Capacity Building Monitoring

The openIMIS Initiative invests significant resources in capacity building on topics around openIMIS and social protection. It is of interest to the Community to monitor these capacity development activities to get an idea of what type of trainings are being developed, to whom and on what topics. The challenge is that in the end capacity building is about acquiring competencies and knowledge, which is hard to monitor and assess in online tools, especially given the variety of types of material which can’t be tracked in the same way.

However, we have already developed the openIMIS capacity development directory (with a template), which lists all capacity building material available from the Community. In order to refine this directory and include more monitoring aspects we would want to know from Community members the following points:

1. What type of trainings do you do around openIMIS?

• Training of medical students

• Trainings of IT students

• Training of health facility staff

• Etc.

2. For each type of training, what is the objective of the training and do you already measure the success of it (if so, how)?

• Training of medical students:

Gain a deep understanding of the Health Care System and its components.

Discuss the role of eHealth in ensuring an efficient and sustainable health care delivery and financing system.

Utilize eHealth, Digital Health, and Digital Health Initiatives in all aspects of health care practice.

Observe data privacy at both personal and professional levels.

Advocate for the use of openIMIS and other digital health initiatives as strategies for ensuring access to universal health care.

• Training of IT students:

• Training of health facility staff: for an openIMIS implementation, the goal of user trainings is to teach the staff on how to use the software for their activities, to ensure the successful implementation.

• Ect.

3. What would be a generic way to assess the impact/engagement of your trainings?

• Number of participants

• Represented institutions

• Gender % of participants

• Lead institution (presenter/organizer)

• Evaluation of the student’s reaction to the module and learning