Working Outside Our Comfort Zone: Fighting NTDs in Conflict Areas

To accomplish this while also keeping health workers safe, we’ll need to work with an even higher degree of flexibility, smarts, and strategy — and become more comfortable working with uncertainty. For more than a decade, we have supported USAID’s global NTD efforts, currently through the Act to End NTDs | East program. Here are a few lessons we’ve learned about operating in conflict zones:  

• Don’t miss out on pockets of safety. The security situation can change quickly in areas of conflict and instability. In Cameroon, the Ministry of Health and partners devised a strategy called ‘hit and run’, rapidly treating an area during a window of peace and then withdrawing. Camps for refugees and internally displaced persons also offer a relatively safe place to reach people affected by conflict. 
   

• Recognize that a different and more intensive form of planning will be necessary. An additional layer of strategy and creativity is often needed to reach conflict and hard-to-reach areas. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, NTD officials conducted a modified trachoma rapid assessment using already-available data before sending teams out to map trachoma prevalence. This additional analysis narrowed down where mapping teams needed to be sent, mitigating risk for health workers and cost for implementing organizations.  
   

• Work with a high degree of flexibility. Countries may be considered too insecure or volatile to implement NTD interventions, even while large swaths of the country are peaceful and can be reached safely with proper planning and coordination. When (and where) possible, flexibility is essential to ensure activities carry on. For example, when the U.S. government suspended foreign aid to Mali following a coup d'état in 2012, we knew we needed to find a way for NTD treatments to continue. Through a series of discussions with USAID and partners, The END Fund was able to step in to bridge support, ensuring NTD efforts could continue wherever feasible. And when U.S. support resumed, Mali was still on track to reach their NTD elimination goals.  

• Operate through government structures. When local or national health structures implement health interventions directly, it can be much less disruptive and conspicuous than an external partner. On USAID’s Act | East program, we use a grant mechanism to fund governments, often at the lower local levels, to achieve defined program activities and goals.  
   

• Prioritize and invest in social mobilization — not just to improve the effectiveness of health interventions, but also for safety. Whether work is implemented through government structures or external NGOs, trust of authority can be an issue among populations, especially in those areas dealing with conflict. Social mobilization is therefore incredibly important to build the credibility of health workers and their efforts, reinforcing their safety. 

These extra considerations undoubtedly come at a cost; operating in conflict zones is not ‘business as usual’ and will require significant investment. Some big questions remain: How do we maximize health worker safety? How do we measure impact in populations that are dramatically expanding and contracting? The answers to these questions won’t always be perfect, but we must get comfortable working without perfect answers while driving conversations that result in practical new policies and approaches.