- Evaluation Plan:
- 2016-2021, Tanzania
- Evaluation Type:
- Final Project
- Planned End Date:
- 12/2020
- Completion Date:
- 02/2021
- Status:
- Completed
- Management Response:
- No
- Evaluation Budget(US $):
- 10,000
REDUCING UPOPS AND MERCURY RELEASES FROM THE HEALTH SECTOR IN AFRICA
| Document | Type | Language | Size | Status | Downloads |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 TOR REDUCING UPOPS AND MERCURY RELEASES FROM HEALTH SECTOR IN AFRICA.pdf |
tor | English | 168.80 KB | Posted | 68 |
| REREDUCING UPOPS AND MERCURY RELEASES FROM THE HEALTH SECTOR IN AFRICA.pdf |
report | English | 2609.81 KB | Posted | 99 |
| Title | REDUCING UPOPS AND MERCURY RELEASES FROM THE HEALTH SECTOR IN AFRICA | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atlas Project Number: | 87082 | ||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Plan: | 2016-2021, Tanzania | ||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Type: | Final Project | ||||||||||||||
| Status: | Completed | ||||||||||||||
| Completion Date: | 02/2021 | ||||||||||||||
| Planned End Date: | 12/2020 | ||||||||||||||
| Management Response: | Yes | ||||||||||||||
| UNDP Signature Solution: |
|
||||||||||||||
| Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021) |
|
||||||||||||||
| SDG Goal |
|
||||||||||||||
| SDG Target |
|
||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Budget(US $): | 10,000 | ||||||||||||||
| Source of Funding: | GEF | ||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Expenditure(US $): | 8,000 | ||||||||||||||
| Joint Programme: | No | ||||||||||||||
| Joint Evaluation: | No | ||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Team members: |
|
||||||||||||||
| GEF Evaluation: | Yes
|
||||||||||||||
| Key Stakeholders: | |||||||||||||||
| Countries: | TANZANIA (UNITED REPUBLIC OF ) | ||||||||||||||
| Comments: |
|
| Lessons | |
|---|---|
| Findings |
| Recommendations | |
|---|---|
| 1 | Before the completion of the project, the four project teams should engage in intensive consultations with relevant local authorities (such as district/regional environmental authorities, public health offices and district/local councils). In particular, they should arrange visits of the autoclave treatment facilities by the local authorities and share with them reports and other information on testing of performance of the HCW sterilization. |
| 2 | Before the completion of the project, the UNDP COs in the four countries in cooperation with the national PIUs should establish institutional mechanisms for a post-project monitoring of performance of the autoclaves and periodic collection of information about amounts of HCW treated. The monitoring, led by the national health authorities, should start immediately upon closure of the project with monthly periodicity. |
| 3 | As part of the post-project monitoring, the four countries should evaluate merits of the post-treatment on final disposal of autoclaved HCW and gather experience from operation and maintenance of the shredding and compacting devices. The lessons learned should be disseminated through relevant UNDP outreach channels.. |
| 4 | Relevant health authorities in the project countries should collect and disseminate experience from working cluster HCW treatment systems including formulas for calculation of tariffs for transportation of HCW and treatment at the autoclave cluster treatment centers |
| 5 | In order to ensure continued after-warranty repair service of the installed autoclaves, the national health authorities and the project model HCFs in the four countries should establish national autoclave maintenance teams and/or contracting local external repair service companies. UNDP COs should be of assistance for identification of reliable local suppliers of necessary spare parts for the autoclaves |
| 6 | Relevant health authorities in the four countries should establish procedures for sound post-project management of the central storage of mercury HCW and cooperate with holders of mercury waste in other sectors in order to identify final disposal option in line with provisions of the Minamata Convention |