Scaling-up Nutrition:

Outline
•
•
•
•
•

Outline
Phase I
Policy review
Analytical framework (ACT): Programme classification, target groups, costs
Methodology for country visits
Phase II
Remote support to countries and SUN Movement Secretariat (SMS) 21
Country visits (stakeholder engagement, situational analysis, cost map)
Support SMS at International events
Phase III
Policy, legislation, and plan reviews and summaries
Support effective nutrition-sensitive implementation around a Common
Results Framework
Support financial tracking and resource mobilization

Outline

•
Good Nutrition Practices
•
Vitamin and Mineral Intake
•
Acute Malnutrition Management
•
Enrichment of diet nutrient density for pregnant and lactating women and children 6-23 months
•
Food Security and Agriculture
•
Care Environment
•
Public Health and Water and
Sanitation
•
Coordination and Information Management
•
Policy and Legislation Development
•
Advocacy and Communication
•
System Capacity Building

Outline

Outline
NUTRITION SPECIFIC ACTION COSTS
TOTAL COST: US$ 4.0 billion
(timeframe 2011-2015)
US$ 2.4 billion for good nutrition practices (61%)
US$ 650 million for acute malnutrition management (21%)
US$ 717 million for vitamin and mineral intake (18%)
US$ 198 million for nutrient dense diet for PLW and young children
(5%).*
*Peru, Mozambique and Madagascar

Outline
NUTRITION SENSITIVE ACTION COSTS
TOTAL COST: US$ 28.9 billion
(timeframe 2011-2015)
US$ 19.6 billion for nutrition-sensitive food systems.
Note: Bangladesh alone is US$ 8.5 billion
US$ 89.5 million for interventions enhancing caring environments
US$ 9.2 billion for interventions in public health services, including reproductive health and WASH

Outline
Nutrition sensitive – Food Systems

Outline
Nutrition sensitive – Public Health

Outline
GOVERNANCE TOTAL COST: US$ 2.3 billion (timeframe 2011-2015)
US$ 1.5 billion for system-wide capacity building (66%)
US$ 629 million for coordination and information management (28%)
US$ 143 million for policy development, advocacy and communication
(6%)

Outline
Plan differences (caveats for comparison)
Inclusions/exclusions
Existing government inputs (labor, infrastructure)
New versus existing interventions
Stakeholder and sector involvement
Assumptions for scale-up
Percentage increase
District rollout
National coverage
Cost methodologies
Total intervention costs (ingredients)
Marginal budgeting
Program unit costs
Cost estimations
Program planning
Country budgets
External budgets

Outline
Paper 1 Details of Progress in SUN Countries

Outline
Progress with Preparing for Scaling-up Nutrition
Process Indicator I – Bringing people into a shared space for action (the multisector, multi-stakeholder platform):
Process Indicator II – Ensuring a coherent policy and legal framework:
Process Indicator III – Aligning around a single set of Expected Results
[Common Results Framework CRF]:
Process Indicator IV - Financial Tracking and Resource Mobilisation :
Paper 1 Details of Progress in SUN Countries

Outline
Progress with Preparing for Scaling-up Nutrition
The impact of high-level political commitment:
Tanzania, Uganda, Benin and Namibia have placed nutrition directly under the supervision of the Head of Government or State.
The President of Guatemala and the President of Peru have linked their presidency mandate to the reduction of stunting.
Other countries including Zimbabwe, Sierra Leone and The Gambia have their
Vice-Presidents as national Champions for Scaling Up Nutrition.
Many are focusing on the gender dimensions of under-nutrition and the importance of empowering women for scaling up nutrition.

Outline
Progress with Preparing for Scaling-up Nutrition
National policies, legislation and strategies that impact on nutritional outcomes :
Nutrition policies and strategies have been updated and endorsed
In Nepal, Mozambique, Madagascar, Benin, Tanzania, Zambia and Uganda the approved national policies and strategies reflect a multi-sector approach
At least one third received legislative approval for a coherent multi-sector framework (Niger, Mauritania, Indonesia, Burkina Faso and Peru)
The Gambia, Madagascar and Uganda have specific gender policies that will contribute to nutritional outcomes.

Outline
Progress with Preparing for Scaling-up Nutrition
Aligning around a single set of expected results (Common Results
Framework) :
A priority for strategic focus on the most effective interventions
Aligning different programs to contribute to one set of expected results .
Alignment: the best means for translating commitments made by governments / partners into synergized implementation . Roadmaps Shared.
Examples include: 3N initiative in Niger, Hambre Zero in Guatemala, CRECER para Incluir in Peru and Aba Grangou in Haiti.
The Focal Points in Mozambique, Tanzania, Madagascar and Indonesia have shared their experiences of prioritisation at the sub-national level .

