Review of different stakeholders needs in relation to Joint Assessment of National Strategies and Plans (JANS) Preliminary Findings IHP+ Country Teams.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
4 TH IHP+ COUNTRY TEAMS MEETING: Sustaining and Accelerating Change, Getting Results December 2012 Nairobi, Kenya.
Advertisements

CCA Analysis around key national issues among: MD & MDGs Global Conferences (including BPOA) National Priorities UN Support to Nationalization of MDGs.
IATI Registry Demonstration and Country Pilot Overview Simon Parrish IATI Technical Advisory Group, DIPR July 2010.
A Big Family Now Developing countries:831 Bilateral donors:813 Int'l agencies and foundations*:1112 TOTAL2756 *African Development Bank, Bill.
KENYA HEALTH SECTOR PARTNERSHIP Third IHP+ Country Health Sector Teams Meeting Brussels, December 2010.
ENTITIES FOR A UN SYSTEM EVALUATION FRAMEWORK 17th MEETING OF SENIOR FELLOWSHIP OFFICERS OF THE UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM AND HOST COUNTRY AGENCIES BY DAVIDE.
Dr. Stuart Kean Co-Chair UK OVC Working Group Moving Upstream with Children HIV and AIDS Integrating CABA into national development instruments Inter-Agency.
Guidance Note on Joint Programming
Working Together for Greater UN Impact Repositioning the UN in a changing aid environment The case of Country xxx July 2005 Harmonization & Alignment to.
2002 CCA/UNDAF Rollout Lessons Learned from the 5 Country Teams.
Re-positioning the UN in a new aid environment. The UN response to the challenges of a new aid environment 1.Putting national strategies and plans at.
1 Module 4: Partners demand and ownership Towards more effective Capacity Development.
Track A- Developing Effective Partnerships to Roll Back Malaria Experiences and lessons.
Environment & national PRSs - directions and dilemmas EPD Seminar Series May 2002.
1 PRSp Alignment Finnish Aid in a PRS Context Helsinki Workshop May 2003.
1 Modalities for Supporting PRSs Finnish Aid in a PRS Context Helsinki Workshop May 2003.
Building Statistical Capacity To Monitor Development Progress World Bank Development Data Group.
Developing an Evaluation Strategy – experience in DFID Nick York Director – Country, Corporate and Global Evaluations, World Bank IEG Former Chief Professional.
Supporting Integrated Health Systems Strengthening A CIDA Perspective.
Progress Toward Impact Overall Performance Study of the GEF Aaron Zazueta GEF Evaluation Office Hanoi, March 10, 2010.
Results Reporting by Donor Agencies (DAC/WP EFF – Cluster MfDR) Presented by Adrian Maître, SDC, and Daniel Low-Beer, GFATM EU Expert Group on Results,
Environmental Mainstreaming Mainstreaming environmental linkages into national development planning and the UNDAF In plain language… Understanding the.
Julian Lob-Levyt Health Systems Funding Platform update ECOSOC Coordination Segment United Nations Headquarters, 6 July 2010.
Feedback Mechanisms in Malawi Key challenges and way forward Ministry of Finance and Development Planning MALAWI.
Elaine Ireland Policy Adviser: Global Health Global Health Policy Forum 9 th September 2010 Aid Effectiveness in the Health Sector: A civil society perspective.
Global Poverty Action Fund Community Partnership Window Funding Seminar January 2014 Global Poverty Action Fund Community Partnership Window Funding Seminar.
Improvement Service / Scottish Centre for Regeneration Project: Embedding an Outcomes Approach in Community Regeneration & Tackling Poverty Effectively.
Australia’s Experience in Utilising Performance Information in Budget and Management Processes Mathew Fox Assistant Secretary, Budget Coordination Branch.
What has changed in 5 years ? Strengthening Accountability to Achieve the Health MDGs Nairobi, 12 th December 2012 Overview of progress in implementing.
Presentation title goes here this is dummy text Joint Office : -What have we learned?- “Delivering as One” through Joint Programming and Joint Programmes.
Overview of UNDAF process and new guidance package March 2010 u nite and deliver effective support for countries.
