Home What We Do Health Programmes Reproductive health MotherNewBorNet Events Second annual meeting of MotherNewBorNet at Delhi in July 2006 Evaluation Summary

Evaluation Summary

Second Annual Workshop
of
MotherNewBorNet
 
9 to 11 July 2006 | Taj Mahal Hotel | Delhi, India
 
Participant’s evaluation of the workshop:
 

Q-1: To what extent were the following objectives of the workshop achieved? (The participants were requested to rate using a 5 points ordinal scale, in which 5 meant ‘completely’, and 1 meant ‘not at all’)

  1. Objective 1: Provide technical update on research and programs for the health and survival of mothers and newborns in the community

 

 
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
3
8
19.0
19.0
4
23
54.8
54.8
5
11
26.2
26.2
Total
42
100.0
100.0
b. Objective 2: Identify gaps in research, program, policy and advocacy to address maternal and newborn health as a dyad

 

 
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
3
20
47.6
47.6
4
16
38.1
38.1
5
6
14.3
14.3
Total
42
100.0
100.0
c. Objective 3: Develop plans for incorporating community based interventions to prevent and manage maternal and newborn infections, manage low birth-weight babies, prevent postpartum hemorrhage, and promote birth spacing interventions at scale
 
 
 
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
2
1
2.4
2.6
3
13
31.0
34.2
4
18
42.9
47.4
5
6
14.3
15.8
Total
38
90.5
100.0
Missing
4
9.5
 
Total
42
100.0
 
 
d. Objective 4: Review and identify common indicators for community based postpartum care programs

 

 
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
2
3
7.1
7.7
3
9
21.4
23.1
4
21
50.0
53.8
5
6
14.3
15.4
Total
39
92.9
100.0
Missing
3
7.1
 
Total
42
100.0
 
e. Objective 5: Review progress of the MotherNewBorNet, determine collaboration/partnership opportunities among the members of the network, build consensus on the future directions of MotherNewBorNet, and identify key roles and responsibilities

 

 
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
1
1
2.4
3.1
2
1
2.4
3.1
3
6
14.3
18.8
4
20
47.6
62.5
5
4
9.5
12.5
Total
32
76.2
100.0
Missing
10
23.8
 
Total
42
100.0
 
2. What are your comments in the following areas of the meeting? (The participants were requested to rate using a 5 points ordinal scale, 5= Excellent. 4= Very good, 3= Good, 2= Bad, 1 = Very bad)
 
a. Selection of themes
  
 
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Good
4
9.5
9.5
Very good
22
52.4
52.4
Excellent
16
38.1
38.1
Total
42
100.0
100.0
 
b. Organization of plenary sessions

 

 
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Bad
2
4.8
4.8
Good
9
21.4
21.4
Very good
19
45.2
45.2
Excellent
12
28.6
28.6
Total
42
100.0
100.0
c. Quality of presentations

 

 
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Bad
1
2.4
2.4
Good
10
23.8
23.8
Very good
21
50.0
50.0
Excellent
10
23.8
23.8
Total
42
100.0
100.0
d. Time keeping

 

 
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Bad
2
4.8
4.8
Good
18
42.9
42.9
Very good
13
31.0
31.0
Excellent
9
21.4
21.4
Total
42
100.0
100.0
e. Level of interaction during questions and answers

 

 
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Bad
4
9.5
9.5
Good
12
28.6
28.6
Very good
21
50.0
50.0
Excellent
5
11.9
11.9
Total
42
100.0
100.0
e. Organization of the group discussions

 

 
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Bad
3
7.1
7.3
Good
13
31.0
31.7
Very good
18
42.9
43.9
Excellent
7
16.7
17.1
Total
41
97.6
100.0
Missing
1
2.4
 
Total
42
100.0
 
f. Opportunity to network with people

 

 
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Good
12
28.6
28.6
Very good
19
45.2
45.2
Excellent
11
26.2
26.2
Total
42
100.0
100.0
g. Usefulness for future work

 

 
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Good
6
14.3
14.6
Very good
21
50.0
51.2
Excellent
14
33.3
34.1
Total
41
97.6
34.1
Missing
1
2.4
100.0
Total
42
100.0
 
h. Overall rating for the meeting

 

