Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38524914›Full record

ArticleGates open research2020

Towards reimagined technical assistance: the current policy options and opportunities for change.

Alexandra Nastase, Alok Rajan, Ben French, Debarshi Bhattacharya

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gates open research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Alexandra NastaseOxford Policy Management, Oxford, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6717-9736
Alok RajanOxford Policy Management, Oxford, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1396-176X
Ben FrenchOxford Policy Management, Oxford, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8652-5331
Debarshi BhattacharyaBill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Delhi, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8400-353X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Technical assistance has been at the heart of development assistance provided to country governments by donor agencies over the past several decades. The current debates on reimagining technical assistance focus on the existing challenges of the different types of technical assistance and the (re)construction of an ideal model for delivering this type of support, with little discussion about the dilemmas involved in making day-to-day decisions and trade-offs in implementation. This article presents technical assistance as a policy option for governments and details the existing models of delivering technical assistance, their limitations, and the required enabling conditions. The models presented focus on the type of role for the technical advisers- as doers (performing government functions), partners (working with the government to perform a specific role) and facilitators (enabling and facilitating change programmes to address wicked problems). Finally, the paper provides a practical account of the implications of the programme design and suggests potential opportunities for change particularly in the context of COVID-19 pandemic. It complements an open letter on the practical account of the current challenges in the design and implementation of technical assistance programmes.

Indexed as

capacity developmentcapacity substitutioncapacity supplementationinternational developmentpolicy optionsstate capabilitytechnical assistance

Identifiers

PMID38524914
PMCPMC10957524

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.