enhancing budget monitoring and expenditure tracking for health issues and marginalised groups
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Enhancing Budget Monitoring and Expenditure Tracking for Health Issues and Marginalised Groups

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 47

Enhancing Budget Monitoring and Expenditure Tracking for Health Issues and Marginalised Groups - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 144 Views
  • Uploaded on

Enhancing Budget Monitoring and Expenditure Tracking for Health Issues and Marginalised Groups. Bucharest Workshop ~ OSI Partners 17/18 th October 2008 Teresa Guthrie Centre for Economic Governance and AIDS in Africa. Centre for Economic Governance and AIDS in Africa.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Enhancing Budget Monitoring and Expenditure Tracking for Health Issues and Marginalised Groups' - willa


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
enhancing budget monitoring and expenditure tracking for health issues and marginalised groups

Enhancing Budget Monitoring and Expenditure Tracking for Health Issues and Marginalised Groups

Bucharest Workshop ~ OSI Partners

17/18th October 2008

Teresa Guthrie

Centre for Economic Governance and AIDS in Africa

centre for economic governance and aids in africa
Centre for Economic Governance and AIDS in Africa

CEGAA aims to contribute to improved economic governance, fiscal policy and financial management and accountability, with specific attention to improving the response to HIV and AIDS.

  • Through ~ economic and budget analysis research, training and capacity building, and advocacy activities
  • With ~ civil society orgs, independent research agencies, parliamentarians and Ministries of Health and National AIDS Commissions.
overview of this presentation
Overview of this Presentation
  • Potential scope for budget monitoring and expenditure tracking
  • Different foci & methods in BMET
    • Costing
    • Budget monitoring
    • Expenditure tracking
  • Examples of evidence-based advocacy using BMET data
  • Key decisions in developing the Project TORs
slide4

Transparency & Accountability ~ Govt Allocation & Expenditure Processes

  • Govt Budget is a powerful economic policy tool to balance the revenue & expenditure, maintain fiscal discipline, and translate policies into services. Undermined by IMF/ WB conditionalities.
  • Budget allocation is powerful indicator of the priorityaccorded to health (or other issue), more than policy or legislation, and are key to the sustainability of programmes.
  • Participatory, transparent, accountable budget & expenditure systems indicate degree democracy in the country.
  • Budget Allocations do not equate to actual Expenditure
  • Monitoring of allocations & expenditure depends upon strong financial information systems!
bmet compliments policy service analysis strengthens advocacy
BMET compliments policy & service analysis & strengthens advocacy

Policy

Policy Analysis

BUDGET $$

Prog.Evaluation

BMET

Services

definitions
Definitions
  • Costing – determining required resources, quantities, their costs and calculating total cost for an intervention
  • Budgeting – a plan to manage the available resources, within a specific timeframe (usually 1year) according to the project plan (intended allocations)
  • Expenditure – those resources spent on particular interventions
  • Adequacy – are the inputs sufficient to achieve intended goals – implies knowledge of how much is needed.
  • Efficacy / Effective – achieves its intended outputs or outcomes – implies programme plan.
definitions cont
Definitions cont.
  • Efficient – achieves its outputs with the best use of inputs/ resources – most cost-efficient.
  • Allocative efficiency – best choice of type of intervention between different types of intervention (eg. Prevention activities vs treatment activities.
  • Technical efficiency – best choice of intervention from same type of interventions (eg. Within treatment options, best and cheapest ARVs).
  • Operational efficiency – intervention is run/ implemented as efficiently as possible.
  • Programme outputs – immediate tangible products
  • Programme outcomes – results of the outputs
  • Programme impact –longer-term effects (the overall purpose for the intervention)
fiscal cycle different phases methods
Fiscal Cycle ~ Different Phases & Methods

Assessment of Resource

Need – costing analysis

Budget Monitoring

Process

Actual amounts

Revenue & tax

Sector analysis

Budget Allocations –

indication of intended

PUBLIC expenditure

Your use of the data

will influence all

these aspects

Public

Private

Donor

Outcome analysis –

long-term indicators.

