From legacy to integration in the Global Polio Eradication Initiative

Looking back to look forward

Datos Bibliográficos

ID21880209
AutoresSvea Closser (0000-0001-8337-9957, Johns Hopkins University, autor de correspondencia), Abigail H Neel (0000-0002-4254-9582, Johns Hopkins University), Sue Gerber (0000-0001-7621-162X, Independent Consultant, Truchas, New Mexico, USA), Olakunle Alonge (0000-0001-7642-2806, University of Alabama at Birmingham)
Año2024
Volumen9
Número5
Páginase014758
Fecha de publicación2024-05-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaBMJ Global Health (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 2059-7908 • E-ISSN: 2059-7908
EditorialBMJ (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014758
PMID38770815
OpenAlexW4396732689
IdiomaEN
Referencias citadas22

INTRODUCTION: The Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) is a global single-disease programme with an extensive infrastructure in some of the world's most underserved areas. It provides a key example of the opportunities and challenges of transition efforts-the process of shifting from donor-funded, single-disease programmes to programmes with more integrated and sustainable programmatic and funding streams. Our goal is to closely analyse the social and political dynamics of the polio transition in the 2010s to provide insights into today, as well as lessons for other programmes. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with GPEI officials involved in transition planning across GPEI partner agencies (n=11). We also drew on document review and interviews with national and subnational actors in Nigeria, India, Ethiopia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. We inductively analysed this material to capture emergent themes in the evolution of transition activities in the GPEI. RESULTS: Since the mid-2010s, GPEI actors expressed concern that polio's assets should not be lost when polio was eradicated. Planning for polio's legacy, however, proved complicated. The GPEI's commitment to and focus on eradication had taken precedence over strong collaborations outside the polio programme, making building alliances for transition challenging. There were also complex questions around who should be responsible for the transition process, and which agencies would ultimately pay for and deliver polio-funded functions. Current efforts to achieve 'integration' both have great promise and must grapple with these same issues. DISCUSSION: Within the GPEI, relinquishing control to other programmes and planning for significant, long-term funding for transition will be central to achieving successful integration and eventual transition. Beyond polio, other vertical programmes can benefit from going beyond transition 'planning' to integrate transition into the initial design of vertical programmes

Disease Eradication · Economic growth · Economics · Poliomyelitis · Poliomyelitis eradication · Poliovirus · Political science · Public health · HIV/AIDS Impact and Responses · Medicine · Musculoskeletal Disorders and Rehabilitation · Nursing · Public Administration · Viral Infections and Immunology Research · Virology