1

Developing shared principles for the assessment of the health impacts of development aid

A country perspective

Dr. Francisco Songane06/Feb/2012

2

Why Development Aid

• Many people ( billions ) still in poor health status and in deplorable living conditions

• The countries where most of these people live in lack sufficient resources, and/or have limited capacity

• Healthy populations are a major asset for socio-economic development

• The economies are interlinked and interdependent; all the nations have to do well, not just a few

• Expression of solidarity

3

Countries’ expectations

• Aid contributes to development• Country vision and startegies are fulfilled• Long-term perspective of the cooperation• Predictability of funding• Sovereignty is respected• Capacity building is addressed• Favourable and fair environment to develop-

trade just as an example

4

Principles 1

• Inclusion, i.e. not a one side game• Country ownership• Activities concerned based on the country

plan• Equity in the implementation• Use the existing mechanisms established in

the country• Ensure sustainability

5

Principles 2

• Results based monitoring of progress• Capacity building• Accountability at all levels• Agree on a cycle to assess systems development, e.g. 5 years

While it is important to show where, how and what the Aid money is used for, this should

not be at the expense of leaving out the assessment of the ultimate goal-the development

of the country

6

TO REACH CONSENSUS ON THE SET OF INDICATORS THAT CAPTURE BOTH DIMENSIONS, AND HAVE THEM INCORPORATED IN THE COUNTRY REPORTS

Development takes time, we can’t expect changes in 6 months or 1 year.Money is one of the factors, and an important one. When aid money is used, in part is to create the other factors, which are similarly crucial to enable the country to deliver and respond to the challenges. It is here where the problem lies -unfair, inequitable approach driven to only show the link of the $ with a particular output without due consideration to other important elements for proper service delivery.

7

We can learn from previous experienceSome issues

• Lack of synchronicity between the donors’ areas of interest and the country priorities

• Diverse lines of funding, and multipicity of requirements, including monitoring mechanisms

• Selective approach rather than a comprehensive one leaves important areas uncovered

• Officials from the country institutions absorbed by the requirements to meet the conditions of grants or initiatives

8

Important aspects to consider in reporting

• The country as the base; the report should be about the country progress

• Coordination and harmonization among all the stakeholders under the leadership of the Government- to have everyone abide by the consensus reached

• Involvement of the local research and academic institutions

• One report for all the partners

9

The principles are the same notwithstanding the change of label

• From Rome to Busan, no major changes in content

• The problem lies on implementation-coordination has been loose, and there have been frequent unilateral decisions with consequences in one direction

Cooperation for Development should be the overarching message

10

Thank You