17
Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB) 2018–2019: the European Region’s perspective Dr Sussan Bassiri Director Administration and Finance

Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB)2018–2019: the European Region’s perspective

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB)2018–2019: the European Region’s perspective

Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB)

2018–2019: the European Region’s perspectiveDr Sussan Bassiri

Director

Administration and Finance

Page 2: Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB)2018–2019: the European Region’s perspective

OutlineFull cycle through the lens of the

12th General Programme of Work (GPW12)• 2014–2015: assessing progress made in the 1st

biennium of GPW12• 2016–2017: applying lessons learned and continuing

priorities • 2018–2019: consolidating and refining the priority areas

Page 3: Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB)2018–2019: the European Region’s perspective

WHO/Europe PB14–15 in numbers

• WHA-approved PB (US$ 225 million) was increased by 6% (US$ 239 million); all increase in Outbreak and crisis response

• WHA-approved PB was 95% funded• Financial implementation of the approved

was 89%

Page 4: Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB)2018–2019: the European Region’s perspective

PB14–15 by category• Variation in implementation

directly related to financing level

• Better alignment of funding and allocated budget

• Even implementation of available funds (91%–98%)

• Many technical achievements across 6 categories

best funded

least funded

Page 5: Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB)2018–2019: the European Region’s perspective

Financial resources in 2014–2015• 48% fully or highly flexible funds• 52% highly specified voluntary contributions

(VC)• 9% more assessed contributions (AC) and

core voluntary contributions account (CVCA) allocated in 2014–2015 from the global level than in 2012–2013 greater fairness in financing underfunded and priority areas

Page 6: Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB)2018–2019: the European Region’s perspective

WHO/Europe top donors in 2014–2015Un

ited

Stat

es o

f Am

eric

a

Euro

pean

Com

miss

ion

Germ

any

GAVI

Alli

ance

Switz

erla

nd

Unite

d Ki

ngdo

m o

f Gre

at

Brita

in a

nd N

orth

ern

Irela

nd

Russ

ian

Fede

ratio

n

Gene

ralit

at d

e Ca

talu

nya,

Sp

ain

Norw

ay

Unite

d N

ation

s Ce

ntra

l Em

erge

ncy

Resp

onse

Fund

(C

ERF)

-

5,000,000

10,000,000

15,000,000

20,000,000

25,000,000 • USA – single largest donor (19% of all VC)

• European Commission and Germany – 8% each

• European Member States fund ~ 22% of approved PB for WHO/Europe, in addition to AC and CVCA

• Picture similar to previous bienniums WHO/Europe vulnerability due to limited donor base

Page 7: Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB)2018–2019: the European Region’s perspective

Lessons learned from 2014–2015

• Significant increase in outbreak and crisis responses in 2014–2015 resulted in challenges to find a balance between planned core activities and response to emergencies given unvarying level of core human resources

• Political changes in countries and limited financial and human resources were the main challenges for implementation, similar to previous bienniums

Page 8: Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB)2018–2019: the European Region’s perspective

Lessons learned from 2014–2015

• Strong commitment at the country level is a key for success• Collaboration and partnerships are critical• Sustainability of actions is essential to maintain achievements• Technical capacity at the country level needs to be

strengthened • Unfinished agendas to be considered

Please see detailed analysis of lessons learned in Regional Committee document

Page 9: Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB)2018–2019: the European Region’s perspective

2016–2017: applying lessons learned• Early operational planning 2016–2017 allowed continuity of

operations and early start of implementation• Early allocation of flexible funds prior to biennium start increased

predictability and ensured smooth start• Bottom-up planning approach for 2016–2017 led to more realistic

budget levels• Roll-out of the country matrix of roles and responsibilities, promotes

clarity and transparency of actions between regional and country levels

Page 10: Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB)2018–2019: the European Region’s perspective

2016–2017: continuing priorities

• WHA-approved PB increased by 6% in emergencies

• Implementation on track

• WHA-approved PB 84% funded, incl. projected VC

• Better alignment of funding to the approved budget, “pockets of poverty” still exist

