Fellowship: Digital Health & AI Leadership

This six-month, mentored Fellowship is the apex of the ADHA pathway: a competitive cohort of 25 to 30 mid-career clinicians, informaticians, policymakers, regulators, investors, and founders who will govern, finance, and build Africa's digital health future rather than merely operate within it. Across nine modules you move beyond tools and concepts to institutional craft. You will diagnose a national digital health ecosystem and design enforceable strategy that binds procurement; stand up governance institutions, regulation, sandboxes, and certification; build a full-lifecycle cost model that defeats the donor cliff; govern frontier AI through local validation, bias audit, and the WHO principles; and take a homegrown venture from verified problem to evidence-led scale against the quintuple aim.

The program culminates in a mentored, real-world capstone, defended before an expert panel. Fellows graduate able to lead change in a digitizing workforce and to sit at the table where digital health is decided.

Capstone and practicum framework

The Fellowship is capstone-based and mentored. Over six months each Fellow carries one real-world capstone from problem to board-ready defense, supported by a named expert mentor, peer review, and the eight modules above.

Capstone tracks (choose one, anchored to a real institution or venture):

• National/sub-national strategy — an enforceable digital health strategy or strategy component (architecture, standards mandate, governance design) for a real jurisdiction.
• Financing and sustainability case — a five-to-ten-year TCO model and domestication/transition plan that defeats the donor cliff for a real system.
• Governance and regulation design — a lead-authority charter, sandbox protocol, or certification scheme for a real ecosystem.
• AI/data deployment governance — a local-validation, bias-audit, and deployment-checklist package for a real algorithmic tool under the WHO six principles.
• Venture plan — a clinical-grade, ecosystem-aligned go-to-market and financing plan for a real homegrown solution, scored against the quintuple aim.

Practicum structure (6 months):

• Month 1 — Problem definition and ecosystem assessment. A baselined problem statement and structured assessment of governance, assets, data flows, people, and financing; mentor and track assignment.
• Months 2–3 — Design. Strategy/architecture, governance, financing, or venture design developed against the modules; first peer-review checkpoint.
• Month 4 — Coalition and alignment. Engagement of the eventual owner/buyer (ministry unit, insurer, regulator, or anchor customer); alignment with the national architecture documented as a deliverable.
• Month 5 — Evidence and MEL. A theory of change with adoption, performance, and equity indicators and pre-committed decision rules; second peer-review checkpoint.
• Month 6 — Institutionalization plan and defense. A dated ownership-transfer/sustainability schedule; final capstone document and oral defense before an expert panel.

Mentorship and peer learning: Each Fellow has a named mentor (a practicing leader in their track), participates in monthly cohort seminars and South–South peer exchange, and presents at two formal review checkpoints before the final defense. The cohort of 25–30 is itself a deliberate professional network — the leadership cadre the governance stack most needs.

---

Assessment rubric

Capstones and Fellow performance are assessed against six weighted criteria. Each is scored 1 (Emerging) – 4 (Exemplary); a passing capstone scores ≥ 3 on every criterion and a weighted total ≥ 75%.

#	Criterion	Weight	Emerging (1)	Proficient (3)	Exemplary (4)
1	Problem definition & evidence	15%	Problem asserted, no baseline	Baselined, ecosystem-verified problem statement	Quantified baseline with a defined improvement and decision rules
2	Strategic alignment	15%	Stands outside national architecture	Aligned to national strategy/architecture	Alignment leveraged as financing, governance, and market strategy
3	Governance & trust	20%	Governance unaddressed	Lawful basis, security, and accountable institution specified	Full trust stack: enforceable rules, sovereignty, sandbox/certification fit
4	Financial sustainability	20%	CapEx-only, no recurrent costs	Five-to-ten-year TCO with a domestication plan	Named instruments and dates; donor cliff demonstrably defeated
5	Scale, MEL & institutionalization	15%	Pilot-only thinking	Design-for-scale + adoption/performance/equity MEL	Dated ownership-transfer checklist; learning institutionalized
6	Leadership & defense	15%	Unable to defend choices	Clear, evidence-argued defense; equity and change addressed	Withstands expert challenge; board-ready; mentors peers

Formative components (gate the capstone but are not separately weighted): module knowledge checks; two peer-review checkpoints; mentor sign-off at each practicum milestone; and a professional-conduct expectation (confidentiality, attribution, and honest evidence) consistent with the ethics tier.

