NEXT STEPS

Objectives of the meeting - review

1. Orient key stakeholders about the context and implications of the recommendations of the Commission on Information and Accountability for Women's and Children's Health

2. Assess the current situation in terms of progress and plans, opportunities and challenges for implementing the recommendations, and identity priority actions

3. Building on existing plans and frameworks, develop a country roadmap for enhancing accountability for the next 4 years, outlining how the gaps and priorities will be addressed and implemented.

4. Establish a shared understanding of the work required and the roles and responsibilities of each partner to implement the roadmap.

Accountability framework 7 areas of action

1. Strengthening monitoring of results

2. Strengthening innovation through the use of ICT

3. Strengthening civil registration and vital statistics

4. Maternal death surveillance and response and quality of care assessments

5. National review and accountability mechanisms

6. Resource tracking and national health accounts

7. Advocacy and outreach

Accountability

framework

Monitor

Action

Review

Monitoring of results

Maternal

death surveillance & response

Resource tracking

ehealth & innovation Country review processes

Advocacy and action

Birth and death registration

Results

0 50 100

Myanmar

India

Nepal

Bangladesh

Indonesia

Sri Lanka

Thailand

Maldives

Timor-Leste

Bhutan

0 50 100

Myanmar

India

Nepal

Bangladesh

Indonesia

Sri Lanka

Thailand

Maldives

Timor-Leste

Bhutan

0 50 100

Myanmar

India

Nepal

Bangladesh

Indonesia

Sri Lanka

Thailand

Maldives

Timor-Leste

Bhutan

0 50 100

Myanmar

India

Nepal

Bangladesh

Indonesia

Sri Lanka

Thailand

Maldives

Timor-Leste

Bhutan

Monitoring of results eHealth

Review mechanisms Monitoring of resources

Results

• Summary scores

• Assessment report

• Summary Roadmap development

Accountability framework Afghanistan

Summary scores of self assessment

February 2012

Civil registration and vital statistics systems (CRVS) 8%

Monitoring of results 29%

Maternal death surveillance and response 26%

Innovation and eHealth 8%

Monitoring of resources 52%

Review processes 43%

Advocacy & outreach #DIV/0!

8%

29%

26%

8%

52%

43%

0%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Civil registration and

vital statistics systems(CRVS)

Monitoring of results

Maternal death

surveillance andresponse

Innovation and

eHealth

Monitoring of

resources

Review processes

Advocacy & outreach

Situation analysis (strengths,

weaknesses/gaps)Possible actions

National health accounts3

Insti tutional ize production of NHA including Expenditure

Management Information System (EMIS)

Strengthen the capaci ty of the NHA team to be able to produce

subaccounts on RMNCH.

0

0

Compact 3

Reporting on expenditure could be added to the Donor-MoPH

agreements . Review the exis ting agreements between government

and partners and improve mutual accountabi l i ty and transparancy 0

0

Coordination4

Strengthen the technica l capaci ty of the NHA steering committee

by bringing more technica l and profess ional members on board.

It i s working properly.

0

0

Production

2

Tra in s taff on system of health accounts 2011 and expand the NHA

team in order to produce RMNCH subaccounts . NHA staff should be

supported to attend regional and internation relevant events in

order to be kept up to date.

Insti tutional ize EMIS in order to generate automated government

expenditure data.

Link NHA tables with EMIS database, so that they wi l l be

populated automatica l ly once EMIS i s insti tutional ized.

0

0

Analys is 2 Produce analytica l summaries annual ly.

Use SHA 2011 for production of NHA tables after 2013. Diss iminate

the report widely to make i t accessable to publ ic access .

0

0

Data

Use2

Promote use of NHA data in pol icy making process .

0

0

Monitoring of resources

A) Yes , there i s an officia l ly approved NHA

framework bui l t upon international guidel ines (i t

i s not based on the SHA 2011, rather i t i s based on

the previous vers ion of SHA). Afghanis tan produced

the fi rs t NHA report in 2011, but the data was from

2008/2009. We wanted to produce the Reproductive

Health Subaccount, but we couldn't. The reason

was workload and shortage of s taff (NHA team

comprises of only two persons).

B) There i s a formal governance mechanism for

production of the NHA. The NHA team is based in

the Health Economics and Financing Directorate

(HEFD) of the MoPH. Financia l resources for RMNCH

could not be tracked because of the absense of

relevant approved indicators . . Memorandum of

Understanding (MoU) has been s igned between

MoPH and CSO. Implementing partners (NGOs) are

required to report their expenditure to MoPH by

their contracts . Donors are a lso providing data on

their expenditure, but we are not sure i f they are

required to do so. . A) Yes , there i s a functional

NHA steering committee that meets on regular

bas is and provides technica l overs ight on data

needs , methods of production and data use. B) Key

s takeholders (e.g., MoF, CSO, NGOs and

development partners ) are actively involved in the

production of NHA reports . Subnational level data

i s provided by NGOs. . A) We bel ieve that the

human capaci ty i s not adequate for production of

RMNCH subaccounts . B) Government expenditure

data i s not converted automatica l ly to NHA format

right now, but i t wi l l be poss ible once EMIS i s ful ly

functional . C) EMIS should serve as a centra l

database for production of automated s tandard

NHA table, including table by beneficiaries and

automated production of key RMNCH indicators . . A)

MoPH does not produce analytica l summaries , but

we have the ful l NHA report 2008/2009 in Engl ish

and Dari languages . We do not use SHA 2011, but

we use the previous vers ion of SHA. B) The NHA

report (which i s not produced according to SHA

2011) i s ava i lbe to publ ic access on

www.moph.gov.af and www.who.int.. Yes , i t i s an

Next steps

• Web publishing of draft assessment results (transparency!)

• National accountability framework workshop (suggested national workshop to be organized within 2-3 months)

• Finalize roadmap and submit to WHO

• Web publish the final roadmap (transparency!)

• Get catalytic funding

• IMPLEMENT

• Orient key country stakeholders about the context and implications of the recommendations of the Commission on Information and Accountability for Women's and Children's Health;

• Review the initial assessment (prepared by the country team in this workshop) and possible actions

• Take into consideration the results of the initial assessment results:

• Finalize the list of priorities

• Finalize the approach/methods

• Define responsibilities (government/partners)

• Indicate year of implementation (including catalytic actions for 2012-13)

• Estimate total per action and catalytic funding

What happens in a national

workshop?

What are the expected outputs of the national

workshop?

• Increased awareness and understanding by all stakeholders of the Commission recommendations and opportunities/challenges for country implementation;

• A completed review of the final draft of the accountability roadmap, identifying the priority actions and budget

• Group work on the identified priority areas – aim to identify the priority areas for strengthening during 2012-15, with cost implications for 2012-13.

• Catalytic US$ 250,000 potentially available from the CoIA

Further information

http://www.who.int/woman_child_accountability/en/

Accountability

Monitor

Action

Review

THANK YOU