1. Joint Annual Reviews an overview Finn Schleimann, IHP+ Core Team IHP+ CHTM, Siem Reap, December Based on Joint Annual Health Sector Reviews: A Review of experience (2013) Joint Annual Health Sector Reviews: Why and how to organize them (2014)

2. Key Conclusions of Review
All in favor of maintaining JAR
JARs have different modalities based on country context and have evolved over time.
JARs share common aspects: Part of annual M&E cycle; review last year’s work program; aim at improving next year’s work program; annual rather than multi-year strategic focus; become more inclusive over time.
JARs strengthen policy dialogue, alignment, accountability, implementation, and internal resource allocation.
JARs have the potential to improve plans, mobilize resources, and promote mutual accountability, and have done so in some countries.
JARs are less succesful in: improving harmonization, setting new targets/indicators, and reducing transaction cost.
25/02/2019

3. Key Conclusions of Review
Factors that determine a succesful JAR:
Government leadership and local ownership
Meaningful and wide participation
Constructive climate and open policy dialogue
Well designed performance assessment framework
Timely, good quality & properly validated data data
Capacity to perform strategic analysis
Good preparation and organization of JAR
JAR integrated in national planning cycle
Keeping inputs, processes and outputs at a managerial level
Sharing findings and recommendations with all levels & stakeholders
SMART recommendations that are followed up and tracked
25/02/2019

4. Decisions & steps preparing a JAR
Objective – e.g. last year’s performance, identify blockages, next years budget & plan, mutual accountability, reduce transactíon cost, or often a combination of two or more
Scope – whole sector, or focused, or a combination
Process, frequency & timing – including: who is responsible, once or twice a year, alternating normal and light
Data & analytical input – e.g. decide on independent team, plan studies
Detailed planning – timing of inputs, TORs for team & studies, selection of consultants, plan bmeeting itself, reporting etc
25/02/2019

5. Decisions & steps preparing a JAR
Engagement of a wide range of stakeholders – central government (also outside MoH), decentralized level, autonomous institutions, elected bodies, private sector, civil society, professional associations, media.
Outputs – e.g. report, aide-memoire (signed?)
Follow-up – aide memoir/action plan with SMART recommendations and clear institutional responsibilities, process to monitor follow-up
25/02/2019

6. Some trade-offs & Challenges
Thematic focus or not – or a combination
Independent or internal review team
Availability of data and other inputs
Balancing inclusiveness and real dialogue
Holding DPs to account
Managing demand for additional reviews and project reporting – ensure it all fit together
Use JAR findings in meaningful policy dialogue – e.g. length, timing and size of meetings
Getting JAR findings and agreements into operational plans – especially at sub-national level – and ensure follow-up
25/02/2019

7. Summary of JAR process
25/02/2019