TITLE from VIEW and SLIDE MASTER | 27 July 2006 AID EFFECTIVENESS FOR HEALTH: TOWARDS THE 4TH HIGH-LEVEL FORUM, BUSAN AID EFFECTIVENESS FOR HEALTH.
Joint Assessment of National Strategic Plans JANS: assessing a sector strategy with an in-depth review of programme specific strategies Sudan experience.
SECTOR POLICY SUPPORT PROGRAMMES A new methodology for delivery of EC development assistance. 1.
1 Development Partners Group (DPG) DP Induction Seminar August
5 th IHP+ CHTM: conclusions and messages Very participatory meeting – suggests right topics were covered Reviewed progress over past 2 years on the seven.
Development partnership in the education sector Mokoro Seminar 24 January 2014.
Project Overview, Objectives, Components and Targeted Outcomes
Michalis Adamantiadis Transport Policy Adviser, SSATP SSATP Capacity Development Strategy Annual Meeting, December 2012.
What makes a successful development project? Kristin Olsen IOD PARC
IHP+: introduction and ministerial review Action for Global Health Conference Strengthening Accountability to Achieve the Health MDGs Madrid, 7 th June.
SECTOR-WIDE APPROACH – a Planning Tool for Samoa Ms. Makerita Luatimu – Tiotio (Public Administration Sector Coordinator) Mr. Talatalaga Matau – (ACEO:
BCO Communication Strategy: An initial set of proposals James Deane BCO Impact Assessment meeting Johannesburg, 4-5 December 2006.
Towards Universal Access Scaling up HIV Prevention, Treatment, Care and Support: The Role of the United Nations.
Module 4: Partners’ demand and ownership Supporting change through Capacity Development.
International Health Policy Program -Thailand Reflection on experience in using JANS with sector strategy Phusit Prakongsai, MD. Ph.D. International Health.
Embassy of Sweden, Lusaka Working together for greater impact: Sweden’s collaboration with the Southern African Development Community (SADC) Francis Mangani.
European Commission Joint Evaluation Unit common to EuropeAid, Relex and Development Methodology for Evaluation of Budget support operations at Country.
1 SUPPLY DIVISION Procurement and Supply Management Technical Assistance.
Vito Cistulli - FAO -1 Damascus, 2 July 2008 FAO Assistance to Member Countries and the Changing Aid Environment.
IHP+ Financial Management Technical Working Group One year after formation FMTWG (Nov 2015)
IDEAS Global Assembly 2011 Evaluation in Times of Turbulence Amman, April 2011 EVALUATION OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PARIS DECLARATION ON AID.
Kathy Corbiere Service Delivery and Performance Commission
UPDATE ON GAVI ALLIANCE, THE GLOBAL FUND AND WORLD BANK COLLABORATIVE EFFORT FOR MORE EFFECTIVE HSS SEPTEMBER, 2009 Exploring a potential common platform.
REVIEW OF JAR EXPERIENCES MAIN FINDINGS IHP+ Nairobi Meeting December
IAIA Prague 2005: International Experience and Perspectives in SEA: Session B1: SEA in Poverty Reduction Strategies Success Factors in Integrating Environment.
Slide 1 Civil Society Policy and Practice in Donor Agencies GSDRC study commissioned by DFID, February 2010 Size and position for cover image Lone Sorensen,
Folie 1 Sarajevo, October 2009 Stefan Friedrichs Managing Partner Public One // Governance Consulting Project Management in the Public Sector Monitoring.
RCUK International Funding Name Job title Research Councils UK.
“Delivering as One” through Joint Programming and Joint Programmes
PROCUREMENT FIDUCIARY ARRANGEMENTS IN SECTOR-WIDE APPROACHES (SWAps)
Environmental Mainstreaming
SWAPs: Based on Lessons Mainly from Morocco and Zambia
International Health Partnership (IHP+)
IHP+ First Steering Committee Meeting 15 January 2014
Preparations for post-2020 Impact Assessment European Commission Directorate General for Regional and Urban Policy Unit DGA Policy.
Statistics Governance and Quality Assurance: the Experience of FAO
General Principles Align with country systems whenever they meet the minimum acceptable level. Harmonize among development partners, when all or part of.
Abebe Alebachew 12th December 2012 Nairobi, Kenya
Primary Health Care Improvement Global Stakeholder Meting, Geneva
Presentation transcript:

