Dr. Stuart Kean Co-Chair UK OVC Working Group

1. Moving “Upstream” with Children HIV and AIDS Integrating CABA into national development instruments Inter-Agency Task Team on Children HIV and AIDS April 23-25 2007 Washington Dr. Stuart Kean Co-Chair UK OVC Working Group

2. Summary • Background – Global Partners Forum & IATT • UK OVC Working Group concept • UNICEF – ESARO & HQ concept • Research methodology outline • Preliminary findings of desk review • Next steps

3. Background • 2006 Global Partners Forum – Priority Recommendations: • 5.1 Integrate action for children affected by AIDS into development instruments • 5.2 Strengthen national coordination of actions for children affected by AIDS • 2006 IATT: “Conduct a review of national HIV/AIDS plans and development plans in countries where NPAs have been finalized to identify where children affected by HIV & AIDS are included as a priority group in development plans (ie PRSP, MTEF, etc.). The process should be conducted in partnership with country level actors and could be utilized to mobilize and strengthen civil society at country level.”

4. UK OVC Working Group concept Undertake review of development instruments (NDPs, PRSPs, NSFs, METFs, SWAps), in sample of 16 countries with OVC NPAs • Review importance of integration and key factors influencing inclusion • Action planning to take forward recommendations • Major role for civil society

5. UNICEF Concept • - Concern to scale up national responses in NPAs • - Gain increased government ownership of plans, political commitment & core government resources • - Avoid promoting parallel programmes and projects • - Thus better integrate OVC into lead sectors, national development plans, PRSPs and budgets Research to: • Summarise the benefits and risks of taking an integrated/mainstreamed approach to OVC; • Review the experience of integrating orphans and vulnerable children into PRSPs to learn from country successes and failures; • Use the outcomes to develop an action plan to strengthen partnerships and capacity for improved integration.

6. Research Overview Four phases: • Desk review summarising the benefits and risks of integrating vulnerable children in development instruments • Country case studies reviewing experiences of such integration in East and southern Africa with special focus in three countries (Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia) additional information from Kenya, Malawi and Mozambique • Action planning to strengthen the integration of children issues in critical development instruments in the three case countries and develop generic recommendations for other countries – material for toolkit • Feedback to stakeholders at a regional workshop

7. Criteria for country selection • Well owned OVC National Plan of Action • Existence of an OVC Steering Committee • Strong civil society group working on OVC • Potential for improved integration of vulnerable children in development instruments • Number of UK OVCWG partners agreed to work together in country • Strong local contact

8. Key research questions 1. What have been the demonstrated benefits of including OVC (HIV/AIDS, children, vulnerable groups) in development instruments - the benefits need to be observed in the extent to which funds have been released for OVC, either domestic government and/or external donor funds? 2. Which of the development instruments have been most important in influencing the release of funds for OVC, both domestic and external? 3. What have been the key factors influencing the processes by which OVC (HIV/AIDS, vulnerable groups etc) have been included in the priority development instruments? 4. What strategies used & actions taken to overcome some of the potential problems encountered when integrating OVC into development instruments?

9. Preliminary findings of desk research • Little evidence found of OVC included in development instruments • Importance of looking at lessons of integration from HIV & AIDS (WB/UNDP/UNAIDS Joint Process) & gender mainstreaming • Benefits of Integrating into PRSPs & MTEF: • Critical for high level debate – creates forum and policy makers understand micro-macro linkages more easily • Promote improved cross-sectoral coordination • Greater ownership by key ministries e.g. Finance • Increased domestic financial contributions leading to increased financial predictability and sustainability • May result in donor funds being moved”on-budget” • Integration provides “ticket” for consideration in decentralised planning, budgeting and implementation.

10. Preliminary findings of desk research cont... Disadvantages of integrating into PRSPs & MTEFs • Danger of “policy slippage” • Without adequate representation in indicators OVC or in MTEF and annual budget, OVC risk losing out at national policy level • Even if OVC reach annual budget, there is high probability of significant mismatch between budget commitment and allocation • Once integrated there is less attention from the “champion” sector, leading to loss of attention: “evaporation” • Ministries responsible for children are marginalised and under-resourced with little influence over national resources • Shifting resources to national level planning and budgeting risks losing funding for specific interventions e.g. civil society activities • Shifting analysis “upstream” to PRSPs/MTEFs may lead to loss of quality and insight on critical decisions • Integration to down decentralised implementation may lead to “slippage” as decentralised structures often have less capacity than responsibility.

11. Preliminary findings of desk research cont... • Potential of domestic finances to bring predictability and sustainability is doubtful because: • levels of government funding remain low • External funding levels likely to remain high • Summary findings: • Integration in PRSP/MTEF essential for longer-term national policy ownership • Must be accompanied with use of a mix of instruments to bring shorter-term benefits

12. Next Steps • Country case studies draft reports • Country action planning workshops • Report and materials for generic toolkit • Dissemination workshops