The following themes emerged from the data during the analysis: (i) district stakeholder engagement activities; (ii) stakeholder engagement outcomes (level of knowledge and awareness about COBERS); and (iii) stakeholder perception about opportunities offered by COBERS. These themes are described and discussed below.
Stakeholder identification and analysis
Data from document review and key informant interviews indicated that training institutions utilized the power, interest and influence model to identify, analyze and prioritize stakeholders. The analysis focused on identifying stakeholders with power and interest to influence not only the implementation of COBERS but also the outcome of the programme. Based on the analysis, the district local council chairperson who heads the district council, the policy-making organ and the district chief administrative officer who oversees the implementation of policy and budget were identified as key stakeholders with both power and influence. Similarly the district health officer who heads the health service department was identified as an important stakeholder. This was due to the power vested in the officer as head of the district health service department and the interest in health service provision in the district, as illustrated by the following quotation:
‘The district health officer was involved because the training of health professionals is more related to his office. The chief administrative officer is involved in the implementation of the policies and budget. The district local council chairperson is the head of the policy-making organ of the district’. (Representative, Health Professional Education Institutions)
In the Ugandan health service structure, the district health officers oversee and supervise all health service units within the district from which the training sites are selected. Chief administrative officers and district local council chairpersons, on the other hand, were considered to have the power and influence to allocate the needed material and human resources to COBERS. Whereas the health professional education institutions made initial contacts with the districts through the respective district health officers, the memoranda of understanding were signed by respective chief administrative officers on behalf of the districts.
The main engagement activities consisted of consultations, dialogues and sharing information about COBERS with the identified district stakeholders.
‘Shared information included: the meaning of COBERS; justification for COBERS, its potential role in retaining human resources for health as well as the role of various stakeholders’. (Representative, Health Professional Education Institutions)
Channels of information sharing between the health professional education institutions and the districts participating in COBERS included the following: health professional education institutions sending a representative to the annual meetings of the Uganda Local Government Association; health professional education institutions organizing and facilitating district leaders regional meetings; one-on-one meetings with key individuals in the districts; formal introduction letters given to students at the beginning of attachment; and students holding briefing and debriefing meetings with district leaders.
‘We make courtesy calls to their respective offices; invite them to participate in meetings. For instance recently we had a meeting for chief administrative officers and local council chairpersons from Western Uganda where we invited about 26 districts participating in COBERS activities. Other meetings were also held in 2012. We also participate in the local government meetings held annually’. (Representative, Health Professional Education Institutions)
There were also collaborative activities related to improving the training sites. For example, districts provided space for accommodation and the universities would make the necessary furnishing and renovation; and the universities engaged preceptors in the training activities to serve as site tutors.
‘But they had also trained a supervisor who was from the community who would supervise these people’. (Technical leader, Eastern Region)
The most formal engagement was signing of memoranda of understanding between district authorities and some health professional education institutions, which stipulated partners’ roles and responsibilities.
‘We have signed memoranda of understanding with several districts where we send students for community-based education service and research. The memorandum is usually signed by the chief administrative officer on behalf of the district and it clearly spells out the roles and responsibilities of each partner’. (Representative, Health Professional Education Institutions)
Awareness and knowledge about COBERS
Awareness and knowledge about COBERs varied both across and within districts. Some participants were well informed about community-based education and were also aware of the timing of the students’ placements and the activities that the students were engaged in during placement. Yet, others had very limited or no knowledge about the community placement programme. Overall the technical arm of the district local government, which comprised the chief administrative officer, district health officer, and health facility representatives, was well informed and aware of the COBER’S programme. They were also informed about the different activities such as health education, immunization, and research that the students were involved in during their placement in the districts, as illustrated by the selected quotes below:
‘Normally the district health officer’s office is informed when the students are coming. A letter is sent which is written to the district health officer’s office informing them of the students who will be attending the programme’. (Technical leader, Northern Region)
The political leaders were generally less informed about the programme; some thought it was a non-governmental organization or association, while others thought it was a community development project. A few of the leaders had never heard about the programme.
‘…. but we didn’t know; when you started talking about COBERS I said to myself now this is a new association or something they have just formed’. (Political leader, Northern Region)
‘I think that would be best described by the district health officer because earlier on we said that some of us are hearing about COBERS for the very first time’. (Political leader, Eastern Region)
From the perspective of district leaders, the variation in awareness and knowledge about COBERS could be attributed to the engagement approach used by health professional education institutions coupled by the poor information flow between the technical and political arms of local government. Participants noted that health professional education institutions selected and prioritized stakeholders based on the reality of limited human and financial resources to fully engage each individual stakeholder. The assumption was that the information shared with the priority stakeholders would trickle to other stakeholders within the districts through various communication channels. However, this did not happen in most districts. Furthermore, it was noted that leadership structure may have contributed to the information gap about the programme. More often than not, there were communication gaps between political and technical wings of the district leadership, as illustrated by the quotation below:
‘As said earlier, as leaders we were not aware about this. The district health officer was aware about it, but it was not brought to the attention of the head of the leadership’. (Political leader, Northern Region)
According to the respondents, the information gap was impeding a sense of ownership among district leaders, yet it was crucial for full participation in the training of health professionals.
‘When top district leadership is informed, the matter will automatically move to council. You know what it means; when it is owned by council, we can fully participate’. (Political leader, Western Region)