Outline
Progress with Preparing for Scaling-up Nutrition
Estimation of the cost for scaling-up and analysis of shortfalls :
Information within SUN Country Templates about estimated costs, domestic and external contributions, and financing gaps, is incomplete .
Most SUN countries provided an indication of the costs of nutrition-specific interventions , mostly those provided through the health sector .
National authorities & donor agencies struggling to establish consistent methods for tracking expenditures on nutrition outcomes across sectors.
Nevertheless country focal points from Bangladesh, Niger, Indonesia, Sierra
Leone, Peru, Guatemala, Ethiopia, Mozambique, The Gambia and Nepal have reported on efforts to estimate overall financial investments for nutrition.

Outline

Outline
Brief History of SUN – Costing Processes
•2010 – Movement Led by Governments – NOW 45 countries
•Provided context for existing support groups to align behind national policies
•National plans need core elements as well as investors language
•Framework for Scaling-up Nutrition (What will it cost – Susan Horton) –
Stunting as an indicator
•2013 Refinements in costs of specific interventions / WHO Costing
•June 2013 G8 – costs pulled together from national plans to show elements, costs and gaps where plausible

Outline
G8 Commitments – 2013
• Global Nutrition for Growth Compact endorsed by a total of 94 stakeholders
• 15 Governments committed to increase the domestic resources
12 Governments announced national stunting-reduction targets.
• Donors today have secured new commitments of up to GBP £2.7 billion
(USD $4.15 billion) to tackle undernutrition up to 2020, GBP £1.9 billion
(USD $2.9 billion) of which is core funding with the remainder secured through matched funding.
• An estimated GBP £12.5 billion
(USD $19 billion) committed for improved nutrition outcomes from nutrition-sensitive investments between 2013 and
2020.

Outline
G8 Commitments – 2013
•
New partnerships between business and science
• Commitment to develop a new catalytic financing facility for nutrition .
• Launch an annual Global Report on Nutrition from 2014,.
• Hold annual global nutrition meeting in margins of UN General
Assembly, from September 2013.

Outline
Contribution of National Nutrition Plans to Stewardship of
Multiple Actors and Synergised, Effective Actions
The process through which a plan is developed has a critical influence on the utility of the plan for stewardship of multiple actors.
The development of a national nutrition plan is a “directed negotiation”.
A national nutrition plan is often an amalgam of multiple sector plans.

Outline
Contribution of Nutrition Plans to Effective Implementation of
Interventions to Scale Up Nutrition
Local level plans informed by national recommendations
Plans are especially useful if then basis for monitoring progress
Most likely to yield synergised and effective efforts if attention paid to nutritionally
vulnerable individuals and communities .
Most plans currently focus on enabling pregnant women and young children to access specific nutrition interventions in the 1,000 day window

Outline
Cost Calculations in National Plans Should be Based on Explicit
Principals and Assumptions
Increasing need for costing to be undertaken in an inclusive way.
The assumptions that underlie costings are made explicit and can be examined by all:
Intervention directly relates to nationally agreed targets for implementation rather than to general objectives for improvement,
…and if expected expenditure is spelt out year by year .

Outline
Strategy for Increase the Potential Utility of Costed National
Plans for Scaling Up Nutrition
Emphasis on the processes for planning, implementation and monitoring rather than on the plan itself.
The systematic engagement of domestic and international decision makers in planning and costing work.
The evolution of principles that should be reflected in different stages of the planning cycle (from design to costing, managing implementation and monitoring).

Outline
National Nutrition Planning Processes are Likely to be most
Useful if Based in the Following Principals
Agreement around a national Common Results Framework (CRF) helps to shape multi-‐ stakeholder working.
The role of government is to convene all stakeholders, coordinate their engagement, lead strategy, maintain shared ownership (national and sub)
Tracking the use of resources involves the development of systems for gathering data on expenditure.
National plans should incorporate the investments of the NGOs contributing to national targets and Common Results Frameworks.
The design of a financial tracking system should at all times reflect the interests of decision –makers. Type / regularity and level of info needed ?

Outline
Next Steps – Strengthening the capacity of SUN countries for planning, costing, managing implementation, tracking expenditure and monitoring progress.
Optimising the use of communications and advocacy to maintain political commitment and support institutional change,
Establishing guidance for countries on nutrition-sensitive investments, planning, costing and managing the implementation of actions and establishing robust systems
Mobilising additional external and domestic resources for nutrition, and tracking the effectiveness and efficiency of these funds.

Outline
1. Policy, legislation and plan reviews and summaries
2. Support effective nutrition-sensitive implementation around a Common
Results Framework (CRF) to maximise impact
3. Support financial tracking and resource mobilization
4. Aggregate and document the lessons learned from the work with countries

Outline
Yemen – Contextual analysis and prioritisation of nutrition-sensitive intervention within the national plan.
Malawi – Monitoring and Evaluation support / financial tracking, especially in the area of nutrition sensitive
Ghana – Support the review process of the National Nutrition Policy, provide training on costing processes and identify features of financial tracking
Benin – Support development of the multi-sector M&E framework
Chad - Costing of the National Action Plan (scoping exercise)
El Salvador – Review and considering alignment of the Capacity
Building Strategy to the Nutrition and Food Security Strategy
Synthesis
Other ToR (Haiti and Indonesia)

Outline
Ensuring capacity of the movement within national settings
Efficient use of MQSUN resources – country selcection and ToR
Development
Understanding and enhancing service provision capacity
Assessing the exponential growth for coverage
How to correctly select nutritionsensitive interventions within a ‘nutrition framework’
Assessing impact of nutrition-sensitive (Columbia and List)
Promotion of learning between national platforms
Understanding the links between existing budgets
Designing and installing pooled or ‘top-up’ mechanisms
Links with private industries
National level resource development (CS )

Outline

Outline
Global Targets for Nutrition

Outline
Average Annual Rate of Reduction (AARR)

Strategic Objective (SO) 1. MOPIC (Suggested Results)
•Multi-sectoral commitment and resources for nutrition are increased
•Nutritional information management and data analysis strengthened
•Nutrition capacity of implementing agencies is strengthened
SO 4. Ministry of Education
•Specific girls education
•School nutrition relevance recognized
SO 2. Ministry of Health and Population
Community 14 High
Impact Interventions
The intergenerational transmission of growth failure: When to intervene in the life cycle
Child growth failure/ death
Incentives:
•CCT
•Take home food rations
•Free school materials
ANC, Malaria, LBW
Water & Sanitation
Links
Education (Health curriculum)
SO 3. Ministry of Water &
Sanitation
•Potable water supply and sanitation (20m)
•Distribution of water filters at household level (8m) (social fund for development)
•Social mobilization programme (10m)
•Regulate private sector in service delivery
•Treatment of sewage,
Low Birthweight baby
Early pregnancy
Small adult woman
SO 6. Ministry of Fisheries
Low weight & height in teenagers
Small adult man
•Project to feed the targeted population sardines
(5M)
•Awareness programme to promote the consumption of fatty fish (1m)
•Conservation and fish drying (including women) (2m)
•Support Storage facilities for fresh fish for small
SO 5. Ministry of Agriculture
•Support home gardening for poor families in rural areas (2m) (women)
•Bee keeping & livestock support
•Support food processing in rural areas (3m)
•Introduction of improved crop varieties of cereals, pulses, fruit and vegetables
(2m)(challenge qat)
•Support production and marketing of fresh dairy products in rural areas
(6m)(women involvement)

Outline

Outline
Introduction (Susan Horton)
Opportunity to attract even greater support
The food price crisis of 2007 helped reverse international complacency
We know more about “what works” – Lancet Interventions (direct)
MDG’s have helped to focus attention on investment not only social benefits, but also economic benefits
Amassing international funding for nutrition came from global costing
Exercises
– World Bank
The 2013 “Nutrition for Growth” – ambitious targets
Individual country costing efforts are the essential next step.
Costing a plan is key to the process of prioritisation – actions / sequence / then adaptation and decentralisation
20 Countries have invested in this process

Outline
Overview David Nabarro
National plans for scaling-up nutrition include:
(a) Improvements in people’s access to nutrition specific interventions,
(b) The adoption of nutrition - sensitive strategies in related sectors,
(c) Explicit functions to enable stewardship & synergised working of stakeholders.
The costing of these plans is most valuable if it includes the following elements:
•A well-defined population for enhanced access to nutrition interventions
•Clarity of national targets well as up to date estimates of projected coverage
•Definition of multi-stake holder platforms & performance monitoring mechanisms
•Reliable unit costs for interventions
•Well justified costs for the stewardship of joint actions
•Incorporating costs of existing plans including labour and fixed costs