Jour 3.1 - Développer les engagements de 2014
•Descargar como PPTX, PDF•
0 recomendaciones•240 vistas
Recomendados
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
Similar a Jour 3.1 - Développer les engagements de 2014
Similar a Jour 3.1 - Développer les engagements de 2014 (20)
Más de sanitationandwater4all
Más de sanitationandwater4all (20)
Jour 3.1 - Développer les engagements de 2014
- 1. Développer les engagements de 2014 Fiorella Polo Partnership Meeting, 11-13 Nov., Geneva 2013
- 2. 1. Les fondements 2. “Tentions créatives” des engagements de la RHN de 2012 3. Les “règles d‟or” pour des engagements idéaux 4. Outils et support du Secrétariat
- 3. Engagements de la RHN 2012: un melting pot? 4
- 4. Engagements de la RHN 2012: un melting pot? 5
- 5. Les „tensions créatives‟ des engagement de la RHN de 2014 1. Beaucoup trop vs. trop peu 2. Anciens vs. Nouveaux 3. „Gains rapides‟ vs. „Changements Structurels‟ 4. Génériques vs. Spécifiques 6
- 6. 1. Trop vs. pas assez! Trop Pas assez 15 1 15 2 • difficile de faire du plaidoyer • Perçu comme peu ambitieux • difficile d‟effectuer le suivi • Quantité vs. Qualité • difficile à mettre en œuvre 7
- 7. 2. Vieux vs. Nouveaux Vieux Nouveaux Appliquer les programmes de proximité en soins de santé primaire sur le terrain - Enraciné dans les plans nationaux / engagements existants - Favoriser l‟alignement des priorités - Favoriser le suivi par les systèmes nationaux Le pays tout entier sera 100% ODF en 2015 - Peut changer l„agenda Peut changer l‟échelle 8
- 8. 3. Gains rapides vs. gains structurels Rapide • Créer un groupe de travail inter sectorielle • Allouer 1.5 Mil à l‟eau - Réalisable - Visible - Le suivi est possible Structurel • Créer un conseil WASH qui supervise les ministères liés a WASH et rend compte directement au Président • Créez ligne budgétaire distincte pour l'assainissement - Peut avoir un impact à long terme Difficile a atteindre en 2 ans Difficile de garder la dynamique 9
- 9. 4. Spécifique vs. large et consensuel Spécifique Large et consensuel • Créer une Direction de l'assainissement au sein du ministère de la Santé • Accroitre l‟accès a 50 Mil de personnes supplémentaires • Procéder à des réformes Institutionnelles en matière d'assainissement - - Actionnable Contextuel suivi à l‟échelle nationale Difficile à agréger au niveau mondial Vision globale Agrégable Difficile a suivre 10
- 10. 1. Basique 2. “Tentions créatives” des engagements de la RHN de 2012 3. Les “règles d‟or” pour des engagements idéaux 4. Outils et support du Secrétariat
- 11. 1. Peu mais de qualité La règle des 90 secondes - Max. 5 engagements - Raconter une histoire aux acteurs de haut niveau Changer les règles du jeu - Des engagements ambitieux qui induiront un changement: 1. Durabilité 2. Elimination des inégalités 3. Accès universel 13
- 12. 2. Ancrés dans les plans nationaux mais avec un nouvel angle Règle de l‟équilibre De bons engagements sont: - ancrés dans les stratégies existantes - comprennent les goulets d'étranglement de l‟agenda inachevé BUT - Reconnaître les évolutions de l‟agenda (Accès universel, lutte contre les inégalités, durabilité, efficacité de l‟aide) - seront intégrés dans les cycles de planification futurs 14
- 13. 3. Séquentiel à court terme et structurel Les règle de la durée appropriée: - Pour les nouveaux partenaires, des gains rapides sur une période de 2 ans. - Pour les anciens partenaires, la priorité devrait se faire sur les changements structurels 15
