Lessons on strengthening use of evidence in government institutions: A case study of the SECURE Health programme in Kenya

ID: 

18612

Session: 

Short oral session 12: Stakeholder involvement in evidence production, synthesis and use B

Date: 

Saturday 16 September 2017 - 14:00 to 15:30

Location: 

All authors in correct order:

Githure M1, Williams E1
1 African Institute for Development Policy (AFIDEP), Kenya
Presenting author and contact person

Presenting author:

Eunice Mueni Williams

Contact person:

Abstract text
Background: Although decision makers recognise the value of evidence in formulating sound and sustainable policies that will achieve their objective, often research evidence is not consulted when developing policies. The paucity of research evidence on how to bridge this gap, particularly in the global south presents a big challenge. To identify what works in improving demand and use of research evidence in decision and policy making, the Strengthening Capacity to Use Research Evidence (SECURE) Health programme was developed in Kenya and Malawi in consultation with high- and mid-level policy makers from the Ministry of Health (MoH) and Parliament of Kenya.

Objectives:The SECURE Health programme aimed at increasing demand and use of evidence in health policy making through strengthening capacity to use research evidence in policy making among high- and mid-level leaders, and strengthening organisational systems to support use of research evidence.

Methods:Science policy cafes centred on different health issues, policy dialogues with high-level policy makers, and training on Evidence-Informed Policy-Making (EIPM) were used to achieve programme objectives.

Results: After 3 years of implementation, there was a considerable increase in demand for evidence, particularly on resource allocation at the MoH, and improved individual technical capacity of policy makers in EIPM. The strategic links and continuous relationships developed between policy makers and researchers has created an ecosystem of facilitation of the transition of research evidence into policy. Remarkably, a Health Research and Development Unit was set up in the MoH, and is fully operational. However, institutional leadership and capacity to enable an EIPM environment still remains a mirage.

Conclusions: In order to create a sustainable and productive EIPM environment, the institutional systems and capacity to foster a culture of EIPM need to be created and maintained. More EIPM champions are needed in government institutions, with high-level leaders trained to demand and use evidence to inform all decisions and policies.