Monitoring and evaluation of mental health and psychosocial support programs in humanitarian settings: a scoping review of terminology and focus

Abstract

BackgroundMonitoring and evaluation of mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) programs is critical to facilitating learning and providing accountability to stakeholders. As part of an inter-agency effort to develop recommendations on MHPSS monitoring and evaluation, this scoping review aimed to identify the terminology and focus of monitoring and evaluation frameworks in this field.MethodsWe collected program documents (logical frameworks (logframes) and theories of change) from members of the Inter-Agency Standing Committee Reference Group on MHPSS, and systematically searched the peer-reviewed literature across five databases. We included program documents and academic articles that reported on monitoring and evaluation of MHPSS in low- and middle-income countries describing original data. Inclusion and data extraction were conducted in parallel by independent reviewers. Thematic analysis was used to identify common language in the description of practices and the focus of each monitoring and evaluation framework. Logframe outcomes were mapped to MHPSS activity categories.ResultsWe identified 38 program documents and 89 peer-reviewed articles, describing monitoring and evaluation of a wide range of MHPSS activities. In both program documents and peer-reviewed literature there was a lack of specificity and overlap in language used for goals and outcomes. Well-validated, reliable instruments were reported in the academic literature, but rarely used in monitoring and evaluation practices. We identified six themes in the terminology used to describe goals and outcomes. Logframe outcomes were more commonly mapped to generic program implementation activities (e.g. “capacity building”) and those related to family and community support, while outcomes from academic articles were most frequently mapped to specialized psychological treatments.ConclusionsInconsistencies between the language used in research and practice and discrepancies in measurement have broader implications for monitoring and evaluation in MHPSS programs in humanitarian settings within low- and middle-income countries. This scoping review of the terminology commonly used to describe monitoring and evaluation practices and their focus within MHPSS programming highlights areas of importance for the development of a more standardized approach to monitoring and evaluation.

Delivering mental health and psychosocial support interventions to women and children in conflict settings: a systematic review

“…The 2017 Lancet series on health in humanitarian crises confirmed the dire necessity for vigorous, high quality and practical evidence to help inform interventions in these settings 9. The scarcity of empirical evidence is coupled with a lack of consensus on terminology, measurement and monitoring and evaluation of MHPSS interventions 10. As an attempt to safeguard best practices for MHPSS in emergency settings, WHO initiated the Inter-Agency Committee Guidelines for MHPSS in emergency settings in 2007 11.…”

Capturing the essential: Revising the mental health categories in UNHCR’s Refugee Health Information System

“…Many humanitarian mental health programmes have weak and inconsistent monitoring and evaluation systems across organisations (Augustinavicius, Greene, Lakin, & Tol, 2018;Bangpan, Dickson, Felix, & Chiumento, 2017). UNHCR's new iRHIS can generate detailed and comparable data about utilization of services for MNS conditions across settings in various countries longitudinally.…”

analisis penerapan keselamatan dan kesehatan kerja (k3) puskesmas di kabupaten semarang menggunakan re-aim framework

“…Kegiatan monitoring dan evaluasi sangat diperlukan untuk pembelajaran program serta akuntabilitas data bagi pelaksana, fasilitator dan penyandang dana. (27) Secara teori, monitoring dapat diartikan sebagai sebuah kegiatan yang berkelanjutan yang bertujuan untuk menyediakan data dari sebuah program yang sedang berlangsung dengan memperhatikan indikasi awal kemajuan atau kemunduran dalam pencapaian hasil bagi pihak manajemen dan pemangku kebijakan, sedangkan evaluasi diartikan sebagai pengujian selektif yang mencoba menilai kemajuan program dan pencapaian hasil secara sistematis dan obyektif. (28) Implementation mengacu pada sejauh mana sebuah program dapat tersampaikan dan diterima sebagaimana mestinya.…”