- 14. 4. “SMART” et aligné avec les catégories SWA „SMART rule‟ Specific S‟assurer de la coordination des activités NO Measurable ? Achievable ? Relevant ? Timebound NO 16
- 15. 4. “SMART” et aligné avec les catégories SWA SMART Specific Dans les 2 années à venir, mettre en place un mécanisme formel de coordination par le Ministere de la Sante et Ministere des Infrastructures Publiques YES Measurable ? Achievable YES Relevant Timebound ? YES 17
- 16. 4. “SMART” et aligné avec les catégories SWA SMART Specific Inclure l‟assainissement sur l‟agenda politique NO Measurable ? Achievable ? Relevant ? Timebound NO 18
- 17. 4. “SMART” et aligné avec les catégories SWA SMART Faire de l'assainissement une priorité dans la stratégie de croissance pour la réduction de la pauvreté (2014-2018) et le Programme d'actions prioritaires des gouvernements (2014-2018) Specific Yes Measurable Yes Achievable ? Relevant ? Timebound Yes 19
- 18. 4a. SWA spécifique Pour adresser les problèmes les plus importants, les engagements doivent : • • • Indiquer une action, un leader et le soutien des ministres / partenaires Faire sens au niveau des pays MAIS s'inscrire dans l‟une des catégories SWA: Priorisation Politique 1. Financement 2. Visibilité Prise de décision sur base factuelle 3. Monitoring Global 4. Monitoring à l‟échelle nationale 5. Transparence 6. Preuve 7. Lien entre monitoring et programmation National Processes 8. Politique et planification 9. Coordination et alignement 10. Decentralisation 11. Capacité 22
- 19. 4b. SWA Mesurable Pour adresser les problèmes les plus importants, les engagements doivent prendre en compte: • • • Aucun des indicateurs globaux / communs MAIS indicateur spécifique à chaque pays et inclus en avance dans l‟élaboration Mesurable par les systèmes nationaux 23
- 20. 4c. Réalisable Pour adresser les problèmes les plus importants, les engagements doivent prendre en compte: 1. Les goulots d‟étranglements sectoriels les plus importants – JSRs, CSOs, BAT, JSR, GLAAS 2. Les progrès réalises sur les engagements précédents – Mis a jour SWA 3. Les priorités plus larges des pays - PSRP etc. 4. Engagements des forums régionaux/globaux - Africasan, Sacosan - ne avec les progrès réalises vis-a-vis des enagements precedents - Qui anticipent les efforts requis pour leur mise en oeuvre E.g.: Construire des reseaux de partage d‟informations/de connaissances 1 ans plus tard: des centres d‟infos ont ete construits mais pas de ressources pour leur fonctionnement! 24
- 21. 4d. Pertinant Pour adresser les problèmes les plus importants, les engagements doivent prendre en compte: 1. Les goulots d‟étranglements sectoriels les plus importants – JSRs, CSOs, BAT, JSR, GLAAS 2. Les progrès réalisés sur les engagements precedents – Mis a jour SWA 3. Les priorités plus larges des pays - PSRP etc. 4. Engagements des forums régionaux/globaux - Africasan, Sacosan 4e. Limité dans le temps 25
- 22. Resume: règles d‟Or des engagements RHN 2014 2014 RHN 1. Peu, mais de qualité Règle des „90 secondes‟ 2. Ancrés sur des plans actuels, mais avec sous un nouvel angle Règle de l‟équilibre 3. Gains rapides et structurels Règle de l”‟ordre” 4. SMART par catégories SWA Regle “SWA-MART” 26
- 23. SWA- MART: 10 categories and 3 optiques ACCES UNIVERSEL EGALITE DURABILITE Prioritisation politique 1. Financement 2. Visibilité Prise de décision à base factuelle 3. 4. 5. 6. Suivi Transparence Evidence Lien entre le suivi et la planification Processus nationaux 7. Politiques publiques et planification 8. Coordination 9. Decentralisation 10. Ressources Humaines 27
