Management practices in facilities providing HIV services to key populations in Kenya and Malawi: A descriptive analysis of management in community-based organizations

Abstract

HIV services for key populations (KP) at higher risk of HIV infection are often delivered by community-based organizations. To achieve HIV epidemic control, countries need to scale up HIV services for KP. Little is known about the management practices of community-based organizations delivering health services. We explored the management practices and facility characteristics of community-based health facilities providing HIV services to key populations as part of the LINKAGES program in Kenya and Malawi. We collected information on management practices from 45 facilities called drop-in centers (DICs) during US Government FY 2019, adapting the World Management Survey to the HIV community-based health service delivery context. We constructed management domain scores for each facility. We then analyzed the statistical correlations between management domains (performance monitoring, people management, financial management, and community engagement) and facility characteristics (e.g., number of staff, organization maturity, service scale) using ordinary least square models. The lowest mean management domain scores were found for people management in Kenya (38.3) and financial management in Malawi (25.7). The highest mean scores in both countries were for performance monitoring (80.9 in Kenya and 82.2 in Malawi). Within each management domain, there was significant variation across DICs, with the widest ranges in scores (0 to 100) observed for financial management and community involvement. The DIC characteristics we considered explained only a small proportion of the variation in management domain scores across DICs. Community-based health facilities providing HIV services to KP can achieve high levels of management in a context where they receive adequate levels of above-facility support and oversight—even if they deliver complex services, rely heavily on temporary workers and community volunteers, and face significant financial constraints. The variation in scores suggests that some facilities may require more above-facility support and oversight than others.