---

Course glossary

• Adaptive management — short review cycles against pre-set decision rules, with the authority to adapt, stop, or scale an intervention.
• Alignment — placing an intervention inside the national architecture and strategy so it inherits financing, governance, and scale pathways.
• Augmentation architecture — deploying AI as triage/second reader under clinical governance with human escalation and audit, as added capacity rather than replacement.
• Capability ladder — the required sequence of data quality and use culture, then statistics, then machine learning, on which analytics is built.
• Certification regime — testing solutions against the standards catalogue and security baseline to give procurement and partners a quality signal.
• Clinical-grade MVP — a minimum viable product additionally constrained by clinical safety, data-protection compliance, and frontline workflow fit.
• Computer-aided detection (CAD) — AI reading medical images; WHO-recommended for TB screening/triage in those aged 15+.
• Decision rules — pre-committed criteria, set before piloting, that determine whether to scale, stop, or redesign.
• Domestication — migrating a system's core operating costs onto durable domestic instruments before external financing recedes.
• Donor cliff — service collapse when grants end and no domestic instrument has absorbed the recurring costs; a design failure, not a financing failure.
• Enforceability — the quality by which a strategy binds procurement and partner behavior rather than merely inspiring.
• Frugal innovation — engineering for affordability, robustness, and existing infrastructure, gaining advantage from constraint.
• Gender digital gap — the systematic disadvantage of women in device access, connectivity, digital confidence, and digital-role advancement.
• Health information exchange (HIE) — the governed (technical, legal, institutional) capability for moving health data between systems and organizations.
• HL7 FHIR — the modern global standard for exchanging health data through web-based APIs.
• Institutionalization — the dated transfer of every life function (budget, staffing, maintenance, governance, data ownership) from project to government.
• Lead digital health authority — the directorate, agency, or statutory body owning strategy execution, architecture, and standards.
• Local validation — testing an AI model on the local population before clinical use to confirm safe, equitable performance.
• Malabo Convention — the AU's continental treaty on cyber security and personal data protection, in force 2023.
• Multi-stakeholder governance council — a legitimate cross-sector decision venue aligning government, professions, academia, private sector, partners, and civil society.
• NASSS framework — a model locating scale failure in accumulating complexity across condition, technology, value, adopters, organization, and wider system.
• Pilotitis — the failure pattern in which projects launch as pilots and terminate when project funding ends, never integrating into national systems.
• Procurement lever — making compliance with the national standards catalogue a condition of sale, the sharpest tool for driving adoption.
• Quintuple aim — population health, experience of care, per-capita cost, workforce well-being, and health equity; the scorecard for health ventures.
• Regulatory sandbox — a supervised environment where innovations operate under defined scope while evidence and regulation co-develop.
• Software/AI as a medical device (SaMD) — software or algorithmic tools regulated as medical devices through extended classification pathways.
• State as market-maker — sandboxes, standards/certification, procurement quality, and digital public infrastructure as a venture's operating environment.
• Total cost of ownership (TCO) — the full five-to-ten-year lifecycle cost, including recurrent operation, support, training, and replacement.
• Trust stack — the layered foundation of legal protection, cybersecurity, sovereignty, and accountable institutions on which digital health trust rests.
• WHO six AI-ethics principles — autonomy; well-being & safety; transparency & explainability; accountability; inclusiveness & equity; responsive & sustainable AI.

Frequently asked questions

Q: Who is this Fellowship for, and how is it different from the lower ADHA tiers? A: It is for a competitive cohort of 25–30 mid-career leaders — clinicians, informaticians, ministry officials, regulators, investors, and founders — who will govern, finance, and build digital health rather than only operate within it. Lower tiers teach tools and concepts; the Fellowship teaches institutional craft (enforceable strategy, financing domestication, AI governance, venture scale) through a mentored, board-defended capstone. The CEU value is listed as 0 because the Fellowship's currency is the capstone, the network, and the leadership credential rather than contact-hour credits.

Q: I am not a clinician — can I succeed here? A: Yes. The Fellowship is deliberately interdisciplinary. Its central thesis is that digital health is governed and built by people who understand health systems, technology, law, public administration, and enterprise together — and the cohort is strongest when it mixes those backgrounds. Non-clinical Fellows (engineers, economists, lawyers, public administrators, founders) bring exactly the scarce skills the governance and venture tracks need.

Q: What is the single most important idea the Fellowship teaches? A: That scale is an institutional condition, not an event — a system is at scale only when its functioning no longer depends on any particular project, person, or donor. Every module (governance, financing, AI, venture, workforce) is a different route to that one destination, and the capstone is assessed against it.

Q: How concretely does the program prevent the "donor cliff"? A: By making full-lifecycle (TCO) costing and a four-instrument domestication plan — government budget, governed donor transition, health-financing integration, and disciplined PPPs — a graded capstone deliverable. Fellows learn that the transition plan, naming which instrument absorbs which cost by when, belongs in the funding proposal, not the exit report. The donor cliff is treated as a design failure with a known cure.

Q: Does the Fellowship cover AI, and how does it avoid the hype? A: Yes — Module 6 governs the evidence-graded frontier (WHO-recommended TB CAD, SMART guidelines, genomic surveillance, drone logistics) under an augmentation architecture and a data-quality-first capability ladder. Fellows learn to mandate local validation and bias audits, apply the WHO six principles and the AU AI strategy, and build the human, data, and institutional capacity to own intelligence rather than merely host it.

Q: What does the capstone defense involve? A: Each Fellow defends a real-world capstone (strategy, financing case, governance design, AI deployment governance, or venture plan) before an expert panel, scored on six weighted criteria: problem definition and evidence, strategic alignment, governance and trust, financial sustainability, scale/MEL/institutionalization, and leadership and defense. A passing capstone scores at least Proficient on every criterion and withstands expert challenge.

Q: How is mentorship structured over the six months? A: Each Fellow is paired with a named mentor who is a practicing leader in their chosen track, supported by monthly cohort seminars, South–South peer exchange, and two formal peer-review checkpoints before the final defense. The cohort itself is designed as a durable professional network — the interdisciplinary leadership cadre the governance stack most needs.

Q: How does the Fellowship handle equity and the workforce, beyond the technology? A: It treats people as the system and technology as the amplifier. Module 8 trains Fellows to lead change by managing the user's value equation, to build a data-use culture through institutional rituals, and to close the gender digital gap deliberately — because in a workforce that is majority women on the frontline, an equity gap is a performance ceiling. Equity is also a scored dimension of the capstone (in strategic alignment and MEL).