- 24. Résumé des Engagements 1 slide - 2 angles - 10 Catégories D‟ici 9 Avril 2014 Déclaration des engagements des pays D‟ici 5 Mars 2014 Les Règles o9p0 Outils analytiques Dialogue Préparatoire
- 25. Le processus de développement des engagements Les Règles 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. „90 secondes‟: few, but focused „change les règles du jeu‟: carefully ambitious „Equilibrés: existing plans with new lenses” „Séquencé‟: short term and structural „SMART‟: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound 29
- 26. Le processus de développement des engagements Dialogue Préparatoire 6. Les acteurs du secteur ensemble 7. Analiser les goulots et les anciens progrès 8. Equilibre entre anciennes et nouvelles priorités 9. Alignement avec les processus nationaux 10. Lien avec les consultations nationales sur l‟agenda Post-2015 30
- 27. Le processus de développement des engagements Outils analytiques 11. Joint Sector Reviews- JSR 12. Suivi des progrès sur les engagements de 2012 13. Country Status Overviews- CSOs 14. WASH Bottleneck Analysis Tools - BATs 15. GLAAS 31
- 28. 1. Basique 2. “Tentions créatives” des engagements de la RHN de 2012 3. Les “règles d‟or” pour des engagements idéaux 4. Outils et support du Secrétariat
- 29. Outils disponibles produits par le Secrétariat QUOI QUAND 1. Evaluation des progrès - Nouveaux outils - Notes directrices 2014 2. Developpement de nouveaux engagements - Notes directrices - Webinaires - Revue SMART Maintenant! Janvier 1. Planning new commitments Décembre Décembre Mars – sur demande 34
- 30. Site Web: Comparaisons Globales 35
Notas del editor
- Explain that HLM commitments in 2012 were over 400, on abroad range of topics, varied from primary (mdg type) to very specifc actions that would be meanigful only to a specific country.Explain that Explain that this is different on different partnerships: heatlh/e-thekwinin all same commitments and indicators.The SWA model introduces 3 ‘creative tensions’
- Explain that HLM commitments in 2012 were over 400, on abroad range of topics, varied from primary (mdg type) to very specifc actions that would be meanigful only to a specific country.Explain that Explain that this is different on different partnerships: heatlh/e-thekwinin all same commitments and indicators.The SWA model introduces 3 ‘creative tensions’
- Explain that HLM commitments in 2012 were over 400, on abroad range of topics, varied from primary (mdg type) to very specifc actions that would be meanigful only to a specific country.Explain that Explain that this is different on different partnerships: heatlh/e-thekwinin all same commitments and indicators.The SWA model introduces 3 ‘creative tensions’
- The SWA model introduces 3 ‘creative tensions’
- Ask participants to check their country summary and to refelect : how easily can you communicate to your Minister what your commitments are all about? Can you do it in 90 second? Or do you have toomany commitmentsTo To many commitments mean:it is hard to communicate on them to the political levelIt is hard to monitor progressIt is ultimately hard to implement them!On the other side: has any of you thought, while preparing the commitments: ho no! we can’t have only two commitmentsToo few commitments can be seen as not ambitious!Does quantity equal quality?
