1. Dr Wiktor Szydarowski Freelance consultant NDPHS SWG meeting Stockholm, 10 February 2015 Progress in developing the NDPHS Strategy 2020

2. Architecture of the NDPHS Strategy 2020 © Wiktor Szydarowski Promote sustainable development in the Northern Dimension area through improving human health and social wellbeing OVERALL OBJECTIVE SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES RESULTS TARGET GROUPS ACTIVITIES Cross-sectorial action Health equity and social cohesion in all actions Innovative approaches and technologies, such as e- Health The ‘Health in All Policies’ approach Inclusion of vulnerable groups in all actions of relevance CROSS-CUTTING OBJECTIVES Added value Bottom-up processes combined with top-down approaches Co-financing Multi-sectorality GUIDING PRINCIPLES

3. The footprint of the NDPHS © Wiktor Szydarowski OVERALL OBJECTIVE Outcome of actions taken by all relevant organisations SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE Specific outcome to which the NDPHS contributes through the change that the NDPHS is able to generate RESULT Changes in the target group to which the NDPHS contributes to (first part of the specific objective) ACTIVITY Specific action(s) taken by the NDPHS Promote sustainable development in the Northern Dimension area through improving human health and social wellbeing OVERALL OBJECTIVE Objective 1: Strengthened prevention and reduced impact of HIV, TB and associated infections among key populations at risk, including prisoners Objective 2: Contained antimicrobial resistance - through inter-sectoral efforts supporting the implementation of regional and global strategies and/or action plans Objective 3: Reduced impact of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) - through strengthened prevention and addressing lifestyle-related risk factors Objective 4: Reduced social and health harm from alcohol, tobacco and illicit use of drugs - through strengthening and promotion of multi-sectoral approaches Objective 5: Adequately addressed health needs related to chronic conditions and demographic changes – through strengthened integration and coordination of care and prevention throughout life course at primary care level Objective 6: Strengthened occupational safety and health and well-being at work - through information and reporting systems, workplace activities and occupational health services 6 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES NDPHS STRATEGY INDIRECT RESULT Changes induced by the NDPHS in the work of policy stakeholders (second part of the specific objective) DIRECT RESULT

4. Current stage © Wiktor Szydarowski SWG meeting, October 14 – ft. 3 rd draft & raw inputs to Action Plan Guidance after the SWG meeting on designing the Action Plan Updated Action Plan drafts received from EG/TGs by 15 January 2015 Drafting team meeting, Tallinn, 21 January 2015 Restructuring and processing work 4 th draft distributed on 2 February 2015, incl. consolidated Action Plan Discussion on quality and further steps

5. Capital in building the Action Plan © Wiktor Szydarowski KNOWLEDGE OF INSTRUMENTS RATIONALE FOR EACH SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE IN NDPHS STRATEGY 2030 What kind of instruments do the stakeholders work with? Is the scope/range/quality/number sufficient? What kind of instruments can the NDPHS use to improve this situation? Which areas should the NDPHS Strategy focus upon to allow for visibility of results? Presents issues of concern (challenges, problems) for the NDPHS area Informs about stakeholders in need Shows the way the NDPH may contribute to alleviating the challenges/problems May help set indirect and direct results Whom may the NDPHS Strategy 2020 address (target groups in the population)? Which policy stakeholders should the NDPHS mobilise to joint work (organisations and institutions, external projects, experts etc.)? What are interests, priorities, and awareness of the policy stakeholders? KNOWLEDGE OF ACTORS NDPHS EXPERIENCE Has the NDPHS been successful in achieving some visible results in the past period? Why/ why not? Has the NDPHS added value been recognised? NDPHS RESOURCES Staff Time Money

6. Reflections © Wiktor Szydarowski Process far from being completed Relatively good understanding of direct results EG/TGs tend to present their own perspective rather than holistic view on how to implement the specific objective(s) Several inputs resembling annual implementation plans based on available resources Not all EG/TGs responding to the inquiries Overlapping thematic scopes of EG/TGs hampering the drafting work Varying approaches: (1) what needs to be done; (2) what we do already now, e.g. a project; (3) what exists and may be followed, e.g. higher level guidelines

7. Outstanding issues (1) © Wiktor Szydarowski General aspects Formulation of specific objectives Structure of the information in the Action Plan Designation of the prison health issues in the Action Plan: high ambitions but are resources available? Input from the NDPHS Secretariat: on visibility and overall actions

8. Outstanding issues (2) © Wiktor Szydarowski Indirect results As the inputs received from the EGs/TGs have been extremely diverse, instead of developing a table with indicators and targets for the indirect results, a plain description of the purpose of the NDPHS work has been made

9. Outstanding issues (3) © Wiktor Szydarowski Consistency Some expected results still deemed unrealistic seeing the planned activities Imprecise delineation of activities under objectives: 3, 4 and 5 due to overlaps in the scope of work between NCD, ASA and PPHS EG/TGs Division of work between the EG/TGs to implement the objectives? Role of the Secretariat?

10. Outstanding issues (4) © Wiktor Szydarowski Baselines and targets No estimate figures in many areas Some EGs/TGs tend to project the targets for the expected results for 2020 rather than for 2017

11. Outstanding issues (5) © Wiktor Szydarowski Deliverables The understanding differs. Under a few specific objectives the EG/TG group meetings are listed, which calls for a more general discussion if such meetings (with or without participation of external stakeholders) should be regarded a deliverable on its own

12. Outstanding issues (6) © Wiktor Szydarowski Resources Specification of resources (in connection to challenges, assumptions and risks) is vague. Shall these be estimated in monetary terms or just generally listed (as in the current form)?

13. Thank you for your attention! wiktor@szydarowski.com wiktor@szydarowski.com