An analysis on the roles and involvements of different stakeholders in the provision of adolescent sexual and reproductive health services in Southeast Nigeria

INTRODUCTION: Sexual and reproductive health of young people involve a lot of stakeholders, traverse different sectors, and cut across all levels of government. For a clearer understanding of the activities of these stakeholders in adolescent sexual and reproductive health (ASRH) services, this paper was designed to explore the positions, attitudes and involvements of government/public institutions and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in ASRH policy-making processes and implementations in Ebonyi State, Nigeria. METHODS: The evidence was generated from a cross-sectional qualitative study, with data collected through in-depth interviews and focus group discussions from 81 and 59 stakeholders in adolescent sexual and reproductive health, respectively. A mapping tool was used for the stakeholder analysis. RESULTS: The State Ministry of Health (MOH) was identified as playing a major role in ASRH policy development and so was categorized as a ‘savior’. However, out of nine public institutions, four were categorized as ‘trip wire’ because they had non-supportive attitudes, weak powers and passive interests in ASRH policies and programs. All the NGOs were categorized as ‘friend’, because of their weak, but favorable disposition to ASRH policy-making processes. Regarding the implementation of ASRH programs, most public institutions were categorized as ‘savior’. Similarly, most of the institutions were classified as ‘trip wire’ at the local government level, in relation to ASRH policy development. Only, the offices of traditional rulers/village heads and local government administrative secretaries were regarded as ‘friend’, while the public schools were classified as an ‘acquaintance’. Concerning the implementation of ASRH programs at this level, public secondary schools, the offices of local government administrative secretaries and local government focal persons on ASRH were categorized as ‘savior’, while town union/ward development chairmen were considered ‘friend’. Few stakeholders, including, religious leaders were classified as ‘savior’ regarding engagement with local authorities on ASRH matters. CONCLUSION: Although key stakeholders appear to play supportive roles in the implementation of ASRH programs in Ebonyi State, many of the relevant government and non-government institutions are not involved in the policy-making process. There is a need for more intentional and active involvement of relevant stakeholders in policy-making for better ownership and sustainability of ASRH interventions.