- Remind that we have asked countries if hteir commitmetns existed before the HLM.50% yes 50% no.Is that good or bad? there are countries who make commitments to implement previosu commitments (e.g. ethekwini)Other that make ocmmitments that were intheir national plansRooting commitments to existing plans and commitmetn :Allows for commitments to be aligned with country priotityes Allows for commitments to be picked up and monitired by national systems HoweverHLM commitments have been used ‘shift’ the agenda: sanitation, equity all emerging topicsIf plans already existed and were nt being implemented, maybe problem will perpetuate
- Remind that we have asked countries if hteir commitmetns existed before the HLM.50% yes 50% no.Is that good or bad? there are countries who make commitments to implement previosu commitments (e.g. ethekwini)Other that make ocmmitments that were intheir national plansRooting commitments to existing plans and commitmetn :Allows for commitments to be aligned with country priotityes Allows for commitments to be picked up and monitired by national systems HoweverHLM commitments have been used ‘shift’ the agenda: sanitation, equity all emerging topicsIf plans already existed and were nt being implemented, maybe problem will perpetuate
- Remind that the choice was to let evey country come up woth its own commitentKeeping commitments specific:Help focus on concrete actionsCan be tailored made for each countryAre easier to monitor- at country level HoweverBroad It is hard to see how they contribute to the big pciture- The more specific to a country, the more difficult to aggregate them and compare their progress globally
- Explain that HLM commitments in 2012 were over 400, on abroad range of topics, varied from primary (mdg type) to very specifc actions that would be meanigful only to a specific country.Explain that this is different on different partnerships: heatlh/e-thekwinin all same commitments and indocatorsThe SWA model introduces 3 ‘creative tensions’
- Remind that quanittiy and quoity are not the sameNeed easy crunchyAnd need game changin
- It is ok to have bothIf you have new important agenda, seize the opportunity to raise it at HLM (buthen try to ahve it reflected in next cycle of planning)-if you have old commitments that are not being pusured, sue the HLM to revive them (but try to tackle the reason why the commitments are not being implemented
- AMEASURABLE: give expale of JMP how now they archeckign measurability before proposing targets and indicators , before the other way aorund and ahs to adjsut definitions/indicatorOther parnterships have stnadard indicators, but this would actually mean that we are imposing stanadrvisionof sector, with stadard benchmarksSpecific:Action oriented and descriptive- state a solution not a problemIt needs to be clear who is responsible for what (esp. when several ministries involved)Makes sense to your country but fllows SWA categriesMeasurable: include the indicator updfront in the commitment designcheck its measurability /think of whom will follow up
- Remind that specific is ggos, but what about the broader context, what else can make the commitments measureable?
- Ask participants to check their country summary and to refelect on whether they could easlity communicate to their Minister what their ocmmitments was all about?Also ask them if they have neve thought..ho no! we can’t hae only two commitments
- Ask participants to check their country summary and to refelect on whether they could easlity communicate to their Minister what their ocmmitments was all about?Also ask them if they have neve thought..ho no! we can’t hae only two commitments
- Ask participants to check their country summary and to refelect on whether they could easlity communicate to their Minister what their ocmmitments was all about?Also ask them if they have neve thought..ho no! we can’t hae only two commitments
- Ask participants to check their country summary and to refelect on whether they could easlity communicate to their Minister what their ocmmitments was all about?Also ask them if they have neve thought..ho no! we can’t hae only two commitments
- Ask participants to check their country summary and to refelect on whether they could easlity communicate to their Minister what their ocmmitments was all about?Also ask them if they have neve thought..ho no! we can’t hae only two commitments
- AMEASURABLE: give expale of JMP how now they archeckign measurability before proposing targets and indicators , before the other way aorund and ahs to adjsut definitions/indicatorOther parnterships have stnadard indicators, but this would actually mean that we are imposing stanadrvisionof sector, with stadard benchmarksSpecific:Action oriented and descriptive- state a solution not a problemIt needs to be clear who is responsible for what (esp. when several ministries involved)Makes sense to your country but fllows SWA categriesMeasurable: include the indicator updfront in the commitment designcheck its measurability /think of whom will follow up
- AMEASURABLE: give expale of JMP how now they archeckign measurability before proposing targets and indicators , before the other way aorund and ahs to adjsut definitions/indicatorOther parnterships have stnadard indicators, but this would actually mean that we are imposing stanadrvisionof sector, with stadard benchmarksSpecific:Action oriented and descriptive- state a solution not a problemIt needs to be clear who is responsible for what (esp. when several ministries involved)Makes sense to your country but fllows SWA categriesMeasurable: include the indicator updfront in the commitment designcheck its measurability /think of whom will follow up
