Table 3_Implementing Stabdardized Community-Based Services Package

The study was designed as a mix of qualitative assessments in a variety of settings chosen to obtain a representation of adaptation practices across the EECA region and presents the results of: (a) a programme review, (b) qualitative interview data, and (c) analysis of data collected through community-led monitoring (CLM). The study design and tools were discussed, tested and agreed within the research team, consisting of national coordinators in each country led by an international expert.A desk review of the national TB strategic plans, policies related to state social contracting systems, available country specific reports and documentation related to external funding (current and/or expected), as well as research papers and grey literature were performed, using a template with standard questions. A total of 81 document sources have been taken into the desk review - it included national TB strategic plans, government laws and regulations, executive orders, national reports and Global Fund grants implementation reports.Semi-structured interviews were conducted with informants identified through a convenience sample, among representatives of local CSOs, national policy makers, contracting agencies, including NTPs, and international development partners, using a specific questionnaire between July and August 2024 with a total of 33 respondents (Table 1). The analysis framework was focused on country approaches in adapting the national packages of services; services included in the national packages, criteria for provision and geographic accessibility; quality; tools used for monitoring and evaluation (M&E); training programs for the implementers of the services; and available financing mechanisms to deliver the services included in the packages.The CLM data, available in countries were extracted from the CLM open-source platforms: OneImpact for Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Ukraine and, ILikeVST for Moldova.The data collected at country level was triangulated by the national-level coordinators, who compiled a templated country-specific report and contributed to the consolidation of a joint report. Additionally, the data were analyzed and across countries by two members of the team (MV, OR). These were compared and are presented below under three thematic areas: 1) adaptation of the community package; 2) ensuring quality and supervision; 3) funding.The need for ethics approval was waived for this study, but written consent was obtained from all key informants.