| EFA1 | EFA2 | EFA3 | |||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2016 PRIME version 2016 data, N = 142 facilities | 2016 PRIME version 2017 data, N = 148 facilities | 2017 PRIME version 2017 data, N = 148 facilities | ||||||||||||||||
Factors | Factors | Factors | ||||||||||||||||
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |||
Item # | Original domain | Eigenvalue | 2.7 | 2.7 | 2.6 | 2.0 | 1.9 | 2.6 | 2.3 | 2.2 | 2.1 | 1.5 | 2.6 | 2.3 | 2.2 | 2.0 | 1.7 | 1.6 |
% Variance accounted for | 15% | 15% | 14% | 11% | 10% | 16% | 15% | 14% | 13% | 9% | 12% | 11% | 10% | 9% | 8% | 7% | ||
Number of items in factor | 8 | 6 | 7 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 4 | 8 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 4 | ||
Item | Factor loadings | Factor loadings | Factor loadings | |||||||||||||||
24 | Monitoring | Extent to which data to monitor & improve service delivery is valued | 0.72 | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | 0.87 | Â | Â | 0.45 | Â | Â | 0.65 | Â | Â |
31 | Community | Patients’ opinions drive change or improvement | 0.65 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 0.55 | −0.38 |  |  |  |  |  | 0.73 |
17 | HR | Has formal, supportive, and continuous supervision system | 0.61 |  |  |  | −0.40 | 0.57 | 0.36 |  |  |  |  | 0.68 | 0.32 |  |  |  |
20 | Monitoring | Maintains books to track revenue and expenditure | 0.58 | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | 0.69 | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | 0.64 |
13 | Operations | Proportion of time facility head spent on managerial activities the previous day | 0.57 | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | 0.43 | Â | No loadings2 | |||||
16 | HR | Has established criteria to evaluate staff performance | 0.48 | Â | 0.54 | Â | Â | Dropped 1 | Dropped 1 | |||||||||
2 | Target setting | Has one comprehensive annual budget for running costs | 0.48 | Â | 0.42 | 0.34 | Â | 0.36 | Â | Â | 0.64 | Â | 0.33 | Â | Â | Â | 0.52 | Â |
11 | Operations | Facility head has received any formal management training | 0.35 | Â | 0.62 | Â | Â | 0.68 | Â | Â | Â | 0.34 | Â | 0.37 | Â | Â | Â | Â |
26 | Monitoring | Reports client opinions using any available tool | Â | 0.30 | 0.67 | Â | Â | Â | 0.87 | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | 0.91 | Â | Â | Â |
15 | HR | Supervisors have held individual meetings to review staff performance | Â | 0.37 | Â | 0.85 | Â | Dropped 1 | Dropped 1 | |||||||||
21 | Monitoring | Conducts quality improvement activities | Â | 0.55 | 0.57 | Â | Â | Â | 0.87 | 0.43 | Â | Â | Â | Â | 0.83 | 0.39 | Â | Â |
22 | Monitoring | Held meetings to discuss routine service statistics with staff | Â | 0.57 | 0.41 | Â | Â | 0.85 | Â | Â | 0.32 | Â | 0.33 | 0.74 | Â | Â | Â | 0.37 |
27 | Monitoring | Regularly receives reports tracking common conditions with results shared with staff | Â | 0.83 | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | 0.67 | 0.39 | Â | 0.84 | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â |
23 | Monitoring | Has mechanism to report new disease outbreaks | Â | 0.94 | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | 0.65 | 0.53 | Â | 0.85 | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â |
32 | Community | Made changes based on client opinion in the last 12 months |  |  | 0.75 |  |  |  | 0.66 | −0.37 |  |  | −0.31 | 0.31 | 0.57 |  |  |  |
34 | Community | Has a community member regularly attending staff meetings | Â | Â | Â | 0.85 | 0.37 | No loadings 2 | No loadings 2 | |||||||||
30 | Community | Shared information on performance with the community in the past 6Â months | Â | Â | Â | Â | 0.70 | 0.74 | Â | Â | Â | 0.40 | 0.31 | 0.64 | Â | Â | Â | Â |
33 | Community | Has a community advisory board that meets regularly and facility follows up on board discussions | Â | Â | Â | Â | 0.81 | Â | Â | Â | Â | 0.89 | No loadings 2 | |||||
14 | HR | Staff are offered training to improve their skills | Dropped 1 | |||||||||||||||
29 | Community | Collects client opinions using any tool | Dropped 1 | |||||||||||||||
4 | Target setting | Has formal goals and priorities for service delivery | 7 items not included in 2016 PRIME | Dropped 1 | ||||||||||||||
5 | Target setting | Has formal improvement targets to achieve goals | Â | Â | Â | Â | 0.88 | Â | ||||||||||
6 | Target setting | Formal improvement targets shared with staff | Â | 0.64 | Â | Â | 0.50 | Â | ||||||||||
7 | Target setting | Burden of target achievement evenly distributed to staff | No loadings 2 | |||||||||||||||
18 | HR | Perceived ability of staff to carry out assignments | −0.34 |  |  | 0.68 |  |  | ||||||||||
19 | HR | Staff encouraged to share new ideas to management | Â | Â | Â | 0.79 | Â | Â | ||||||||||
28 | Monitoring | Conducts formal case reviews for quality | Â | Â | Â | 0.43 | Â | 0.55 |