1 2 3 4 5 6 Emer-gencies

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

70 WHA budget

Current budget allocations

Funds available

Implementation

CategoryUS

$, m

illio

n best funded

least funded

Page 11: Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB)2018–2019: the European Region’s perspective

Development of PB18–19 to dateFebruary – May 2016

• Setting strategic direction from the regional level

• Identification of priorities at the country level

• Identification of regional and global priority work

• Costing of outputs for all prioritiesMay 2016Regional consolidation and review of priority outcomes, with related outputs and costing

June 2016Global consolidation and review of priorities by category and programme area networks, and Global Policy Group

July 2016Development of the draft global PB18–19

July – Aug. 2016Development of the Regional Perspective on PB18–19

Sept. 2016RC66 reviews draft global PB18–19, draft Regional

Perspective

GLOBAL LEVEL REGIONAL LEVEL

Page 12: Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB)2018–2019: the European Region’s perspective

Development of PB18–19• Continuity – bottom-up planning identified priorities built on the

priority-setting of 2016–2017 • Stable budget – same base budget level as 2016–2017 with

adjustments based on application of the Strategic Budget Space Allocation (~US$ 3 million)

• Alignment of budget and priorities – good correspondence between priorities and budget level by category

• Alignment with SDGs – the 2030 Agenda taken into account during various steps in the PB development process

• Emergency reform – followed separate planning process; approved by WHA69; integral part of the draft PB18–19

Page 13: Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB)2018–2019: the European Region’s perspective

Frequency of programme areas cited as priorities

• Country consultations:

10 priority health outcomes were identified, excluding Emergencies

• Highest demand (= number of countries choosing specific priorities) for categories 2 and 3

• Continuity of priorities from 2016–2017

NCDHealth services

TBMental health

Health info.Mother&Child

Health policiesMedicines

VPIEnvironment

HIVAMR

NutritionSDH

Violence&injuriesAgeing

DisabilitiesNTDGER

0 5 10 15 20 25 30Number of countries

* does not include programmes under emergency reform

Page 14: Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB)2018–2019: the European Region’s perspective

Proposed PB18–19Categories and programme areas WHA PB

2016–2017PB 2018–2019

proposed % Change

Categories 1–6, excluding Health Emergencies Programme

219.47 222.50 1%

Subtotal base programmes, incl. Health Emergencies Programme

235.40 258.60 10%

Outbreak and crisis response 3.0

Poliomyelitis 7.40 5.90 -20%

Total PB 245.80 264.50 8%

Page 15: Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB)2018–2019: the European Region’s perspective

Proposed PB18–19 compared to allocated PB14–15 and PB16–17

• Clear increase of budget in priority areas across bienniums

• Readjusted budget where necessary (e.g. categories 1 and 3)

• Effect of emergency reform in category 5

• Strategic orientations for Region for PB18–19 shown in the Regional Committee document

Cat 1 Cat 2 Cat 3 Cat 4 Cat 5 Cat 60

10

20

30

40

50

60PB14-15PB16-17PB18-19

US$

mill

ion

Page 16: Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB)2018–2019: the European Region’s perspective

Financing of PB18–19• Financial dialogue: fully funded PB14–15, good

projections for PB16–17, uncertain prospects for PB18–19

• Current projections financing is 48% of proposed budget

• High reliance on few donors, high earmarking, and «pockets of poverty» still exist. More flexibility is needed on donor side

• Financial dialogue, web portal, emergency reform, SDGs expected to affect PB18–19 financing but effects are still uncertain

Financing Projections

Flexible US$ 103 million

Voluntary US$ 24 million

Total US$ 127 million

Page 17: Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB)2018–2019: the European Region’s perspective

Next steps in developing PB18–19

Sept. 2016RC66 reviews draft global PB18–19, draft Regional Perspective

Jan. 2017EB reviews revised PB18–19 incorporating input from all RCs

Oct. – Dec. 2016Region contributes to revision of the global PB18–19 based on feedback from Regional Committees (RCs)

July – Sept. 2017Preparation and presentation to RC67 of the regional implementation plan for PB18–19

GLOBAL LEVEL REGIONAL LEVEL

May 2017Consideration of draft PB18–19 by 70th World Health Assembly