Updated Sep 30, 2019CLOSED
Offered by Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
|Stage||Stage 2: Research & Development|
|Region||Low and Middle Income Countries|
Successful proposals should consider the following phases of campaign delivery:
-Planning and microplanning,: This includes the planning processes - led by governments and often supported by partners - at the national, sub-national, facility, or community levels. Overall planning supports the mobilization of information and resources needed to conduct the campaign, andmicroplanningspecifically addresses the detailed, delivery-level planning required to reach intended populations with the health intervention. Innovations might include/consider:
-Modeling and analytics to test, identify, and recommend more effective implementation approaches (e.g. modeling to identify optimal location of campaign fixed sites and outreach posts in order to improve community access).
-Novel or nontraditional information or data sources to improve the accuracy of planning (e.g. geospatial data to improve population estimation or location and more accurately plan for and target campaign delivery).
-Technologies for developing and using community maps or populations that can help campaigns to better reach their intended age groups or sub-populations.
-Interactive or adaptive microplans that better incorporate past or real-time data (e.g. based on prior campaign performance or operational monitoring data) to guide planning and implementation.
-Increased automation of microplans (e.g. updating, adapting microplans for other platforms).
-Implementation / operations: Improvement in this area may encompass all aspects of campaign operations, ranging from logistics management, identification and reach of target populations, delivery of interventions, management of human resources (including payments, incentives, and training), data collection & analysis, and supervision. Innovations might include/consider:
-Novel approaches to leverage data, maps, or other information or data to better identify and reach high-risk or unreached (e.g. "zero dose") populations.
-Approaches to delivering campaigns in a way that prioritize high-risk or vulnerable populations.
-Leveraging of novel partnerships such as linking with other disease control programs, community initiatives, or religious or traditional structure that may improve campaign outcomes.
-Use of innovative technologies to support logistics management, campaign supervision, data collection and use.
-Monitoring and evaluation: Campaigns rely on monitoring and evaluation both during and after the campaign to understand campaign performance, identify populations that require post-campaign mop-up or targeting, to inform post-campaign improvement activities and routine system strengthening and identify lessons learned. Additionally, although M&E has not been used to systematically test and identify promising or best practices that may be replicated across geographies or campaign types, there is an opportunity to improve the use of iterative testing or operations research to identify best practices. Innovations might include/consider:
-Novel approaches to understanding the effectiveness of campaign planning and implementation while campaigns are ongoing or during post-campaign evaluations.
-Approaches for measuring and incorporating real time process, quality, and coverage improvement during campaigns.
-Methods of identifying, testing, and disseminating lessons learned and promising or best practices.
Criteria for success include solutions that:
-Are transformative, novel, or innovative. These interventions will significantly change the way in which campaigns are planned, conducted, or evaluated by proposing new ways of working, leveraging lessons from other sectors, or increasing transparency and effectiveness.
-Could be used by various health campaigns beyond the campaign in which the innovation is originally conceptualized or tested, such as for immunization (measles, yellow fever, meningitis, etc.), neglected tropical diseases (trachoma, onchocerciasis, schistosomiasis etc.), nutrition (vitamin A, deworming), malaria (bed net distribution, seasonal malaria chemoprophylaxis), and polio.
-Could be used in various low- and middle-income countries beyond the country in which the innovation is originally conceptualized or tested.
-Can be designed, tested, and scaled as a "best practice".
-Can be applied in low- and middle-income countries.
-Are cost effective.
Upon registration, applicants must provide information about the tax status of their organization as different terms and conditions may apply. You should confirm your organization’s tax status with the appropriate person or group within your organization such as your grants or contracts department, finance, or office of sponsored research. Please select the tax status that most closely reflects your current organization’s status. The foundation may request additional organizational information. For information about tax statuses, you may check with your own advisors and refer to information provided on the Internal Revenue Service web site at:www.irs.gov.
You will submit reports according to the Reporting & Payment Schedule using the Foundation's templates or forms, which the Foundation will make available to You and which may be modified from time to time. For a progress or final report to be considered satisfactory, it must demonstrate meaningful progress against the targets or milestones for that investment period.
This funding opportunity will not consider funding for:
-Proposals not presenting clear innovation for improving the planning, implementation, or evaluation of health campaigns.
-Interventions that are better classified as technical assistance or campaign implementation (e.g. focused on the delivery or improvement of a single campaign).
-Proposals seeking to apply existing tools in ways that do not transform the current practices used for campaign-based delivery.
-Proposals where the solution is to leverage one health campaign for co-delivery of other goods or services (e.g. using a NTD campaign to deliver vaccine reminders).
-Incremental improvements or small, non-transformative operational improvements (e.g. use of mobile data collection instead of paper-based collection) with no clear link to dramatically improved campaign effectiveness.
-Proposals focused on improving access to existing tools or technologies.
-Innovative ideas without a clearly-articulated and testable approach.
-Approaches not directly relevant to low-income settings.
-Approaches for which proof of concept cannot be demonstrated within the scope of the GCE Phase 1 award ($100,000 over 18 months).
-Secondary analysis of existing studies or systematic reviews unless there is a clear way in which the analysis can be scaled and will fundamentally change practice.
-Proof of concept studies that do not clearly consider the current context of available financial systems and infrastructure for resource poor health settings. For example, ideas that are tested using expensive devices or require government-issued IDs in a country where few people have them, or to populations which require hospital deliveries in settings where this is not the norm.
-Approaches that circumvent the public sector completely.
-Approaches which would require a donor’s long-term financial support to sustain.
-Innovative ideas that repeat conventional approaches without novel application.
Applicants planning to conduct project activities in India may be required to register with the Ministry of Home Affairs under the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act of 2010 (FCRA). As part of the foundation’s diligence we may ask for a copy of your organization’s registration under the FCRA or a written certification that FCRA registration is not required. Failure to comply with the requirements of the FCRA may subject your organization to financial and/or criminal penalties. You should consult with your own advisors to determine whether the FCRA applies to your organization.