Upload
melvyn-palmer
View
214
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
High Level Regional Consultation for Policy Makers to Enhance Leadership in Planning the National HIV & AIDS Response S
P
Dominique Mathiot6 November 2007
Introduction to
Results Based Management (RBM)and
Results Based Planning (RBP)
Let’s talk about “results”!
S PSurveillance Data EPP
Census/UN Pop Division Estimates
UNAIDS model epidemic patterns
Spectrum
Costing and coverage data
Existing effectiveness data
Resource Needs Model
GOALS /MOT
Progression using Tools
What is the prevalence of HIV?
How will thedemography be
affected?
What resources are required?
How should we allocate resources?
How do we ensure sustainability?
NASA, Country strategic plans, etc
Financial Planning
SAT
S P
So far, you may have….
• Used the SAT to review your current national strategic framework
• Collected the data and evidence• Analyze the evidence – EPP, SPECTRUM, MOT• Estimated your resources needs• Taken into account data from NASA• Changed the behavior of your partners – CHAT and
aligned their support behind the “Three One Principles”
• Agreed nationally on your priorities and targets toward UA
To be continued…
S P
And you are…
• Probably exhausted, brain-dead, confused may be (I am)….
And know what, we haven’t yet even talked about making plans that work for us!!!!
So it is now time to talk about results-based planning and management….
S PThe Origins of RBM?
1950s – Peter Drucker's pioneering work/ 'Command and Control' of the workforce gives way to 'Management‘
1960s and 70s - Adoption of 'Management by Objectives' to motivate staff around ‘SMART’ objectives with established timelines
1980s – Adopted vigorously by UK and New Zealand in the 80s; USAID's Logical Framework Approach (LFA) and GTZ's ZOPP and the UN shift from line item budgets to budgeting around objectives
1990s – Wholesale adoption by development and humanitarian communities of Results-based management – is now being adopted to direct and justify increased development aid
2000 + – Results-based budgeting
S PWhy RBM?
Stated rationale/intended gains:
• Improved focus on results instead of activities• Improved transparency• Improved accountability• Enhanced performance orientation• Improved measurement of programme
achievements• Enhanced strategic focus• No choice, it is an industry standard• To get more funds!!
S P
Results Based Management …and Results Based Planning …What does it mean for you?
Please try to explain…Please try to explain…
S P
Results Based Programme Planning: Sum of interventions is sufficient to achieve the expected result
Results Based Programme Management: Resources focused on achieving expected results
Monitoring and evaluation of SMART indicators and targeted results used to-- adjust activities and interventions-- hold duty bearers accountable !
S P
Interventions must not only be necessary, but also sufficient to achieve the expected result
If a problem is caused
by conditionsthree
Principle of RBP
S P
All three conditions
Principle of RBP
must addressedbe
S P
So, since we are now talking about ‘results’, what is a ‘result’?
Want to try a definition…
Want to try a definition…
S P
A result is a measurable or describable change resulting from a cause and effect
relationship.
S P
Measurable transformation
• In an individual• In group• In an organization• In a society• In a country
Two major elements in ‘Results’
Cause and effect relationship between an action and the results achieved.
“If-then” logic.
Change Causality
S P“Results” in day to day life…
Inputs
WaterSalt, condimentsCooking oilVegetablesMeat, fishFirewoodWorking time,etc...
OutputThe sauce, the main dish, the meal
Output ResultImmediate (short-term),Satisfied (after having eaten this sauce, main dish or meal)
Impact ResultLong-term effect,‘quality of life’ (if I can ensure I have a balance diet for more than 5 years)
Outcome ResultMedium- term effect,improved physical well-being (if I can make sure I have a balance diet over time)
S P
Now it does get more complicated because there is a hierarchy of change in ‘results’…
Can you describe what are the three levels of results?
S P
The likely or achieved short-term andmedium-term effects of an intervention’soutputs.
Long-term effects produced by adevelopment intervention, directly or indirectly,intended or unintended.
Impact
Outcome
Output
Hierarchy of Change
The products and services which result from the completion of activities within a development intervention.
S P
Let’s talk now about the different ‘types’of change we could measureat each level of the ‘results’…
Any ideas?
S PTypes of Change
Impact
Outcomes
Output
Changes in the lives of people: realisation of their rights
Institutional Change: values, laws – associated with institutional performance, new institutions
Behavioural change: new attitudes, practices
Operational Change: products and services – knowledge, skills
S P
Outcome
Impact
Output
Activity
Level of Change
Strategic Result
Joint Programming
Result
Multiple or single
intervention result
Results Chain
Institutional/ Behavioural
Operational/ skills, abilities,
products & services
Human rights
Focus ofChange
Timeframe
<1 yr
<5 yrs
5 yrs
5-10 yrs
Collective Account-
ability
more
less Processes
S P
‘Results’ are supposed to beS. M. A. R. T.
Any idea of what S.M.A.R.T. stands for?