- AMEASURABLE: give expale of JMP how now they archeckign measurability before proposing targets and indicators , before the other way aorund and ahs to adjsut definitions/indicatorOther parnterships have stnadard indicators, but this would actually mean that we are imposing stanadrvisionof sector, with stadard benchmarksSpecific:Action oriented and descriptive- state a solution not a problemIt needs to be clear who is responsible for what (esp. when several ministries involved)Makes sense to your country but fllows SWA categriesMeasurable: include the indicator updfront in the commitment designcheck its measurability /think of whom will follow up
- AMEASURABLE: give expale of JMP how now they archeckign measurability before proposing targets and indicators , before the other way aorund and ahs to adjsut definitions/indicator
- Explain that HLM commitments in 2012 were over 400, on abroad range of topics, varied from primary (mdg type) to very specifc actions that would be meanigful only to a specific country.Explain that this is different on different partnerships: heatlh/e-thekwinin all same commitments and indocatorsThe SWA model introduces 3 ‘creative tensions’
- AMEASURABLE: give expale of JMP how now they archeckign measurability before proposing targets and indicators , before the other way aorund and ahs to adjsut definitions/indicatorOther parnterships have stnadard indicators, but this would actually mean that we are imposing stanadrvisionof sector, with stadard benchmarksSpecific:Action oriented and descriptive- state a solution not a problemIt needs to be clear who is responsible for what (esp. when several ministries involved)Makes sense to your country but fllows SWA categriesMeasurable: include the indicator updfront in the commitment designcheck its measurability /think of whom will follow up
- Explain that HLM commitments in 2012 were over 400, on abroad range of topics, varied from primary (mdg type) to very specifc actions that would be meanigful only to a specific country.Explain that Explain that this is different on different partnerships: heatlh/e-thekwinin all same commitments and indicators.The SWA model introduces 3 ‘creative tensions’
- Explain that HLM commitments in 2012 were over 400, on abroad range of topics, varied from primary (mdg type) to very specifc actions that would be meanigful only to a specific country.Explain that Explain that this is different on different partnerships: heatlh/e-thekwinin all same commitments and indicators.The SWA model introduces 3 ‘creative tensions’
- Explain that HLM commitments in 2012 were over 400, on abroad range of topics, varied from primary (mdg type) to very specifc actions that would be meanigful only to a specific country.Explain that Explain that this is different on different partnerships: heatlh/e-thekwinin all same commitments and indicators.The SWA model introduces 3 ‘creative tensions’
- Explain that HLM commitments in 2012 were over 400, on abroad range of topics, varied from primary (mdg type) to very specifc actions that would be meanigful only to a specific country.Explain that Explain that this is different on different partnerships: heatlh/e-thekwinin all same commitments and indicators.The SWA model introduces 3 ‘creative tensions’
- Explain that HLM commitments in 2012 were over 400, on abroad range of topics, varied from primary (mdg type) to very specifc actions that would be meanigful only to a specific country.Explain that Explain that this is different on different partnerships: heatlh/e-thekwinin all same commitments and indicators.The SWA model introduces 3 ‘creative tensions’
- Explain that HLM commitments in 2012 were over 400, on abroad range of topics, varied from primary (mdg type) to very specifc actions that would be meanigful only to a specific country.Explain that this is different on different partnerships: heatlh/e-thekwinin all same commitments and indocatorsThe SWA model introduces 3 ‘creative tensions’
- Explain that HLM commitments in 2012 were over 400, on abroad range of topics, varied from primary (mdg type) to very specifc actions that would be meanigful only to a specific country.Explain that this is different on different partnerships: heatlh/e-thekwinin all same commitments and indocatorsThe SWA model introduces 3 ‘creative tensions’
- Explain that HLM commitments in 2012 were over 400, on abroad range of topics, varied from primary (mdg type) to very specifc actions that would be meanigful only to a specific country.Explain that this is different on different partnerships: heatlh/e-thekwinin all same commitments and indocatorsThe SWA model introduces 3 ‘creative tensions’
- Explain that HLM commitments in 2012 were over 400, on abroad range of topics, varied from primary (mdg type) to very specifc actions that would be meanigful only to a specific country.Explain that this is different on different partnerships: heatlh/e-thekwinin all same commitments and indocatorsThe SWA model introduces 3 ‘creative tensions’
- Explain that HLM commitments in 2012 were over 400, on abroad range of topics, varied from primary (mdg type) to very specifc actions that would be meanigful only to a specific country.Explain that this is different on different partnerships: heatlh/e-thekwinin all same commitments and indocatorsThe SWA model introduces 3 ‘creative tensions’