Transcript Review of JAR experiences Main findings

1
REVIEW OF JAR EXPERIENCES
MAIN FINDINGS
IHP+ Nairobi Meeting
December 11-14 2012
2
Introduction
• A key objective of IHP+ is to advance the alignment of
international support to national health strategies and
plans. Compact, JANS, JAR …
• Commission on Information and Accountability has
agreed to use JARs as a way to increase accountability for
results
• The objective of the study is to review experience and
lessons about what has made joint annual health sector
review processes effective or not.
• How well do JARs help to align? What is the added value of the JAR?
What makes it effective?
• Global review of JAR experiences in 9 countries
3
No one-size fits all
• JAR is a long established tradition in many countries
• All interviewees are in favour of maintaining JAR, while
ensuring / improving its efficiency (fatigue)
• No “one-size fits all” = strength
•
•
•
Tailor-made, country- specific
Evolve over time
Countries can learn from each other
• Common aspects: M&E cycle / PoW /annual / DPs
• Modalities vary ++
• Focus on policy dialogue versus operational issues
4
Added value
• JARs tend to strengthen policy dialogue,
alignment, accountability, implementation of the
sector plan and internal resource allocation. But
JAR is only one factor.
• JARs have a potential to improve plans, mobilise
additional resources and promote joint
accountability.
• JARs are less recognised for improving
harmonisation, setting new targets or indicators
and reducing transaction costs.
5
Factors determining a successful JAR
• Strong government leadership, high degree of local
ownership of the JAR, meaningful and wide
participation of all stakeholders, a constructive climate
and an open policy dialogue.
• Reliable and timely data, evidence-based information
and well-designed performance assessment frameworks
are essential for effective monitoring and proper decision
making.
• Good preparation and organisation of the joint reviews is
essential for ensuring efficient work.
• JAR integrated in the national planning cycle
6
Keep inputs, process and outputs
manageable
• Independent reviews
• Frequency & timing
• Size, composition, country experience and
continuity of RT
• Participants: number and profile of participants
• Recommendations: number, feasibility,
prioritisation and timeline
• Reports: size & user-friendly
7
Ensure JAR results into action
• Share JAR reports, recommendations and
proposed actions, with all stakeholders
• Consistently track JAR recommendations and
proposed actions
• Scope for improving SMART action-oriented
recommendations, prioritisation, and ensuring
regular monitoring by a high level sector body.
8
Main Challenges
• How to ensure that relevant JAR recommendations are
integrated in decentralised plans;
• How to balance between a drive for more participation
and good technical / policy discussions;
• How to ensure meaningful participation and further
develop mutual accountability in the context of a
growing tendency among DPs to ask for a direct
attribution of results;
• And how best to integrate meaningful aid effectiveness
criteria in monitoring sector and/or national performance