FORCCE FOCUS
FORCCE Focus is a new section in this newsletter where we feature RCCE personnel across the globe. Through brief Q&A sessions, we shine a spotlight on each person’s RCCE journey, the work that they do and their unique insights on working in the field of risk communication and community engagement.
Q&A with Melinda Frost
Melinda Frost has been working in global public health for over 20 years in more than 40 countries in all WHO regions. Most recently, Mindy, as she is known to colleagues, was the RCCE lead for the World Health Organization global team. She is also the founder of the WHO regional network of RCCE focal points known as the Formidable Officers of RCCE (FORCCE) and is responsible for co-designing and co-leading the Emergency Communications Network and SocialNet deployment trainings, which collectively prepared 300+ media and emergency risk communicators and social and behaviour scientists for deployment. |  |
In this interview, we ask Mindy about working during the COVID-19 pandemic, her hopes for the future of RCCE and what’s next on her to-do list.
FS: Mindy, you were leading the global RCCE team for WHO during the height of the pandemic. What was that experience like?
MF: I’m trying to think of adjectives other than exhausting and exasperating – I’m joking of course – as tough as it was, there’s no other place I would have preferred to be during the pandemic response. I’m often amazed
at the sheer intensity of the work we did within the WHO Incident Management team. I’m so proud to have worked with many incredibly talented colleagues. The world is truly lucky to have WHO and especially fortunate to have dedicated people that
work in emergencies for WHO. I hope I was the right person at the right time for RCCE.
I often think back to January 2020 having just come back from a family vacation (thankfully) and having visited my parents. We were a skeletal staff at the start of the response. We soon hired a team of RCCE experts and various scientists that could potentially
decipher what was going on and help us tailor information and guidance to affected populations. The year prior, I formalized the WHO RCCE regional network which proved invaluable throughout the response. We’ve met nearly every week for the past
three years sharing methods, data, materials and experience.
We also quickly synchronized with partners. I remember a coordination group with WHO, UNICEF, IFRC (the International Federation of the Red Cross) and many others choosing to conclude regular meetings for Ebola response — only to start again the
next week and every week after (even to today) for COVID-19. This mechanism was formalized in June 2020 as the Collective Service which brings together the best of the best of the various partner organizations and ensures that we don’t duplicate
– or worse – leave gaps in preparedness, readiness and response in the very delicate work that needs to be done with communities. In 2022, both the WHO RCCE regional network and Collective Service joint responses expanded to cover a handful
of other concurrent emergencies.
FS: What were some of the lessons you learned from the pandemic?
MF: There was a lot we already knew would likely happen – misinformation, disinformation, misinterpretation of science, the need to communicate uncertainty and changes in scientific findings, the need to be generally consistent with messaging and
the need to tailor information and guidance to the local contexts. These are common issues that risk communication aims to tackle. I think the things that helped the most in the response to COVID-19 and that will shape the way we respond from now
on are the networks and partnerships I described earlier and the use of data. We had more data than ever before in the field of RCCE. Whether it was online social media data from our Infodemics team or behavioural insights – there was so much
information that really helped to shape our interventions. While it was difficult to absorb and nimbly respond at the global level, our regional offices were really able to operationalize this at region and country levels. Next, we really need to
ensure that RCCE practitioners and Member States know how to manage these data for future emergencies and can implement the most effective interventions given very dynamic and complex community level contexts.
FS: What do you think is the one thing most people often get wrong about risk communication and community engagement?
| MF: RCCE, at least at WHO headquarters, is well placed as a technical response pillar equal to that of surveillance, infection prevention and control, clinical care, etc. The same can be said of WHO regional offices. However, the reality in national level Ministries of Health and sub-national entities can be a different story. Oftentimes, RCCE teams are a combination of media officers and community health workers focused on non-emergency topics (e.g., nutrition, immunization, non-communicable disease) who really know their communities. RCCE should be considered as the technical communication and engagement with affected populations which requires a spectrum of skills including emergency risk communication, operational socio-behavioural research, coordination with community leaders and civil society organizations, behaviour change communication, infodemics management and so on. It’s a broad and important field requiring a number of interoperable skills. RCCE incorporation into emergency preparedness, readiness and response has been an iterative process but I feel now it has a critical ‘seat at the table’ for all future emergencies. How can health emergency response continue effectively without a strong and dedicated focus on the people most affected by emergencies? This is why there’s a key focus on this area of work in the WHO Health Emergency Preparedness and Response Framework. |  |
I’m not sure that RCCE will continue as it has in the past; perhaps this area of work will be re-envisioned but there’s no doubt that the work done on COVID-19 and other concurrent emergencies has set a path for more effective support for individuals and communities to be informed, engaged and empowered to make decisions for their health and well-being before, during and after emergencies.
FS: What are your hopes for the future of RCCE?
MF: While RCCE has always been a key part of emergency response and an important part of the International Health Regulations, it’s unfortunately been a sorely underfunded area of work which means trained workforce has been inconsistently supported
in Ministries of Health. When there is a dedicated RCCE pillar – it’s often one person versus a more comprehensive and required team. I think now everyone recognizes this need to effectively communicate and engage with affected populations
but we need more consistent approaches. I think the forthcoming RCCE Competency Framework should help set the path for consistent capacity building content, learner pathways and introduction into university curricula. In addition, I think this area
of work is plagued a bit with an identity crisis. Every organization has a different name for this discipline which I fear causes confusion at country level. We need to start being more consistent in terms of ‘terms,’ as well as monitoring
and evaluation indicators for this area of work.
FS: Finally, congratulations on your new role as the Head of the Learning Solutions and Training Unit. Can you tell us a little bit about that and how RCCE will continue to factor into your work?
MF: Admittedly, it’s bittersweet to be leaving RCCE. I’ve worked for a really long time in emergencies and RCCE but I also have significant background and experience in instructional design so I’m really excited to return to those roots. I will still be able to support RCCE capacity building. I’ll be helping to develop a new training portfolio to address today’s emergency challenges ensuring that the next generation of RCCE emergency responders can access and absorb the increasing amount of data inputs and make effective decisions while working as a key member of an incident management team.