 
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Bad
1
2.4
2.4
Good
9
21.4
21.4
Very good
24
57.1
57.1
Excellent
8
19.0
19.0
Total
42
100.0
100.0

 

Comments from the participants:
 
1. Time:
 
  • More time (One more day, or less presentation): For interaction, and discussion, networking
  • More breakout time for individual interactions
  • Give more time for each presentation, question and answer
  • Time was too short for a presentation that needs more detail explanation and clarification
  • There is no time to breath, we could start early in the morning and finish by 5 pm
  • Reduce schedule: 8:00- 6.30 does not provide time for exchange and developing of interest groups
  • Program should not be organized so tightly
  • Day 1 presentations were very difficult to absorb. There was good data and there was so little time left for questions and answer, much was lost.
  • I think a difficult 1st day made the group work at the end of the day 1 hard – people were tired
  • More time on technical update and discussion and less time on work plan
  • Less time for the meeting (2 days) and less works
 
2. Preparatory works for the workshop:
 
  • Ask participation for OR ideas before the meeting, then discuss at the meeting
  • Ask for country inputs beforehand
  • Better planning for group work and choice of feasible tasks
 
3. Selection of participants:
  • Selective participation
  • For the next meeting, I think you should consider involving more government people, seems to me that it is crucial to have them on board. Our partners can only do so much, for long term uptake and sustainability is up to the government.
  • Involvement of key persons from the government is mandatory
  • More focus on collaboration with local ministries
  • People working in community or facility based programs should be represented from medical colleges
  • Government representation was minimum – this should be increased
  • Increase participation from the developing countries
  • Fewer participants
 
4. Workshop methods:
 
a. Theme:
  • Though possibly overwhelming, micronutrient advances could be included / useful
 
b. Presentations:
  • Working group instructions should be clearer. Group members were not clear about the required deliverable
  • Presentations could be spaced out more evenly (First 2 days more packed)
  • More keynote type speakers (like Vinod’s presentation) with more time too discuss
  • More diversity in the country presentations- more from SE Asia & less from S Asia
  • More vigorous selection of country presentations to ensure that lessons are clear and proven results are presented (not just process)
  • One thing I would suggest is considering less presentations & more depth. For me better selection of a few key presentations in more depth may be more useful.
  • One aspect that should be continued is having regional data presentations. There is sufficient commonality in the region.
  • Less presentations – more demonstrations
 
c. Group work/ discussions:
  • Discussion of common problems in the community
  • More group discussions
  • Engage country level people in discussions
  • Mildly over ambitious work group
  • For quality of group work by allowing thinking and providing breathing space
  • It would be helpful to more clearly define outputs/ deliverables of this meeting so that we know whether this meeting has been useful
  • Group work facilitator should give clear directives & groups should be small, otherwise we spend too much time on discussion
  • Simplify small group work to maximize exchange
  • More structured group work needs to be planned – groups should be small
 
d. Country work plan:
  • Country work plan was helpful
  • From a country perspective, country work plan was not very helpful. We do very intensive planning in country with broad stakeholders, different organizers have specific objectives for this session, those objectives may have been met more effectively in another format.
 
e. Others:
  • Encourage more posters/ informal information sharing
  • Need stronger facilitator for overall meeting
  • Try not be so ambitious; we tried to cover so much that it became unclear what we actually learned
 
5. Venue and logistics:
  • Meeting room was too cold (People got hypothermic)
  • Less elegant venue (a university campus or a less costly hotel) is preferable
  • Less expensive / luxurious venue is preferable
  • Great service from the hotel
  • Dinner too far away + too late
 
6. Themes for the future meeting:
  • Maternal nutrition, Prevention of low birth weight & maternal mortality, Post abortion infection on future meeting
  • Each meeting to have a theme e.g. Scaling up = M+ E = OR
  • Sub regional meetings, or may be even country level meetings with more government involvement.
 
7. Miscellaneous:
  • Thanks for uniting us.
  • Overall, it was a very good meeting, thank you.
AddThis Social Bookmark Button