Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMwita, Nzomo
dc.contributor.authorMwanzo, Isaac
dc.contributor.authorMuthwii, Sammy M.
dc.contributor.authorKabiru, Ephantus W.
dc.date.accessioned2019-07-19T06:04:54Z
dc.date.available2019-07-19T06:04:54Z
dc.date.issued2014-01
dc.identifier.issn2218-7278
dc.identifier.urihttp://repository.kemu.ac.ke:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/591
dc.descriptionP 89-99en_US
dc.description.abstractIn Kenya, middle• level health training institutions (MLHTls) produce the bulk of health workers at continuing professional development (CPD) training level. However, information on whether monitoring and evaluation (M&E) mechanisms for CPD training are available and utilized at MLHTIs in Kenya is scarce and may not be relied on to develop appropriate M&E systems. The main objective of this study was to determine the availability and utilization of the mechanisms for monitoring and evaluating CPD training among public, private and faith-based MLHTIs in Kenya. The study was guided by two hypotheses: there are no significant differences in the availability of M&E mechanisms for CPD training among institutions in the three categories (public, faith-based, private); and, there are no significant differences in the utilization of M&E mechanisms for CPD training among institutions in the three categories. The respondents were 375 tutors from public, faith-based and private MLHTIs, selected using a mix of sampling techniques: stratified, purposive, proportionate to size and simple random. Data collection was conducted using a questionnaire, key informant interviews, and desk review. Quantitative data was analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), while data from desk review was analysed through a process of data reduction, organization and interpretation. Pearson's chi-square test was used to determine the significant differences (p<O.O 1) in availability and utilization of M&E mechanisms, among institutions in the three categories. The study found out that there were significant differences in the availability of M&E guidelines (x2=13.921, df=2, p=.001); questionnaire (x2=20.326, df=2, p=.00); and end of course evaluation form (x2=24.222, df=2, p=.00). There were also significant differences in the utilization of the end of course evaluation form (x2=24.542, df=2, p=.00). The study concludes that there are significant differences in the availability and utilization of the M&E mechanisms for CPD training at MLHTIs in Kenya. Capacity building for tutors at MLHTIs in the area of monitoring and evaluation of CPD was recommended.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherIJPPen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesJanuary- June 2014;Vol 5, issues 1 & 2
dc.subjectContinuing professional developmenten_US
dc.subjectEvaluating continuing professional developmenten_US
dc.titleAvailability and Utilization of the Mechanisms for Monitoring and Evaluating Continuing Professional Development in Kenya: A Case of Middle Level Health Training Institutionsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record