Table. 4 Consequences of standardized and tailored approaches to CHW programming
Standardized | Tailored |
|---|---|
Simple, neat, comprehensible Easy to monitor and report on Fits a top-down, technocratic mindset Easy for planners There may be more consistency on important technical aspects Less likely to be appropriately responsive to the situation on the ground | Empowers local managers/decision-makers Likely to be a better fit with actual needs More scope to adapt to context based on observed performance and changing circumstances Fits with devolved, decentralized systems for governing CHW programmes [20] Uncomfortable for global- and national-level planners, policy-makers, donors |