is resource intensive. Make note of when it was published. |
| Strengths | Provides a comprehensive evidence-base for multiyear planning. |
| Contraints/Limitations | •The process is highly resource intensive. •The EPI Review is designed to give a qualitative overview of the situation in the country, but some countries include a quantitative overview or interpretations based on quantitative information from a limited number of districts which can be misleading. •If the guidelines are not followed then there is a risk that the document will turn into a surveillance report, or in a program implementation evaluation. |
| Why use it | (a) Links review findings to the multi-year planning process, and identification of unreached populations. (b) Facilitates problem solving on zero dose/under-immunised through selection of both high and low performing geographic areas and health facilities, mapping of areas where there have been VPD outbreaks, and development of recommendations based on criteria of targeting the underserved and improving equity. |
| Who should use it | National and sub-national EPI and health system planners and partners. |
| Example criteria this resource could address | As this is the most comprehensive review of the NIP, it is imprtant to review it to understand the strenghts and weaknesses, in order to decide whether the options in consideration would be suitable. |
| If available, notes on the development process | Developed by the country. Although there are development guidelines, the quality will be context specific. |
| Additional Links | |
| Link to access the resource | /en/component/content/article/a-guide-for-conducting-an-expanded-programme-on-immunization-epi-review?catid=660&Itemid=101 |