世界卫生组织2021-2024年在约旦的贡献：评估简报

EfficiencyInterven�ons were delivered economically and on �me, BACKGROUND though funding was uneven across priori�es. The CountryOffice demonstrated strong management capacity but lackeda comprehensive monitoring and evalua�on(M&E)system tocapture results against CCS outcomes. The independent evalua�on of the World HealthOrganiza�on (WHO) contribu�on in Jordan assessed resultsachievedat thecountry level using inputs from all threelevels of WHO. It documents contribu�ons, achievements,success factors, gaps, lessons and strategic direc�onsemployed to improve health outcomes. The evalua�oncomes as the WHO Country Office for Jordan approaches theend of its current Country Coopera�on Strategy (CCS) 2021–2025 and begins re-aligning with the WHO FourteenthGeneral Programme of Work (GPW14). It aims to informstrategic direc�on, including the design and implementa�onof the next CCS cycle. Effec�veness WHO achieved key outputs in defining essen�al services,improving standards of care, expanding NCDs and mentalhealth programmes, and enhancing emergencypreparedness. However, outcomes such as theUniversalHealth Coverage(UHC)index declined, reflec�ng systemicconstraints. Advances included nutri�on policies andimmuniza�on coverage, but challenges remain in tobaccocontrol, fragmented health informa�on and limitedsystema�c equity focus. PURPOSE The purpose of this evalua�on is to support learning andaccountability among all key stakeholders. Specific objec�vesare to synthesize lessons from what worked and what couldhave been done differently, and provide evidence to informnew strategic direc�ons, includingtheCCS 2026–2030.The evalua�on covered all WHO interven�ons in Jordanduring 2021–2024 across outcome and output areas. SustainabilityWHO helped shi� na�onal priori�es toward primary health care (PHC)and UHC, with gains in immuniza�on, supplychain and AMR surveillance. Yet sustainability is hamperedby limited na�onal ownership, underinvestmentandsomefragmenta�on. METHODS Gender, equity and human rights (GER)Equity for refugees and vulnerable groups was priori�zed, The evalua�on applied a theory-based, par�cipatory andu�liza�on-focused approach, guided by a collabora�velydeveloped theory of change(ToC). Mixed quan�ta�ve andqualita�ve data sources were triangulated. The processadhered totheUnited Na�ons Evalua�on Group norms andWHO ethical guidanceand used the OECD-DAC criteria, withgender, equity, disability and human rights integratedthroughout. but systema�c integra�on of gender, disability and socialdeterminants was limitedand requires further support. CONCLUSIONS Conclusion 1:WHO has tailored its approach to the contextof Jordan, which is shaped by a vola�le regional situa�on anda high influx of refugees. This has prompted WHO to respondto humanitarian health needs by suppor�ng servicesprovision through commodi�es procurement andimplementa�on of infrastructure projects, in addi�on to itsother func�ons regarding strategic, policy and technicalsupport. These opera�ons have been well integrated intoWHO’s norma�ve and health system strengthening work,offering a promising approach to leverage emergencyfunding to sustain long-term health goals. KEY FINDINGS Relevance WHO’s work aligned strongly with na�onal health priori�esandthose of theMinistry of Health (MoH), addressingpressing needs such asnoncommunicable diseases(NCDs)and refugee health. However, opera�onal delivery riskedfilling MoH gaps without clear exit strategies. CoherenceCollabora�on among WHO Country Office, Regional Office Conclusion 2:WHO has strengthened its leadership posi�onamong health partners in Jordan, following its prominentrole in the COVID-19 response. The next step is to leveragethis posi�on to advance the mul�sectoral response on healthin the post-pandemic context while enhancing bothdevelopment and humanitarian coordina�on pla�orms tostrengthen engagement, alignment and coordina�on of allhealth partners. (EMRO) and Headquarters (HQ) produced strong results inareas such as immuniza�on, an�microbial resistance (AMR)and health data systems. Coordina�on was less effec�ve inhealth promo�on and determinants. Externally, WHO isviewed as the norma�ve authority, but increased opera�onalroles some�mes blurred mandates. Conclusion 3:The three levels of the Organiza�on haveworked effec�vely together to direct WHO’s global andregional exper�se and resources towards Jordan’s healthpriori�es, although support from WHO HQ and WHO-EMROis not always sufficiently streamlined. Together, thecontribu�ons of the three levels have been pivotal indelivering key outputs in Jordan. support to the WHO Country Office to ensure that the mostimpac�ul interven�ons are priori�zed. ⇒Streamline pilot ini�a�ves.Create a structured processfor pilot ini�a�ves from WHO-EMRO and WHO HQ toensure they are relevant to the context, aligned withna�onal priori�es, and effec�vely scaled whensuccessful. ⇒Clarify roles in the CSP.Include the roles of WHOHeadquarters and th