Impact assessment

Actual Expenditure – execution

of budget. Can include

all sources of funds and

by all service providers

National

Provincial

District

Life years saved

Quality of life

Reduced prevalence rates

Causal link

Effectiveness

(CEA/CBA/CUA)

Expenditure

Analysis

Process/finance channels

Actual amounts

Output analysis –

interim indicators

comparing with

objectives of expenditure

Outputs

Social Auditing

Effectiveness

Quality

slide9

Linking Resource Need Estimates to Allocation Analysis to Expenditure Estimates

Howmuchwasspent

Howmuchwasallocated

Howmuchisneeded

  • Throughgovernment
    • Public
    • Foreign
    • Private
  • Through private orgs/NGOs
  • In strategicprograms
    • Targeted IEC
    • Condoms
    • PMTCT
    • STI treatment
    • VTC
    • ARV treatment
    • IO treatment
    • Palliativeservices
    • Social ImpactMitigation
    • Staff training
    • Research
  • Beneficiaries?
  • Outputs
  • At global level
  • At nationallevel
    • MOH
    • Otherministries
    • NGO, CSO, CBO
  • At provincelevel
    • Tertiary, Secondary
    • Primarylevel
    • NGO, CSO, CBO
  • At local level
  • In strategicprograms
  • Basedonneed (idealistically?)
  • Currentlycovered (reality?)
  • Financial / Programmatic gaps

$$$

$$

$

1 costing methods
1. Costing Methods
  • Costing - determining the expenditure required to purchase the resources/ good/ inputs needed to achieve an activity or strategy
  • Budgeting - the allocation of resources to match requirements.
  • Once the cost of an activity is determined, the total number of desired activities will then determine the desired funding (case of treatment).
1 costing cont
1. Costing cont.
  • In costing we identify and measure all the inputs and all the outputs.
  • Costs are always related to the outcomes they produce. Outcomes can also be called benefits or output. There are intermediate and final outcomes.
  • Some examples:
    • HIV treatment programmes: cost per life year gained
    • HIV prevention programmes: cost per HIV case prevented
  • At a more basic level, we often relate costs to certain activities, such as the cost of an inpatient day or the cost per outpatient visit
costs to be included
Costs to be included
  • Direct– all the expenses incurred in delivering the health service, including shared costs
  • Indirect costs – those additional costs, usually from the perspective of the patient, in accessing treatment, eg. Transport, loss of productivity, etc
  • Intangible costs – those difficult to identify and measure eg. The drawbacks due to illness, depression, loss of quality of life
    • Recurrent costs - Resources that are used up within one year or costs that are incurred on an annual basis
    • Capital costs - Resources that last for more than one year (buildings, medical equipment, furniture, training of staff on HIV medicine and ART etc).
    • Shared costs - resources will be used jointly by the ART programme and other programmes in the health facility
2 budget monitoring approach
2. Budget Monitoring Approach
  • Using the central and sub-national budget documents
  • Using the available line-items for the intended allocations for a sector (eg. Health), programme (eg. HIV/AIDS and STI), facility (eg. Hospitals/ clinics)
  • Undertake simple analysis with the nominal figures to ascertain:
    • Amount allocated – nominal & real terms (adjusted for inflation)
    • Increases from previous year (or more) ~ trends
    • Projected increases (if uses MTEF)
    • Proportional priorities ~ shares of total exp & GDP
    • Per capita allocation ~ adequacy (requires costing), regional comparison
public health as share of total expenditure

Prioritisation of Health ~ proportional analysis

(Public Health as share of total expenditure)

18%

Mozambique

16%

Abuja target

14%

Namibia - Total for MoHSS

12%

South Africa

10%

Namibia – Health specific

8%

Kenya

6%

4%

2%

0%

2000/1

2001/2

2002/3

2003/4

2004/5

2005/6

Source: Guthrie & Hickey, 2004. ABU, Idasa.

slide15

3. Expenditures Tracking ~ What do we want to know?

To describe the financial flows and actual expenditures for HIV and AIDS:

  • Who has promised/ committed/ allocated what?
  • Who pays (sources)?
  • Who manages the funds (financing agents)?
  • Who provides the services (providers)?
  • What was provided (functions/ASC: prevention, treatment, social mitigation, other sector activities)?
  • What are the budget components (Objects of expenditure)?
  • Who benefits from the spending (beneficiaries)?
  • Compare the budgeted/ allocated/ committed / transferred amounts with the actual expenditures
data required to understand spending
Data Required to Understand Spending