Review of different stakeholders needs in relation to Joint Assessment of National Strategies and Plans (JANS) Preliminary Findings IHP+ Country Teams Meeting, 12 – 14 th December 2012 Nairobi, Kenya

Introduction The objectives are: – to identify the needs of the different stakeholder groups with regards to assessment of a new strategy; – Analyse the extent to which these needs are met by current JANS practice, and the opportunities and constraints to achieving greater harmonisation of development partner procedures for assessing national strategies and alignment of these to country processes and needs; – To set out preliminary suggestions on how to proceed based on this analysis Process – Interviews with countries, development partners and CSOs – Document review of lessons from existing JANS Preliminary findings only available as interviews incomplete 1.Lessons from document review 2.Lessons from interviews and questionnaires with development partners

Lessons from document review: Evidence that the JANS influenced funding decisions Very limited evidence to date that health sector JANS has actually contributed to funding decisions: – bilaterals usually already involved in a SWAp in IHP+ countries – GAVI: JANS necessary but insufficient for funding decisions and requires IRC to confirm that weaknesses have been addressed – GFATM: disease specific JANS were used for national strategy first wave funding decisions. Intention was to continue for second wave and HSFP but subsequent funding opportunities were postponed Some evidence that JANS impacted on the mode of funding that DPs use: – a JANS approved plan can serve as one of several criteria that some DPs will use in determining HOW they will channel resources to country – but DPs will still require additional decision making processes Strong evidence that assessment of fiduciary arrangements is needed alongside JANS - intention of JANS is to provide an overview on this – some DPs will always need more rigorous financial management appraisal than others but this process could be better harmonised

Preliminary lessons from DP questionnaires: How development partners use JANS in funding decisions Direct IndirectNo decision Replaced requirement for existing assessment Fed into existing assessment process and reduced elements Additional assurance for a funding decision that would have been taken anyway Participated in JANS but no immediate impact on funding decision DFID Nepal, Ethiopia, Malawi German Development Cooperation, Malawi World Bank Nepal GAVI Vietnam, Malawi German Development Cooperation Rwanda UNFPA EthiopiaMany examples: German Development Cooperation World Bank Netherlands European Commission UN agencies

Preliminary lessons from DP interviews: How DPs assess national health strategies Criteria for Assessing a Strategy – Most DPs use generic guidance for assessing national health strategies – DPs do not have health strategy specific criteria – General DP view that scope of JANS is useful but not sufficient for funding decisions – provides additional evidence and assurance of quality of strategy Format of assessment – Most DPs have a format for programme documentation that agency staff complete – No specific format for national strategy assessment (largely because no formal guidance for national strategy assessment) Who appraises? – For most DPs, staff conduct appraisal (or consultants) – Some have formal peer review requirement – e.g. World Bank – Global Fund requires independence in appraisal

Preliminary findings from DP interviews: JANS and other key elements of a funding decision Scope of JANS Development partners broadly positive on scope Financial management assessment is required but outside scope and intention of JANS Level of detail Implementation arrangements and institutional capacity – These are covered in JANS but some agencies require more detail because national health strategy and JANS are high level and do not include operational plans Results focus is increasing significantly among most DPs – All development partners under huge pressure to demonstrate results – Some national health strategies and JANS assessment need more detail – JANS tool covers results in a number of places – potential for clearer focus? Process Political considerations are as important as technical – particularly for bilateral donors who are increasingly sensitive to political risk Timing of DP funding decisions a out of sync with sector strategy/JANS

Preliminary lessons from DP interviews: DPs use JANS in different ways Bilateral donors and multilateral development banks – Usually have a resident advisor if they are in the sector and therefore participate already in harmonised sector processes, JARs, MTRs, etc – JANS used by development partners to provide reassurance of quality strategy, to persuade headquarters of quality strategy, and if no country presence to provide evidence and assurance of quality strategy – marginal impact on transaction costs Global funds/initiatives – Usually not resident and driven by global assessment processes – Highly focused on particular results but increasingly aware that sector approach is needed to deliver specific outcomes – Potential for reduced transaction costs but need to balance local flexibility and harmonisation with an expectation of global quality standards UN agencies – Highly focused on results – Still have their own budgeting timelines – eg WHO biannual budget – May be more focused on other aid effectiveness priorities – UNDAF etc

How could DPs maximise use of JANS? Options with direct impact on content and use of existing JANS: – Clearer articulation of results required in national strategies and in JANS – for all DPs – Consistent quality and rigour of health strategies and JANS – Shifting the timing of DP funding decisions to link with country strategy development process Options within a wider context that indirectly impacts on use of JANS: – Increasing harmonisation of and shared responsibility for financial management assessment, linked to JANS process – Clearer links between health strategies and implementation plans and assessment of capacity to deliver – Specific focus on articulation of results of interest to global funds (HIV, malaria, immunisation, MDG4/5) JANS are new – more and improved use could lead to greater confidence in JANS and greater role informing decision making