STRATEGIC PLANNING

1. STRATEGIC PLANNING V.Slobozian Coordinator, Harm Reduction Programs SOROS Foundation Moldova 27.06.2011

2. 2011-2015 National Program Developed to enforce: Law on State Surveillance on Public Health No 10- XVI of February 3rd, 2009 (Official Monitor, 2009, no 67, Art. 183) Law on prevention of HIV/AIDS No 23-XVI of February 16th, 2007 (Official Monitor, 2007, No 54, Art. 250) Global Commitments to Millennium Development Goals, Objective 6 “Halt HIV/AIDS and TB by 2015 and begin reversing the spread” Declaration of Commitment of the United Nations General Assembly Special Session on HIV/AIDS of 2001 Commitment to provide Universal Access

3. 2011-2015 National Program Developed according to: National Development Strategy for the 2008-2011 period approved by Law No 295 of December 21st, 2007 Plan of Actions to implement the National Development Strategy, approved by government Decision No 191 of February 25th, 2008 National Health Policy, approved through Government Decision No 866 of 15.08.07 National Strategy for the National Healthcare System Reform for the years 2008-2017, approved in 2007

4. 2011-2015 National Program Developed according to: Government Decision No 33 of January 11th, 2007 on the rules for development and unified requirements for policy documents Methodological Guidelines on decision-making Methodological Guidelines on ex-ante analysis of public policy impact Terms of Reference of HIV/TB/STI National Coordination Council Recommendations of the: Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS(UNAIDS), World Health Organization (WHO), United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), United Nations Population Fund(UNFPA), United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC)

5. METHODOLOGICAL GUIDELINES on decision-making • The principle of prioritizing public policy - public policy planning is performed according to Government priorities and availability of (financial and human) resources managed by the government; • The principle of considering several policy options - in the public policy making process, several options are considered in order to adopt and implement the best one; • The principle of predicting the impact of public policies - the policy making process ensures analysis of all important dimensions of impact; • The principle of public policies continuity and coordination - in the process of elaborating new public policy, the evaluation and updating of existing public policies and their coordination with other public policy initiatives is ensured; • The principle of participation - requires the involvement of stakeholders in the planning, development and evaluation of public policies.

6. National intersectorial and sectorial public policy documents Government program of activity National Response to HIV Strategic planning Annual plan of action Legal and normative acts Public policy proposals Stages of the process to plan public policies • METHODOLOGICAL GUIDELINES on decision making, State Chancellery

7. Defining problem and objective Evaluation and corrective actions Identifying possible solutions Monitoring and corrective actions Analyzing the impact of public policy options and recommending an option Internal and external consulting Implementing Developing PPP Approval of normative act by Government Approval of the PPP by the relevant line institutions Developing the normative act Developing, reviewing and approving public policies

8. Stages of policy document development (GD 33, 2007) a) Identification of problems; b) Information collection and analysis; c) Formulating policy proposal with the definition of the problem, policy objectives, beneficiaries and scenarios of implementation; d) Carrying out impact analysis for policy scenarios (SWOT analysis); e) Consulting policy scenarios and the exhaustive nature of risk analysis using the reporting verticals of the initiating institution, and laterally at the level of units in charge of policy analysis, monitoring and evaluation from the line Ministries; f) Formulating the policy document; g) Extended consultations (including via posting on web)and reviewing of the document; h) Finalizing and presenting the final version for approval; i) Formulating requirements for the monitoring reports; j) Approving the policy document act; k) Monitoring and evaluating the implementation of the policy document. • The 2011-2015 National Program on HIV was additionally examined by all the TWG of the HIV/TB/STI NCC

9. 2011-2015 National Program Developed based on the: Midterm evaluation of the 2006-2010 NAP Final evaluation of the 2006-2010 NAP / National Response Analysis Ex-ante analysis of the 2011-2015 NAP draft Estimates of sizes of MARPS and epidemiological estimations and projections (using the Estimations and Projections Package-EPP and Spectrum ) Behavioural and biological studies among vulnerable groups (IDU, FSW, MSM, migrants, prisoners) Results of the modeling of probable Modes of Transmission and triangulation Evaluation of prevention in the 2006 – 2010 NAP (2011) Other relevant studies

10. Ex-ante analysis

11. Number of new infections by risk groups category, Scenario B, 2010-2015

12. Analysis of risks and opportunities • Risks identified in the strategic planning phase of developing the National Program - the National Program document includes strategies for mitigating risks • Risk analysis overarching for the national prevention and response efforts • Integration in existing national disaster preparedness and response mechanisms

13. 2011-2015 National Program Developed based on 6 principles: a) National Response to HIV/AIDS is evidence-informed b) Human rights based approach in prioritizing interventions for an equitable coverage of the most affected/marginalized groups c) Ensuring that the gender equality principle is respected d) Ensuring universal access to quality prevention, treatment and care e) Involving communities and people living with HIV / AIDS in developing, implementing and evaluating the program f) Monitoring and evaluation

14. Logical framework of NP results • Determining the hierarchy of results based on the priorities identified through the situational analysis/national response analysis • SMART Objectives (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Time bound). • Impact, outcome and process indicators, disaggregated to measure equity of access to various services/thematic areas of the NAP • Baseline (2009) and targets (2015) stipulated for impact and outcome indicators • Targets established through a participatory process, based on modelling exercises/estimates/projections and expert opinion consensus, in line with Universal Access principles • Annual targets established by interpolation and validated participatively

15. NP purpose and impact indicators

16. Objective 1:

17. Objective 2:

18. Planning interventions • Based on specific NAP objectives • Based on lessons learned by implementing previous programme cycles • Based on interventions that have proven their cost efficiency • Based on international good practices recommendations/guidelines • For the coverage of key groups with high risk of infection • For equity and increasing accessibility

19. Planning for the provision of sustainability • Planning to increase the share of funding from public sources over the years • Interventions to strengthen programme management • Integrated interventions to consolidate systems - health system, social protection system, education system, M&E system • Capacity building on levels of decision-makers, operational-technical levels and service provision levels • Technical assistance plan for strengthening systems and capacities of human resources

20. Thank you! vslobozian@soros.md Soros Foundation Moldova 32 Bulgara Street, tel. + 373 22 270031