ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: A Quality Assurance model was rolled out in Bihar, India. It had two components: external and internal monitoring and giving feedback for action. The parameters included infrastructure and policy, equipment maintenance, stock supply and aseptic measures. METHODS: The performance and gradation into good/average/poor was measured based on the scores translated from the data collected after giving appropriate weights. RESULTS: 12%, 63%, and 25% units were categorized as good, average and poor based on infrastructure. For equipment, 68% of units performed poorly; for stock maintenance 64% and 35% of NBCCs fell under good and average categories respectively; most (54%) NBCCs had average scores for aseptic measures; 30% fell in the poor category. CONCLUSIONS: Involvement of government in monitoring and feedback mechanism, establishing a system of data collection at the grass root level and analysis at the state level were the positive outcomes.
