Evaluation Review

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click Here for More Information

Click here for free access to the SAGE eReference platform!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bertrand, J. T.
Right arrow Articles by Landry, E. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Bertrand, J. T.
Right arrow Articles by Landry, E. G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Evaluation Review, Vol. 8, No. 5, 645-662 (1984)
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X8400800504

Active Users vs. Couple-Months-of-Protection

The Comparability of Two Indicators of Performance in Family Planning Programs

Jane T. Bertrand

Tulane University

Maria Antonieta Pineda

Asociacion Pro Bienestar de la Familia

Roberto Santiso

Asociacion Pro Bienestar de la Familia

Evelyn G. Landry

Tulane University

The purpose of this study was to determine the comparability of two indicators of family planning (FP) performance-number of active users (a widely reported statistic) and couple-months-of protection. Both were used to monitor the Guatemalan community- based distribution (CBD) program over a twelve-month period. Discrepancies between the two indicators were observed m monthly statistics but were minimal in trimester data. Differences between indicators were greater for barrier methods than the pill, although both systems yielded similar results on the distribution of users by method. It is recom mended that CMP be used for the routine monitoring of FPprograms, and that CMP be reported separately for clinical and nonclinical methods.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?