Programme/

Activity

Programme/

Activity

Programme/

Activity

Programme/

Activity

Programme/

Activity

Programme/

Activity

Programme/

Activity

Programme/

Activity

Adjusted from UNAIDS NASA approach.

flow of resources from origin to end users reconstruction of transactions

Source

Provider

Functions

A

C

B

Target Groups

Objects of Expenditure

Flow of resources from origin to end users: reconstruction of transactions

Agent

4 output monitoring
4. Output Monitoring
  • Social Auditing
  • Citizen Score Cards
  • Service Satisfaction Surveys
  • Quality assessment of services
  • Counting numbers of beneficiaries, staff members, availability & quantity of drugs
  • These activities are better carried out by the community members / beneficiaries of the services
  • Clinical data – life years saved, QALYs, DALYs
eg bmet tb treatment in sa
Eg. BMET : TB treatment in SA
  • Initially institutionalisation of TB pts
  • Advent of DOTS – needed evidence to prove was more cost-effective than institutionalisation
  • Then rolled out DOTS
  • With advent of HIV/AIDS, co-infection rates increased
  • Needed evidence to prove that ART would be cost-effective in reducing incidence of OIs (incl. TB), and that govt could afford to provide ARVs free to patients
  • Now calling for integrated treatment of HIV/AIDS and TB, and needing evidence to prove that TB prophylaxis for HIV-patients is cost effective
  • MDR-TB & XDR-TB… ?
sources of hiv aids funds in swaziland

400,000,000

350,000,000

300,000,000

International

250,000,000

funds

200,000,000

Public Funds

Emalangenn

150,000,000

100,000,000

50,000,000

-

2005/2006

2006/2007

239,520,821

220,816,750

International funds

32,835,809

136,915,968

Public Funds

Year

Sources of HIV/AIDS Funds in Swaziland
slide31

Region

(All)

IDU Spending, Needs and Expenditures in EECA*

2006 and 2007

$800,000

$700,000

$600,000

$500,000

$400,000

$300,000

$200,000

$100,000

$0

Bulgaria

Croatia

Georgia

Kyrgyzstan

Latvia

Tajikistan

Armenia

Bulgaria

Kazakstan

Republic of

Moldova

2006

2007

Data

Total Expenditures

Total Needs

Reporting_Year

Country

*Armenia 2007, Bulgaria 2006-2007, Croatia 2006, Georgia 2006, Kazakhstan 2007, Kyrgyzstan 2006, Latvia 2006, Republic of Moldova 2007, Tajikistan 2006

opportunities for evidence based political decisions
Opportunities for evidence-based political decisions
  • adequacy of funding – public & external
    • Public commitments-meeting national/international commitments ~ long-term sustainability
    • Comparison to costed NSP estimates of required resources – funding gap analysis
    • Centralised funding and spending with low funds for the sub-national level
    • Data not disaggregated according to national and sub-national levels
    • Discrepancies between allocations and actual expenditures ~ measurement of absorptive capacity, leakages, transaction costs
opportunities for evidence based political decisions 2
Opportunities for evidence-based political decisions (2)
  • ALLOCATIVE DECISIONS – PRIORITIES
    • Meeting national priorities (aligned to NSP?)
    • Balance between programmes ~ unsustainability of treatment costs without adequate prevention interventions ~ allocative efficiency
    • Equity in allocations ~ between geographical areas, providers, beneficiaries & according to need
  • EFFICIENCY OF SPENDING
    • Provides varying unit costs for interventions, allows comparison of technical efficiency
    • Identifies poor absorption capacity ~ allows for exploration of factors: bottlenecks, dumping etc.
opportunities for evidence based political decisions 3
Opportunities for evidence-based political decisions (3)
  • Coordination, Harmonisation and Alignment
    • Alignment of the actual HIV/AIDS spending to NSP – public and external
    • Agent analysis shows who determines use of funds
    • Identifies poor harmonisation – duplicative financing & reporting, high transaction costs
  • Institutionalization of NASA
    • Within the Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) framework
    • Using standardised financial information/ reporting mechanisms
opportunities for evidence based political decisions 4
Opportunities for evidence-based political decisions (4)
  • Enhanced Transparency, Accountability & Economic Governance
    • Increased pressure (& desire) for mutual accountability by all players
    • Promotes a (legal) framework to ensure all partners report through a national resource tracking system
    • Link framework to the National Resource Mobilisation and Management Strategy
    • Using the framework to harmonise standards of costing among different partners
    • Ensures transparent procurement systems & best pricing within and between countries & regions
opportunities for evidence based political decisions 5
Opportunities for evidence-based political decisions (5)
  • Standardization & Comparability
    • Ensures standard classification of spending & activities within & between countries & regions
      • Provides comprehensive list of possible interventions
    • Resource needs estimates
      • Classification standardised with NASA
      • Package of interventions
      • Future requirements (funding gap) by programmes
      • Comparison of TFRR & TE
so how to go about it
So how to go about it….
  • Broad consultation to discuss and decide what are the key issues requiring advocacy to bring about change
  • And how can budgetary and expenditure data strengthen the advocacy campaign
  • Be clear about your purpose
determining the purpose intended outcomes
Determining the purpose & intended outcomes
  • What are the key issues that you feel require an advocacy response?
  • What is your advocacy goal & intended outcomes?
  • What data is required to provide evidence to support the advocacy strategy?
  • Who will be the key audience of the findings? Who will be the likely supporters and the likely opposition?
  • What will be the focus/ topic of the project – OST, IDUs, HIV/AIDS, TB, health generally, health systems strengthening, ART?
planning the project terms of reference
Planning the Project – Terms of Reference