S PS Specific
M
A
R
T
Measurable
Achievable
Relevant
Time bound
S P
In summary….
S P
INPUTS ACTIVITIES
How? What do we want ? Why?
OUTPUTS
RESOURCES
OUTCOMES
IMPACT
RESULTS
Funds, HR, equipment,
etc.
Activity output
Operational change
Behavioral /
institutional change
Quality of life
MEASURABLE CHANGE
Effect
S P
A Typology for RBM: HIV & AIDS
S P
Outcome
Impact
Output
Activity
HIV incidence reduced
Leadership empowered
Skills of NAC strengthened
Train 250 district AIDS officers
Results Like… Focus Timeframe
<1 yr
<3 yrs
5 yrs
5-10 yrs
more
less
Collective
Accountability Institutions/
Behaviours
Knowledge, skills, abilities,
services
Human!
OutcomeResponse brought to
scale
Institutions/
Behaviours
5 yrs then if
if
if
if
then
then
then
S P
Result
ResultResult
ResultResultResult
Result Result Result Result
Strategic Result
Programme Result
Activity Result
Impact Level
Outcome Level
Ouput Level
The results chain usually takes the formof a more complex results framework,
preserving the levels…
S P
Result
ResultResult
ResultResultResult
Result Result Result Result
Program inputs (resources) and activities
lead to output level results
S P
Result
ResultResult
ResultResultResult
Result Result Result Result
Combined Program Results (outputs) lead to
Program Results at the outcome level
S PCombined Program Results lead to
Strategic Results at the impact level
Result
ResultResult
ResultResultResult
Result Result Result Result
S PWhen all results have been consolidated
into one matrix (logframe, NSP, NSF, UNDAF, AWP)go back and check the “if then” logic
Strategic Result
Program Result
ResultResult
Result Result
if
if
if
then
then
then
S P
Action Language expresses results
from the provider’s perspective
can be interpreted in many ways
focuses on completion of activities
Change Language describes changes in
the conditions of people
sets precise criteria for success
focuses on results, leaving options on how to achieve them
Results Language = Change Language
S P
Action Language1. To strengthen the capacity of teachers
to teach life skills through training on gender sensitive, child friendly, learner directed learning approaches
2. The capacity of teachers to teach life skills is strengthened
3. By 2007, the capacity of all life skills teachers in the 10 districts with the highest adolescent HIV incidence rates is strengthened
4. All life skills teachers in the 10 districts with the highest adolescent HIV incidence rates have increased capacity by 2007 to teach life skills to school children
Change Language1. Results language to
emphasise future condition
2. Take out information relating to strategy or activities
3. All teachers everywhere? By the year 4000? Be more specific
4. Bring the subject of change to the front and shift from passive to active language
Refining Results
S P
Action Language
Goal: to decrease the number of children dying of AIDS and AIDS related causes
Objective: to promote the use of long lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs)
Activity: train 1000 teachers in participatory learning techniques
Indicators: number of TV and radio jingles providing malaria education; number of LLINs distributed
Change Language
Impact Result: Child mortality from AIDS and related causes decreased from 100% to 40% by 2010 Outcome Result: at least 80% of people in endemic areas sleep under a long lasting Insecticidal net
Output Result: 2 teachers in 500 schools are trained in how to teach other teachers in participatory learning
Indicator: % of people who know that sleeping under an ITN reduces the risk of malaria; % of people who sleep under a long lasting insecticidal net
Examples
S P
Action Language
Expand the percentage of young people, successfully practicing strong life skills, including HIV/AIDS
Ensure that all pregnant women have access to PMTCT services
Improve the care and support environment for orphans and vulnerable children
Change Language
75% of people aged 12-24 are practicing abstinence, maintaining a monogamous relationship or consistently using condoms by 2010
The percentage of pregnant women using PMTCT services increased from 40% to 80% by 2010
90% of identified orphans and vulnerable children in model districts are accessing social safety net package by 2008
Suggested answers…
Examples
S PIn summary:
Principles of Results Based Planning
• Context specific causality analysis• Hierarchical logic• “If-then” causality between levels of results• Collective accountability increases as you move up the
hierarchy towards outcomes and impact• Uses change language to describe a specific,
measurable, achievable, relevant, time-bound result • AND… based on strategic choices that focus on
realization of human rights
S P
Applying ‘Results’ to UN programming – The Joint UN Program of Support on AIDS
Following GTT recommendations and the Secretary General’s letter of 12 December 2005,
enhanced accountability for ‘results’ in the UN
S P
SUPPORT TO NAC IN ACHIEVING THE "THREE ONES"
National Goal:
UNDAF Outcome 1:
UNDAF Country Programme Outcome 1.1:
Convernor: UN Agency XXX
UNDAF Country Programme Outputs
Milestones to 2011 Key Results for 2007 Main Activities for 2007Main
Implementing Partner
Funding
SourceBudget (in USD)
Joint UN Program – Results Matrix
S P
COUNTRY XXX NAC SUPPORT SERVICES
National Goal: Reduce the spread of HIV, improve the quality of life of those infected and affected and mitigate the socio-economic impact of the epidemic
