From National Action Plan on Health Security to Financing and Implementation through a One Health Approach

Resource mapping and mobilization

Dr. Amara Jambai

Chief Medical Officer

Ministry of Health and Sanitation

Government of Sierra Leone

Ministry of Health & Sanitation

NAPHS Framework Inception

• Review of existing plans, capacity assessments

• Stakeholders analysis

• SWOT analysis

• Prioritization of technical areas

Development • Prioritization of

activities (Matrix)

• Monitoring and evaluation

• Costing and mapping resources

• Approval and endorsement

Implementation

•Reprioritization for implementation

• Integrating into national development planning

•Monitoring, evaluation and reporting

•Periodic review and update

Situation analysis of country context

High-level multisectoral steering group

Endorsed NAPHS Resource map

Plan implemented M&E and reporting

From JEE through Prioritization and Resource Mapping of NAPHS through Multisectoral collaboration

A set of six criteria was used in prioritization

process. The criteria were:

1) Is the activity a ‘quick-win’? Score= 1

2) Is the activity a high priority for the country? Score=3

3) Does the activity have a known advocate? Score=1

4) Is the activity ongoing or one that needs to be

completed early on in the plan?, Score =2

5) Does the activity require significant amounts of

resources? Score= 1

6) Is there existing or potential funding for the activity?

Score = 2

The criteria was applied across all technical areas,

activities received a score of 1-10 based on the

weighting system

1 1 1

2 2 2

3 3

4 5

6 6

7 7

8 8

9 15

17

0 5 10 15 20

14-Linking Public Health & Security

15-Med Counter Measure

National Legislation, Policy and …

19-Radiation Emergencies

Zoonotic Disease

Reporting

IHR Coordination …

17-PoE

Biosafety and BioSecurity

AMR

Resource Mapping Prioritization

The first 107 Prioritized Activities

Real Time Surveillance

AfDB, China CDC, DFID,

MPTF, US CDC, USAID,

World Bank

$24,601,791

Immunization

EC, GAVI, Rotary

International, US CDC

$12,789,086

AMR

US CDC, USAID

$2,460,251

Chemical Events

EC, GEF (Global

Environment Facility), MLF

(Multi Lateral Fund)

$1,552,831

PoE

CDC, DFID, GIZ, Italy,

MBTF, MPTF, MRU, USAID

$1,505,392

Zoonotic Disease

USAID

$1,500,735

National Laboratory

System

Canada Aid, China CDC,

Chinese Gov, DFID, DoD

DTRA, EU, Global Fund, JICA,

UK AID, UNICEF, US CDC,

USAID, World Bank

$1,477,743

Biosafety & Biosecurity

Canada, US CDC, USAID

$818,312

Emergency Response

Operations

DFID, Italy, Netherlands,

Switzerland, UK AID, USAID

$672,663

Risk communication

GIZ, USAID, Breakthrough

Action

$125,246

Preparedness

DFID, Italy, Switzerland, UK

AID, USAID

$116,576

Reporting

USAID

$66,683

Workforce

Development

UK AID, US CDC, USAID,

World Bank

$59,192

Resource Mapping Sierra Leone – mapped donor support for the next 2 years.

$47,746,501

TOTAL

$624,971

Linking Public Health

& Security

$332,995

Radiation

Emergencies $440,569

Food Safety

National

Legislation, Policy

and Financing

$92,897

Medical

Countermeasure

$17,270

Priority Areas with the Least Identified Resources (no donors)

Challenges

• Inconsistency in representation: Representation of the various Ministries, Departments and agencies was not consistent throughout the development of NAPHS. New entrants require time to understand the process.

• Inadequate information for resource mapping. Mapping all available resources in-country require wide participation of relevant government sectors, partners and donors

• Donor interest to support some preferred technical areas while others lacked funding support

• Inadequate clarity on government’s ability to finance activities in the NAPHS.

• There was high level government ownership but there were challenges with ownership at technical areas level.

Lessons Learnt

• Country ownership: Owning the process of JEE, NAPHS and resource mapping at leadership

and technical/activity levels is primarily the responsibility of national governments.

• Multisectoral/One Health coordination: A coordinated multisectoral/One Health approach is

required to achieve desired outcomes.

• Partnerships: Technical guidance from key health security partners like WHO and CDC is

required while developing, costing, prioritizing and resource mapping for NAPHS.

• Linking NAPHS with existing in-country Plans: National authorities should plug-in all other

relevant plans into NAPHS e.g. WB REDISSE in order to promote rational use of scarce

resources and avoid duplication of effort.

• Participation of stakeholders: Successful resource mapping hedges on partipation of all

relevant staff from MDAs, partners and donors.

• Resource mapping Analysis. Availability of a tailored resource mapping tool is key to

achieving a standardized approach across countries.

Next steps

• Gap Analysis at activity level to determine the level of

available support

• Government needs to have champions/leads for

every technical area

• Involvement of Ministries of Finance to have clarity

on the governments contribution

• Plan an annual internal evaluation on JEE indicators

Thank you.