Direct and judgmental measures of family planning program inputs

Area of Science:

• Public Health
• Program Evaluation
• International Development

Background:

• Assessing the strength of family planning programs is crucial for improving reproductive health outcomes.
• Existing measurement methods include judgmental approaches based on expert opinion and direct measurement of program components.
• Comparative studies are needed to validate these approaches across different global contexts.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the judgmental approach with direct measurement for assessing family planning program strength.
• To evaluate the consistency and differences between these two measurement approaches in Bangladesh and Kenya.

Main Methods:

• The judgmental approach involved scoring program characteristics based on expert responses to questionnaires.
• The direct approach involved obtaining objective, direct measures for each program item.
• Data were collected and analyzed from family planning programs in Bangladesh and Kenya.

Main Results:

• In Bangladesh, total scores from judgmental and direct approaches showed minimal variation.
• In Kenya, the direct measurement approach yielded substantially higher scores than the judgmental approach.
• The judgmental approach offers a cost-effective method for cross-country comparisons.

Conclusions:

• The choice of measurement approach can significantly impact the perceived strength of family planning programs, particularly in diverse settings like Kenya.
• Direct measurement may provide a more comprehensive assessment, while judgmental approaches offer efficiency for broader comparisons.
• Future research should consider the implications of measurement choice for policy and program implementation.