Adjustment of family planning service statistics reports to support decision-making at central and governorate level, Egypt.

Background: The Ministry of Health and Population (MOHP)-Family Planning Sector (FPS) has a strong management information system (MIS) that allows the flow of data from MOHP-FP clinics, health districts, and governorates up to the central level. Yet, family planning (FP) quarterly reports issued at the central level are presented as database/spreadsheet software documents. These data are not used to provide indicators or information that aid in decision-making or the tracking of FP services over time. The objective of the study is to organize data in the database, develop key performance indicators, and design FP reports and policy briefs.

Methods: The study is operations research that is driven by published data derived from MOHP-FP sector-head, and 2014 service statistics quarterly hardcopy reports. The information was entered into an excel program, and 15 key performance indicators (KPIs) were calculated and used to rank Egypt's 27 governorates. We developed an annual FP report form, settled tables, and colored graphs that are liable to rank the governorates from best to least favorable.

Results: The quarterly data sheets issued by the MOHP-FP sector were organized for the quarters, and one annual sheet was developed with the organization of Egypt's Governorates into 4 specific regions, with each governorate having a fixed position in all reports. The key performance indicators were as follows: percent of clients aged 35 and up; percent of clients with fewer than three children; proportion of current FP users by method; percent of clients reported as first-time clients; percent of clients defined as new clients (non-FP users and FP discontinuers); and contraceptive coverage rate, i.e., percent coverage of married women of reproductive age with dispensed FP methods expressed as couple years.

Conclusion: MOHP-FP sector service statistics data could be used for the development of fifteen key performance indicators. Having those indicators at governorate, district, and central levels in quarterly and annual reports and their communication with decision-makers at all levels and their tracking overtime will guide them to timely decision-making for improving performance in FP services at all levels.