The scope of the project:

  • Which phase/s of the budget are being considered (need assessment, costing, resource allocation, processes), budgeted allocations analysis, expenditure analysis, output analysis, impact analysis)
  • Which years are to be covered
  • Which sources of funds (public and/or external and/or private, OOPE)
  • Which providers of services – all, only central or only district level, specific facilities, eg hospitals/ schools, etc etc?
  • Will the outputs and outcomes measured? Against what?
  • Efficiency analysis? (CBA, CEA, CUA?)
  • Is analysis of the beneficiary groups required?
  • Is analysis of the objects of expenditure required?
resource tracking process
Resource Tracking Process

The broad steps in expenditure analysis:

  • Developing the project ToR ~ agree on purpose (advocacy goals), scope & methods & partners
  • Planning and preparation
  • Training & capacity building
  • Data Collection, Processing & Analysis
  • Preliminary findings validation & identification of advocacy campaigns / strategies
  • Final Report & Dissemination
  • Advocacy campaign implementation
  • On-going BMET by organisations involved
possible country level partnership arrangements
Possible Country-Level Partnership Arrangements
  • The CORE Team could be made up of:
  • An organisation/s with economic or research skills
  • A Community level organisation &/or a strong advocacy org
  • Association of PLWHAs or PLWD/ Chln & Youth / Gender network (depending on your focus)
  • Members of the CORE team should be able to commit 2 or 3 people, 50% of their time, for at least 2yrs, hopefully 3yrs.
  • The REFERENCE group could include other key stakeholders whose input /assistance is necessary
  • Broader stakeholder group to identify issues, advocacy, etc
  • Select one org to be the country Co-ordinating agent
  • Identify suitable organisations to provide the tech. support
challenges in monitoring allocations expenditure
Challenges in Monitoring Allocations & Expenditure

Budget documents:

  • Do not give detail
  • Not actual expenditure
  • Non-standardised
  • Some donor contributions off-budget
  • Limited CS participation in allocative decisions
  • Allocations not based on need/ equity
  • Not used as a planning tool

Expenditure records:

  • Not available/ accessible to CS
  • Not disaggregated (by programme/ facility / district)
  • Donors do not provide actual expenditure by recipients (vs commitmts/ disbursmts)
  • NHA data impt but not detailed sufficiently (esp.public sources)

FOI laws in few countries or not used for accessing public expenditure records.

cso challenges in bmet
CSO Challenges in BMET
  • Stronger on advocacy side
    • but often lacking technical capacity on ‘number-crunching’
  • Stronger on the social auditing, citizen score cards, survey satisfaction surveys
    • but lacking skills for assessing efficiency of spending, absorptive capacity
  • BMET requires long-term commitment ito of HR and building capacity and transferring skills
  • Lack human capacity and usually over-stretched
  • Reliant of project-based funding – unreliable, unsustainable, no investment in institutional devmt
thank you
Thank You

For more information contact:

ad