1. Marjolaine Nicod, IHP+ Core Team
What has been the experience of IHP+? IHP+ Steering Committee meeting Geneva 8 April 2016
Marjolaine Nicod, IHP+ Core Team

3. Purpose of IHP+
More effective development cooperation in health: aligning for better results
IHP+ signatories committing to support a single country-led national health strategy and move towards using country systems
=> Are we walking the talk?

4. Impact on the ground Slow progress – but move in good direction:
Strong government ownership and leadership
More confidence in quality of national health strategies, improved policy dialogue and partnership
IHP+ results 2014: better performance in countries with earlier IHP+ membership
Process requiring persistence, context specificity and sustained efforts
Contribution to health outcomes not easy to demonstrate…
… but principles relevant for strengthening systems – planning, management, accountability for results

5. How is IHP+ making a difference?
Strong buy-in: more than 60, plus CSOs (up from 27 in 2007)
Country leadership through IHP+ Compact: 37 countries and 29 development partners
Increasing participation in monitoring: 31 countries in 2016, up from 24 countries (2014), 19 countries (2012) and 10 countries (2010)
Feedback from countries: a useful input into multi-stakeholder policy dialogue + contribution to enhance the profile /quality of performance monitoring
High level political attention: ministerial-level support (e.g. Japan/Germany’s inputs at UNGA 2015 and G7), GHALs

6. Legacy of IHP+
Advocacy around norms/principles: institutionalising good practice through the Seven Behaviours
A open platform for inclusive dialogue and exchange
Greater participation of civil society in health policy processes
Transparency and accountability: IHP+ results, the largest database on development cooperation in health
Practical tools to support alignment in planning, management and monitoring: e.g. JANS, M&E platform
Strong country ownership and country focus

7. Good working arrangements
A coalition of the willing
A non-bureaucratic flexible structure
A lean team across two organisations
Good use of communication and social media
Knowledge products
Ability to seize windows of opportunities: leveraging GHAL meetings, reaching out to CoIA

8. If IHP+ did not exist, we would need to invent it

9. How can IHP+ do better
Need for a more inclusive partnership (e.g. middle-income countries)
Meaningful engagement of non-state actors an imperative – focus on the purpose / mechanisms
More important than ever to focus on strengthening country systems: most resources for health mobilised domestically; Ebola experience
Rethink strategic role of development cooperation/external finance and use of different modalities
Anchor IHP+ results in country processes , avoiding multiple reporting requirements and link with SDG monitoring
Strengthen focus on results and generate evidence
How best to sustain political momentum while nurturing a vibrant community of practice?

10. What do countries think?