https://twitter.com/KeystoneHPSR

Building the HPSR Community Building HPSR Capacity

KEYSTONE

Inaugural KEYSTONE Course on Health Policy and Systems Research 2015

Knowledge Translation (KT): discussion questions

KT discussion questions

3 March 2015

1.1 KT questions to consider

• When to communicate about this knowledge?– Long term partnerships?– Communicating sensitive/critical findings in a strategic

manner• How to communicate about this knowledge?• Who to communicate with? (Stakeholder analysis—

their relationships, dynamics, agendas, networks, identify policy champions?)

1.2 KT questions to consider• Who should do the communication?

– What skills, identities are required? Knowledge broker or boundary organization?

– Whose responsibility is it to promote research uptake?– What are the different responsibilities of researchers, government, civil

society, research funders?

• What should be communicated?– Draft reports & PPT to share and discuss before finalization, Summary reports,

Dissemination workshops, Policy briefs, Media briefs

• What about involving policy makers in setting the research priority? Question? Strategy?

• What about funder priorities? Who do you think will fund this work? What influence will this have on your KT strategy?

• Which of the models do you think is most relevant to your KT strategy?

• A policy community is more likely to react positively to research findings and insights if 1. Its members have participated in the research process

in some way, 2. If the findings are disseminated at the right time in

relation to the decision making process and 3. If the implications of the findings coincide with the

values and beliefs of the policy audience (Short 1997). • How can your KT strategy work with these three

elements?

Engaging policymakers & decision makers during the research process

• Innvaer et al 2002 asked policy makers about barriers and facilitators to their use of research evidence

Facilitators Barriers

1. Personal contact between researchers & policy makers (13/24)

2. Timeliness and relevance of research (13)3. Summary with clear recommendations

(11)4. Good quality research (6)5. Research that confirms current policy or

endorsed self-interest (6)6. Community pressure or client demand for

research (4)7. Research that included effectiveness data

(3)

1. Absence of personal contact between researchers and policy makers (11/24)

2. Lack of timeliness or relevance (9)3. Mutual mistrust: political naivety of

researchers (8)4. Power and budget struggles (7)5. Poor quality of research (6)6. Political instability or high turnover of

policy-making staff (5)

Tribal health1. Poor implementation of tribal health plan

– Dissemination of findings at community level, implantations level, policy level, Ministry of Tribal Affairs

– Network of people working in tribal areas, combine briefs into one common booklet– Present findings in conferences: findings of study and searching for innovative

solutions– Policy brief of findings in English and regional language for political leaders and

communities and implentators– Call to action for tribal health– Mobilize funding support– Personally meet people you want to attend the conference– Present findings from across the group; asking people working in the field to present

solutions– End the conference with a declaration and summary points of what could be done in

next one year– Different kinds of documents, describing actions and solutions

Response of health system to problem of under-nutrition

• How much the health system has capacity to respond to problem of under-nutrition; under-nutrition comes within health system if taking a broad perspective

• What happens if health system in India argues that under nutrition is not their domain? Should we argue that another system manages nutrition or that health system should integrate health issues?

• They want to argue that the health system needs to take on nutrition. • So need to get government to understand that health system does not sufficiently

address nutrition & health system needs to be stronger• Donor agencies: need to get them to fund channels for health system to better

respond to health system• Boundary organizations on how this can be actually done, considering current

scenario• Community side: get community to understand how bad under nutrition is,

understand their difficulties, AWW, ANM constraints felt by community

Zero-prescription policy in Maharashtra

• Centralized drug procurement at state level• Doctor can only prescribe drugs in that facility• Gap in supply chain management, less awareness among community about zero

policy, if doctor prescribes from outside they may get in trouble even though the issue is that there are no drugs in their facility

• Stakeholders: policymakers, those resposible for procurement, pharmacists coordinators, MOs, users, community based monitoring groups

• People need to access information on the policy in print and media• Stakeholders responsible for zero prescription policy • Dissemination workshop, inviting stakeholders; then during workshop identify

group of people who would take the issue up incl community organizations and policymakers. Create group and motivate them to take the issue forward, then use media. Then develop one page note for various stakeholders based on their capacity to understand.

• There is monitoring committee at all levels, which can bring this issue to attention• Policy brief for MLAs

Decentralization in Bihar• How different components of decentralization are influenced by political

components in Bihar• PRI target group and political representatives• Different departments: Edu, Agri, PRI, etc because these departments are

mandated to decentralize• Boundary organizations, bureaucrats, district, block, state program

management units• Newspaper clippings and articles, policy briefs, dissemination workshop at

the end, share reports to all stakeholder, journal articles

Open Access PolicyKEYSTONE commits itself to the principle of open access to knowledge. In keeping with this, we strongly support open access and use of materials that we created for the course. While some of the material is in fact original, we have drawn from the large body of knowledge already available under open licenses that promote sharing and dissemination. In keeping with this spirit, we hereby provide all our materials (wherever they are already not copyrighted elsewhere as indicated) under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This work is ‘Open Access,’ published under a creative commons license which means that you are free to copy, distribute, display, and use the materials as long as you clearly attribute the work to the KEYSTONE course (suggested attribution: Copyright KEYSTONE Health Policy & Systems Research Initiative, Public Health Foundation of India and KEYSTONE Partners, 2015), that you do not use this work for any commercial gain in any form and that you in no way alter, transform or build on the work outside of its use in normal academic scholarship without express permission of the author and the publisher of this volume. Furthermore, for any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. This means that you can:

read and store this document free of charge

distribute it for personal use free of charge

print sections of the work for personal use

read or use parts or whole of the work in a context where no financial transactions take place

gain financially from the work in anyway

sell the work or seek monies in relation to the distribution of the work

use the work in any commercial activity of any kind

distribute in or through a commercial body (with the exception of academic usage within educational institutions such as schools and universities

However, you cannot: