REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT
ASSISTANCE AND MAJOR
FUNDING MECHANISM OF THE
NATIONAL AIDS RESPONSE
Dr R L Adupa
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
1
OBJECTIVES OF FUNDING MECHANISM
REVIEW
OBJECTIVES
– to review performance and contribution of development assistance and
major funding mechanisms VS international agreements
– to examine challenges and consider ways of improving harmonization and
alignment of funding mechanisms to national planning and budgeting
processes
PARIS COMMITMENTS/GTT RECOMMENDATONS
– Ownership and Leadership
– Alignment
– Harmonization
– Managing for Results
– Mutual Accountability
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
2
OWNERSHIP AND LEADERSHIP
•
•
•
•
•
Leadership in National AIDS Response
Ownership
Annual Priority Action Plan
Support for Integration of AIDS into PRSP
Economic Consequences of AIDS and Macroeconomic and Public Expenditure Framework
– USE OF SYSTEMS & TOOLS TO OWN, LEAD AND
COORDINATE DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE ON
HIV/AIDS IS WEAK
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
3
Leadership in National
Response
UAC = National AIDS Coordinating Authority by Act of
Parliament
– Political commitment at highest level
– UAC Board and UAC Secretariat
– Partnership mechanism for coordination –12 SCEs, PC
and PF
– Focal Point Persons – Line ministries and districts
– District Task Force
– Coordination Committees at line ministries and districts
– Policy Committees: SC-MAP; NCC-GF and AC-PEPFAR
– UAC Statue being revised
– HIV/AIDS overarching Policy developed
– NSF to be revised early 2006
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
4
Leadership in National
Response
•
Concerns
– Differentiation in roles of Chair of Board and of DG not clear
– 70% of staff are in administration and support services
– TAs not seriously involved in capacity building
– Weak internal management and coordination
– Complaints in operations of 3 Policy committees
– Overlap in membership to 3 Policy committees
•
Recommendations
– Clarify lines of authority and accountability – UAC Board, Secretariat,
OOP, PMO, MOH, Partnership Mechanism, Coordination Committees and
Project management
– High profile leadership of the Commission and of Secretariat,
Partnership and coordination structures to be revamped
– Decide on retaining all 3 policy committees, having one steering
committee or subsuming them in Partnership Committee
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
5
OWNERSHIP - cont
ISSUES
MAP
GF
PEPFAR
Nature
Loan
Grant
Grant
Contribution
5% by GOU
-
-
Negotiations
MOFPED, Parliament,
UAC, MOH
-
-
Mechanism
Budget Support
Budget Support
Non-budget support
Design/Proposals
GOU agencies, CSOs,
districts
GOU agencies, CSOs,
districts
US-Country Team and
US-Agencies
Principal Recipient
MOFPED/UAC
MOFPED/MOH
US-Agencies
CONCERNS
•Different ownership
•Proposal driven by
availability of funds
RECOMMENDATION
S
•UAC to continue
advocacy on
ownership
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
6
Annual Priority Action Plan
• Annual work plans: by FP persons
• Annual Plans approved by differently – no harmonization
• No strategic plans for many sectors/districts
– Contribution of MAP and AIM/UPHOLD
• First Annual AIDS Action Plan
– JAR; January 06-June 07
• Recommendations
– Harmonize plans of MAP, GF and PEPFAR
– Sectors and districts develop strategic plans = NSF and
respective sector and district long term strategies
– UAC, sectors and districts to develop annual plans with
vertical and horizontal linkages
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
7
Integration of AIDS in PRSP
• PRSP=PEAP
– HIV/AIDS is cross-cutting in PEAP
• PEAP to National Plans
– Plans developed by Sectors: HIV/AIDS=MOH
• HIV/AIDS is multi-sectoral- affects MOH’s ceiling
• MOH can’t address non-health issues
– UAC working on shared planning for HIV/AIDS
• Pre-supposes HIV/AIDS mainstreaming
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
8
Integration of AIDS in PRSP - cont
Constraints to Mainstreaming HIV/AIDS
• Inconsistent understanding
• Opportunistic planning
• Inadequate capacity of Focal points
• Inadequate support by UAC
• Lack of donor support
• SWGs in general:
– Not HIV/AIDS competent
– Inadequately equipped with evidence based strategic information on
HIV/AIDS and development in context of each sector
•
Recommendations
– UAC to develop a comprehensive capacity building strategy for
mainstreaming
– ADP and UAC should increase advocacy for mainstreaming of
HIV/AIDS in public sector and support production and harmonization of
action plans
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
9
ALIGNMENT
Multilateral institutions and international partners work with
national AIDS coordinating authorities to align support
with national strategies, policies, systems, cycles and
annual priority AIDS action plans
•
•
•
•
Public Financial Management and Audit
Procurement system
Parallel Management Units
Capacity building
ALIGNMENT IS WEAK AND SYSTEMS NEED REFORM
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
10
FINANCIAL AND AUDIT SYSTEMS
ISSUES
MAP
GF
PEPFAR
Financial System
Government
Government
US-Agency &
CSO’s
Disbursements to
CSOs
Problematic at
district
Lead Agencies
Problematic
Not problematic
Response Time
(Disbursement/Ac
count)
•PCT slow
•Slow
Accountability
•PMU slow
•IAs slow
•US-Agencies
prompt
•IAs prompt
Diversion
Sometimes
diversion by Gov
Agency
Sometimes
diversion by Gov
Agency
Possible with
CSOs
Auditors
Auditor General
Auditor General
USG Approved
auditors
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
11
Financial Management and Audit Systems
• Issues
– Diversion of funds
– Access to funds by CSOs is problematic
– CAOs not involved in resource allocation and
accountability of CSOs
– Capacity of AG’s Office is inadequate
– US-Agencies accountability/audit report not shared
– IFMS most welcome
• Recommendations
– Accounting officers enforce financial discipline
– Donors support capacity building and sharing of
information on FM and audit
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
12
PROCUREMENT SYSTEM
ISSUES
MAP
GF
PEPFAR
System
Gov & WB
Gov
US-Agency &
CSOs with TA
provided
Guidelines
Provided to IAs
Not provided to
IAs
Own guidelines
Procurement Plan
Drawn but not
adhered to
Drawn but not
adhered to
Plan by IA
Restrictions
None
None
Some: ARVs,
Travel
Distribution
Delays
Delays?
No delays
Procurement of
TAs
Participatory
Participatory?
By US-Agency
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
13
Procurement -- cont
Concerns
• Procurement laws good but slow
• Lack of procurement policy on HIV/AIDS supplies
• Overlap in procurement across projects
• NMS performance is low
• Pooling system vs project procured supplies
• Lack of participation in proc of TAs
• Off-shore procurement debate
Recommendations
• Gov comes with clear policy on proc of HIV/AIDS supplies
• All spending agencies should adhere to agreed procurement plans
• Use of NMS and pooling system need to be rationalized
• Stock at NMS need to be distributed expeditiously
• Off-shore procurement be further explored by MOFPED, MOH, UAC
and ADPs
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
14
Parallel Management Units
• MAP: PCT, TRN, $600,000 per annum
• GF: PMU, HIV/AIDS Technical working Group; $?
• PEPFAR: PEPFAR Secretariat, US-Country Team; USAgencies; Unknown amount in mgmt in USA+US-Agencies
•
•
•
•
Institutional memory lost
No continuity and use of experience
High administrative/transaction costs
Duplication of processes and systems – resource
implications?
Recommendation
• Current opportunities for streamlining parallel
structures need to be utilized
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
15
CAPACITY BUILDING
• MAP: Advisor to MOGLSD; training project driven; civil
work allowed
• GF: Long term TA?; Training donor driven; civil work?
• PEPFAR: TA to UAC – PEPFAR Secretariat; training
project driven; civil work minimal
• Low capacity in programmes, finances, M&E
• Lack of coordinated national strategy
• Donors hard on long term training and civil works
Recommendations
• UAC to produce comprehensive CB strategy while
synchronizing current CB efforts of MAP, GF and
PEPFAR
• Donors consider supporting selective long term & civil
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
works
16
HARMONIZATION
Global Fund, WB and other multilateral institutions
and international partners committed to
harmonizing and better coordinating their
programming, financing and reporting.
• Selection of Grantees
• Funding Mechanism
• Joint Activities
LITTLE EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE FOR
HARMONIZATION OF MODALITIES OF ADPS
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
17
SELECTION OF CSO GRANTEES
ISSUES
MAP
GF
PEPFAR
CSO
•National CSOs
•CHAI Groups
•Lead Agencies
•CSOs
•US-Agency &
CSOs
Gov Involvement
•PCT
•District AIDS
Comm.
•PMU
•CAOs sign
proposals
•US-Country team
•Not clear
Criteria
•Own criteria
•Limited
adherence
•Own criteria
•Limited
adherence
•Own criteria
•Strict adherence
Affirmative Action
•National
component
•CHAI component
•46% of Round 1
HIV/AIDS to CSOs
•CSOs major
beneficiary
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
18
Grantees - cont.
• Lack of coordination and sharing of strategic
information on support to CSOs
• Duplication: questionable synergy, complementarity
• Many unsynchronized criteria with limited adherence
• Many CSOs whose roles vs Gov and comparative
advantage not known
• Poor geogrpahic and thematic coverage
Recommendations
• Donors, gov and CSOs agree on roles of CSOs vs
Gov agencies
• Modalities for engaging different types of CSOs be
rationalized and adhered to
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
19
FUNDING MECHANISM
ISSUES
MAP
GF
PEPFAR
Mechanism
Budget support
Budget support
Non-Budget
support
Public sector
support
•Health Sector
ceiling vs nonhealth funds
•MOH vs OoP for
UAC
•Health Sector
ceiling vs nonhealth funds
•MOH vs OoP for
UAC
•None
CSO
Frustrated by
districts
Frustrated by
Lead Agencies
Frustrated
sometimes by
US-Agencies
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
20
OPTIONS FOR FUNDING HV/AIDS ACTIVITIES
MAP
GF
PEPFAR
PF
OTHERS
UAF
(UAC)
BUDGET
SUPPORT
GOVERNMENT
AGENCIES
(MTEF)
January 31st, 2006
NON-BUDGET
SUPPORT
CSOs
GOVERNMENT
AGENCIES
(NON-MTEF)
Funding Mechanism
CSOs
CSOs
(PEPFAR)
21
FUNDING MECHANISM
• Recommendations
– UAC should document experiences in channeling
funds through various mechanisms by GF, MAP and
PEPFAR
– ADPs should explore further a virtual Uganda AIDS
Funds at UAC with an agreed modality for access by
CSOs
– The mandate of UAC to coordinate HIV/AIDS
response including funds should be strengthened and
supported
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
22
JOINT ACTIVITIES
•
•
•
•
MAP: Joint supervision mission & Reviews of MAP
GF: ???
PEPFAR: Jointly with other US funded support on SO8
Joint Annual reviews of sectors not including HIV/AIDS
• SCEs (UN Agencies & Bilaterals) & ADPG with TOR
• JAR jointly supported by ADPs taking place now
Recommendations
• A mechanism for promotion and provision of incentives for
harmonization among stakeholders be worked out by UAC
• ADPs need to publicize, advocate for and adhere to their TOR
and mutually monitor its implementation
• UAC to insist on joint activities by ADPs
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
23
MANAGING FOR RESULTS
Multi-laterals and partners strengthen national M&E mechanisms and
structures for oversight and problem-solving
MANAGING FOR RESULTS IS STILL WEAK
•
•
UAC lacks M&E staff
M&E framework not operationalized
•
•
•
MAP: strong capacity for M&E; in-house software
GF: weak capacity for M&E; no system
PEPFAR: stronger capacity for M&E through subcontracting; webbased platform
Recommendations
• UAC spearheads capacity building in M&E
• M&E systems be synchronized between projects and gov
departments
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
24
MUTUAL ACCOUNTABILITY
National AIDS coordinating authorities to lead
reviews of performance of multi-laterals and
international partners and national stakeholders
• Involvement of Parliament
• Funding Commitment and Predictability
• Joint Review
MUTUAL ACCOUNTABILITY IS WEAK
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
25
Involvement of Parliament
•
•
•
•
•
SCE-Parliament
Standing Committee on HIV/AIDS
HIV/AIDS in Sessional Social Services Committee
Standing Committee visits to MAP project
Chairperson of Standing Committee on HIV/AIDS is member of
3-SCs
• Standing committee visit/oversight on project basis
• Budget Act 2001 provision on accountability of AID not enforced
Recommendations
• Facilitate a coordinated visit of Parliamentarians to HIV/AIDS
projects/programmes
• The two Committees should demand accountability as stipulated
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
26
Funding Commitment and its
Predictability
• MAP
– WB support to GOU mainly through PRSP that has
been reduced from $150m-135m per annum
• PEPFAR
– $142m for 2006
– Support beyond 2008?
• Other Partners
– Basket funding
– ADPs e.g. DCI Euros 1.97m to 2m;
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
27
300.00
200.00
100.00
0.00
2009/1
2007/8
2005/6
2003/4
Series1
2001/2
Funds (Million
US$)
Current Funding Commitments and
Projected Funding Indications
Financial Years
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
28
MUTUAL ACCOUNTABILITY cont
Joint Review
• Partnership Forums held annually – this being 4th one
• JAR held in December 2005 to provide technical input to
Partnership Forum
Recommendations
• MOFPED and UAC should advocate for short and medium term
funding; UAC should facilitate process by annually tracking
availability, allocation, utilization and accountability of funds to
both public and CSOs
• Donor to be more transparent in their commitments and
disbursements
• GOU needs to begin reflecting on sustainability issues
• UAC to institutionalize JAR in order to influence planning,
resource mobilization and allocation, management of
resources and implementation for results
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
29
Costs of Continued Weakness in Ownership,
Alignment, Harmonization, Managing of Results and
Accountability
Credibility of the national
response is compromised
By-passing central government
by providing aid through
vertical projects
Agenda becomes donor-driven
and often inconsistent with the
“one national framework”.
Impossible to scale-up the
response in this environment
Distortions in human capacity,
policy dialogue, focus,
partnership…
Undermine quality of governance
and capacity of the
public sector & CSOs
Stakeholder confidence
levels fall
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
30
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
Dr Peter Piot – UNAIDS Executive Director in December 2005 at ICASA
Conference in Abuja Nigeria observed that
•
“We need to make money work for the people on the ground and reach
every single person with effective HIV/AIDS prevention and control
programme.”
This requires:
• “.. all of us to be trully committed to inclusive ownership, efficient
management, transparency, accountability and coordination”
•
“Donors to stop funding grants for AIDS programmes without a strong
capacity building component and governments and CSOs should stop
accepting them”.
NATIONAL OWNERSHIP/LEADERSHIP, ALIGNEMENT, HARMONIZATION,
MANAGING FOR RESULTS AND MUTUAL ACCOUNTABILITY
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
31
THANK YOU ALL
January 31st, 2006
Funding Mechanism
32