The current context of NSP processes

1
The current context of NSP processes

• Zambia RBM workshop
• 26 28 August 2009

2
Why national strategic plans?

• While NSPs and OP do not automatically enhance
  prevention, care, treatment and mitigation, they
  are meant to
• Set clear national priorities and align external
  support to them
• Respond to the heterogeneity of the epidemic
• To be translated into action
• Ensure an important role for civil society and
  communities and a multi-sectoral response
• Implement the three ones principle
• Attract and sustain funding

3
Some weaknesses of NSPs

• Weak Evidence base prioritization
• Weak match between epidemic response
• Weak alignment linkages with other plans (PRSP,
  Health, ME, )
• Not Results based (activities )
• Weak Resource estimates Costing, resource
  mobilization strategies
• Weak Institutional design human resources
  (roles, responsibilities accountability)
• Insufficient identification of Capacity
  Technical support needs
• Weak monitoring review processes systems
• Weak basis for Operational planning

4
NSP planning chaos some causes

• 1. Use of multiple Planning methodologies
• - Planning by objectives
• - Log frame approach
• RBM
• Mixed approaches

2. Partners planning practices priorities UN /
UNDAF, MAP, GF, PEPFAR, Bi-laterals, etc
NSP
5. Lack of evidence use of evidence
4. In-country planning practices Consultants

• 3. Non harmonized NSP/NOP guidance
• - UNAIDS 1998 guidance
• Guidance on ME of national programs
• ASAP tools guidance

5
What is clear

• Using different methodologies, concepts and
  approaches to planning
• Lack of evidence and the use of evidence in
  planning and plans

6

Examples of planning methods in Zambia
7
Comprehensive review of evidence
8
(No Transcript)
9
Use of evidence decision making

• Translating evidence in plans prioritize
  decide

Information
Decision makers
Decisions
10
Getting ready to use evidence for planning

• 1) Is sufficient evidence available?
• Criteria to assess sufficient?
• If not, get it
• 2) Is evidence analysed, summarized, translated
  in recommendations for policy planning in an
  accessible understandable format?
• What formats
• If not do it
• 3) Do policy makers planners know, understand
  and approve of the evidence?
• Have policy makers endorsed/agreed, validated the
  evidence (against political, social, cultural,
  religious, .. norms)
• If not, inform them and get the buy-in
• 4) Is evidence widely available and shared with
  all stakeholders
• Discussed, validated, harmonised with experience
  based and local knowledge
• If not, do
• Are we ready to embark on evidence based
  planning

11
Summary of key Challenges .

• 1. Planning for planning purposes but not Making
  the Money Work
• 2. Evidence is not being accessed, shared and
  used for planning
• 3. Prioritisation doesnt take place
• 4. Weak participation, ownership and
  multi-sectoral agreement
• 5. Lack of accountability of various partners
• 6. Absence of capacity assessment
• 7. Gap between planning and ME

12
Key issues to consider

• Speaking the same language - Well defined
  planning methodology that everyone can understand
  and apply
• Use of evidence during the planning stage
• Prioritisation based on strategic choices
  informed by
• evidence, capacity, policy, etc
• Participation of key players throughout the
  planning process
• Collective and organisational accountability of
  shared results
• Implementation based on realistic assessment of
  capacity
• Rigorous and regular measurement of programme
  achievements to
• demonstrate results and Make the Money Work
• Focus our plans to fulfill peoples Human Rights

13
What are we seeking?

• We want SMART, strategic results, that add value
  to the achievement of national priorities.
• We also want results information to be used to
  influence decisions and improve performance.
• We want to report on our results so we can
  mobilise further resources.
• We want to fill our capacity gaps to ensure a
  fully operational plan.

14
The essence of RBM

• The essence of RBM is managing
• so that intended results are achieved.
• Management FOR Results
• Management OF Results

15
How RBM can help

• It is a well defined methodology
• Focus is on results, accountability, change,
  (collective understanding responsibility)
• Using the logical, causal chain for translating
  evidence into results
• Helps prioritisation and decision making
• Better allocation of resources according to
  results
• Greater accountability
• Allows better monitoring and evaluation
• Greater harmonization alignment
• It is the planning standard for UN and being
  promoted in PRSP, ME systems, UNDAF, UNJT/UNJP
  

16
Proposition

• This is the proposition we are making . What do
  you think?