About WHO

Priority evaluations

Leadership and management at WHO: evaluation of WHO reform, third stage

The objective of the evaluation of WHO reform, third stage, was to assess: the status of actions taken on the stage 1 and stage 2 evaluation recommendations; progress made on implementation; and the effectiveness of the WHO implementation approach across the three levels of the Organization. It also aimed to provide recommendations on the way forward.

Ebola Interim Assessment

In 2015, a major focus of the work of the Evaluation Office was to support the work of the Ebola Interim Assessment Panel established in response to resolution EBSS3.R1, adopted during the special session of the Executive Board in January 2015. The Panel submitted its first report to the Sixty-eighth World Health Assembly, and the final report was delivered in July 2015. The Secretariat issued its response to the Panel’s report in August 2015. The Panel’s recommendations further informed the work of the United Nations Secretary General’s High-Level Panel on the Global Response to Health Crises, the deliberations of the Review Committee on the Role of the International Health Regulations (2005) in the Ebola Outbreak and Response and the Director-General’s Advisory Group on Reform of WHO’s work in Outbreaks and Emergencies with Health and Humanitarian Consequences.

WHO Presence in countries

The aim of the evaluation of WHO’s presence in countries was to assess the Secretariat’s contribution to the delivery of Organization-wide outcomes and the attainment of country-level goals. This evaluation addressed the following high-level questions:

  • What does WHO’s presence in countries mean and does it respond to Member States’ and other relevant partners’ expectations?
  • What is the contribution of WHO’s presence in countries to addressing global and individual countries’ health priorities and needs?
  • What is WHO’s added value at country level in the light of its level of investment?
  • What are the modalities for strengthening or reducing WHO’s presence in countries based on the different health status and needs of individual countries?
  • To what extent does WHO exert effective leadership and convening capacity at country level to mobilize different stakeholders and act as a broker of partnerships in support of the national health and development agenda?

Comprehensive Evaluation of the Implementation of the Global Strategy and Plan of Action on Public Health, Innovation and Intellectual Property

The global strategy on public health, innovation and intellectual property aims to promote new thinking on innovation and access to medicines and, based on the recommendations of the report of the Commission on Intellectual Property Rights, Innovation and Public Health, provide a medium-term framework for securing an enhanced and sustainable basis for needs-driven essential health research and development relevant to diseases that disproportionately affect developing countries, proposing clear objectives and priorities for research and development, and estimating funding needs in this area.

The overall purpose of this comprehensive evaluation was to assess the status of implementation of the eight elements of the global strategy and plan of action, its 25 sub-elements and 108 specific actions. It looked at such implementation by all stakeholders listed in the action plan at different levels (global, regional and national), including national governments, the WHO Secretariat and other relevant stakeholders.

Covering the period 2008–2015, the evaluation documented achievements, gaps and remaining challenges and the evaluators have identified areas for future work and proposed recommendations which the overall programme review, planned for 2017, may wish to consider.

Impact of WHO publications

The overall purpose of the evaluation of the impact of WHO publications was to assess the impact of WHO publications by considering the reach, usefulness and use of a representative sample of WHO information products as estimates for their impact. Specifically, it addressed the following high-level questions:

  • To what extent do WHO publications reach their intended audiences and what are their major gaps in reach and why did the latter arise?
  • What is the perceived usefulness of WHO publications (by information product type)?
  • To what extent are WHO publications used as references and as authoritative sources of information for decision-making in clinical, public health and policy-making contexts?
  • What is the extent of implementation of WHO’s publications policy and its influence in the impact of WHO publications?