UNDAF Outcome 3 Reduce the incidence and socio-economic impact of HIV/AIDS, malaria and TB
Joint Program of Support on AIDS Outcome 4:
One coordination body, action framework and M&E system strengthened to function as the core of all programming and resource allocation in support of the national HIV response
Convernor: UNAIDS Secretariat
Joint Programme Outputs Milestones to 2012 Key Results for 2008 Main Activities for 2008
Main Impleme-
ting Partner
Funding
SourceBudget (in USD)
4.1. Improved coordination capacity of the National AIDS Control Council in terms of planning, resource mobilization, strategic partnerships and leadership structures of the national HIV response
1) By mid-2008, a clear framework for civil society and private sector engagement in the national HIV response and collaboration with NAC is in place2) By end-2008, a High Level, multisectoral public sector HIV accountability structure is established and functioning3) By end-2009, all funding partners to the national HIV response have undergone minimum one peer review4) By end-2009, all major stakeholders in the national HIV response base their contribution on formal agreement with NAC (MoU/Code of Conduct)5) By end-2010, information on all resource allocation, programming and monitoring data is channelled through/available to NAC6) By end-2010, an effective mechanism is in place for sustainable long-term funding of the national HIV response
1) The NAC Partnership Forum is fully operational2) The High-level Public Sector Committee on HIV is established as part of the government accountability structure for HIV mainstreaming2) By mid-2008, the High-level committee on national HIV response oversight is meeting on a regular basis (at least bi-annually) and provides feedback reports3) By mid-2008, the consolidated resource mobilization plan for the national HIV response is in place4) By end-2008, six largest development partners (USG, DFID, WB, SIDA, etc.) and key public sectors (Health, Education, Transport, Agriculture, Law and Order and Security) in the HIV response have completed a peer review process
1. Facilitate participatory process for development of clear structure and documentation of NAC Partnership Forum
NAC
2. Source technical support to development of civil society and private sector engagement frameworks
NAC, ASOs
3. Provide financial and technical inputs to implementation of civil society engagement plan of action, capacity development and grant making processes
NAC, ASOs
4. Advocate for, and participate in negotiations of establishment of Public Sector HIV Committee
NAC, Xxxx
5. Advocate for institutionalization of periodic high-level national HIV response accountability reviews
NAC, Xxxx
S P
Universal Access Targets and Results-Based Planning
Are Universal Access Targets ‘results’? Yes? / No?
If Yes, what kind of ‘results’ are they?
S P
“Targets should focus on both achieving defined impact as well as overcoming
critical obstacles to scaling up. The impact targets would be set for 2010 with interim ‘process’ targets (milestones) for 2008”.
Scaling up towards Universal Access –Considerations for countries to set their own national targets
for HIV prevention, treatment and careUNAIDS, April 2006
S P
60% of women, men and children with advanced HIV infection are receiving ARV combination treatment by 2010
(Impact level result)
Interim process target or milestone by 2009(higher outcome level result)
Outcome level result
What if Universal Access Targets were used as the starting point for operational planning?
Interim process target or milestone by 2008(higher outcome level result)
Outcome level result Outcome level result
Output levelresult
Output levelresult
Output levelresult
Output levelresult
Output levelresult
Output levelresult
S PGeneral problems in applying RBM?
• Difficult to apply causal logic, especially in relation to complex, in-transparent or multi-faceted processes
• Difficult to learn: RBM is not intuitive, not easily 'taught', years of usage required to achieve common understanding and practice
• Difficult to integrate, e.g. integrating gender and HR concerns into the results chain and in indicators
• Difficult to revise, and therefore often becomes ‘fixed’• Difficult to measure: multitude of ‘indicator types’, difficulties
in choosing a reasonable number, reliance on un-measurable indicators, seeking visibility in indicators, weak indicator tracking
• Difficult to ‘attribute’, especially at Outcome level (e.g. institution xxx, partner yyy is accountable but not fully responsible)
S PMore specific problems
in applying RBM?
• Tautologies in the results chain• Results not logically linked• Results not sufficiently specific• Results are composites of several results• Results don’t express change (e.g. support provided to
strengthen….)• Results statements are too wordy• Confusion between levels of results• Indicators not logically linked horizontally, are un-
measurable or are results statements
S P
Some references…
• RBM in UNDP: Overview and General Principles• Results-Based Management in CIDA: An Introductory
Guide to the Concepts and Principles• Results-Based Management: An Overview, United
Nations System Staff College• Understanding Results-Based Programming Planning
and Management, UNICEF, May 2005• Results-Based Strategic Planning (RSP) – PowerPoint,
Work Bank Institute, ASAP Workshop, St Lucia• The use and abuse of the logical framework approach,
Sida, Nov 2005