Transcript Document

COUNTRY INFORMATION
AND ACCOUNTABILITY
PLATFORM
IHP+ STEERING COMMITTEE
MEETING
20 JUNE 2014
Monitoring Results & Accountability
IHP+ country-led platform for
information & accountability

Framework & characteristics



Technical framework used by many countries in development of 5-year health sector
strategic plans



Developed by WHO, World Bank, GAVI & GF in consultation with countries
Published in 2011
Strengths: focus on core indicators with targets, results, regular reviews
Weaknesses: data gaps including quality, suboptimal use of data in reviews and planning,
lack of institutional involvement outside MOH, poor alignment of program plans and
reviews with national plan
Partner alignment with country framework



Investment of partners in different components
Increasing discussion and some action to strengthen the performance of the national
platform (data quality, fill data gaps)
Some efforts to use the national platform for global reporting
Accountability framework for women’s
and children’s health

10 recommendations of Commission in 2011
75 countries, 63 completed assessment and national roadmaps; received
catalytic resources ($250,000 in phase I)

Focus on:




Results:



Health with special attention for RMNCH (IHP+ influence), even though there are
many new RMNCH initiatives
Monitoring of results, tracking of resources, CRVS, MDSR, e & mHealth, reviews
and advocacy
Accountability framework (monitoring, review, action) resonates well
Strengthening of components such as better M&E component of national health
strategy, eHealth strategy, new MDSR guidelines implemented, national health
accounts with subaccounts, CRVS “revolution”
Discussions about a second phase for countries
Global Health Agency Leaders
Indicators & reporting requirements


WG established with 19 agencies, led by WHO
and WB to reduce reporting burden for countries
Rapid review of the burden completed with 12
countries, plus inventory of global agency
requirements
Diagnosis
Momentum
Impediments
Possible actions
1 Too many indicators for
countries
Willingness to reduce
indicators, more emphasis
on quality
Demand for more results,
more disaggregation and
accountability
Agree upon global core set
of indicators
2 Reporting requirements
are diverse and multiple
Willingness of partners to
align
Demand for results and
emphasis on “tit-for-tat”
accountability (specific
results for specified
external resources)
Agreement by partners to
support one national
platform for information &
accountability that meets
IHP+ criteria
2a Poor country systems
alignment between M&E
of health sector and
disease plans
More focus on a smaller set
of indicators and targets
Verticalization of
programs, fuelled by
separate funding streams
Ensure better alignment
between plans (IHP+
behaviours)
3 Investments in M&E
systems are fragmented
and inefficient
Awareness of the need to
support systems and
address data availability
and quality gaps;
innovative approaches
possible
Program-specific
approaches lead to
fragmentation;
Strengthen alignment of
M&E investments, including
DQ, in support of national
M&E platform, including
innovative approaches
Global Health Agency Leaders
Indicators & reporting requirements



WG established with 19 agencies, led by WHO and
WB to reduce reporting burden for countries
Rapid review of the burden completed with 12
countries, plus inventory of global agency requirements
Way forward
Develop global list of core indicators
 Focus on countries: work together and make alignment in
support of national platform real along the lines of the IHP+
framework for information and accountability: requires
country leadership, supported by partners
