Limited availability of AGYW for enrollment after school let out

Considerable time needed to administer baseline and HIV/GBV risk forms

Requirement for written parental consent for almost all AGYW (aged 9–19 years) added several weeks to the preparation time for beginning activities

Requirement for constant Internet access and equipment to review records to identify duplicate IDs

Considerable time needed to develop formal agreements with colleges to allow for DREAMS recruitment reduced program access for these AGYW

Difficulties identifying and establishing safe spaces for peer mentoring

Labor-intensive tracking of attendance for funder reporting reduced time for improving program quality

Outdated curricula and AGYW reports that format was insufficiently engaging

Variable levels of prior training and facilitation experience of peer mentors who delivered sessions and mentors were often in their first professional position

Delayed consensus on what curriculum to use for women aged 20–24 years

Stock-outs of commodities during implementation

Challenges and considerable time to transition to implementation of AGYW-preferred community-based PrEP follow-up versus follow-up at clinics

Lack of Government of Namibia–finalized national PrEP implementation plan (at the time)

Refusal of some schools to allow family planning services for AGYW and lack of sexual and reproductive health in school health policy

Lack of communication to all levels of government about DREAMS program objectives

Insufficient number of MoGEPESW staff to handle GBV referrals from DREAMS

Considerable access issue for postrape care in Namibia, which is centralized at GBV units located only at large tertiary hospitals

Considerable time and effort to transport AGYW to GBV units and to provide other assistance

Substantial staff time needed to implement psychosocial interventions and counseling for any AGYW that screened positive for GBV

Lack of dedicated space to provide confidential psychology counseling to AGYW