Page 36 - WHO

Supervision:

Post campaign evalua�on:

The post campaign evalua�on was done by independent monitors. Those monitors were from
various sectors that included university students, school teachers, NGOs, MOH and others. No
one was related to EPI system.

In 2 states (Khartoum and Red Sea) the community medicine sec�ons in the colleges of medicine
were contracted to do the evalua�on. In other states, the WHO NMOs, Zonal Coordinators and
EPI state officers bore the responsibility of selec�on and training of monitors, and analysis of the
data

Strengths:

• Poli�cal and material support at federal and states.

• Availability of budgets, vaccines and supply through WHO and UNICEF country offices and
�mely pre distribu�on

• Suppor�ve supervision by federal, state levels, and independent monitoring in order to ensure
the quality of SIAs according to plan

• forma�on of ac�ve opera�ons rooms at the federal level, state and held before enough �me to
follow up the implementa�on of the campaign (before, during, a�er the campaign).

• Planning and vaccina�on of high risk groups such as nomadic, IDPs, refugees, and returnees

• Reach every areas of difficult access in terms of geography and security through good coordina-

�on with local authori�es
• Social mobiliza�on and community awareness ac�vi�es before and during the campaigns,

which contributed to increasing knowledge of families, communi�es and local influencers.

• Convened evening review mee�ngs with the presence of state’s high level officials.

• Analysis of results and quality of independent monitoring and interpreta�on and use for ac�on.

Weakness:

• Lack of local financial support in some states.

• The recent infla�on rate and unavailability of cash add problem to �mely implementa�on of
SIAs

• Insecurity in South Kordofan and Blue Nile caused large numbers of children to be excluded

from the campaign.
•House marking need improvement based on lesson learned from this round.