Transcript Pre-SAC - Children Without Worms

Committing to monthly sub-meetings and
creating an email group to coordinate
Pre-SAC
Targets
• 2020: 100% of countries requiring STH PCT have achieved 75% national coverage
of pre-SAC
• 2020: >75% of children needing PCT worldwide have been treated
Strategies and
commitments
• Double the number of pre-school children covered by 2016: Go from ~ 66
million children covered in 2012 to 120 million
• Build close relationships with UNICEF and WHO for drug coordination and delivery
• Work to prequalify suppliers for deworming drugs for pre-SAC
• Determine options to coordinate drug supply in-country – pilot in a few countries
• Test ways to improve reporting – pilot in a few countries
• Integrate with WASH
Barriers
Leverage the
Collaboration
•
•
•
•
•
Major concern: pre-SAC coverage has been decreasing
No drug donation from pharma for pre-SAC
Many issues with current reporting process
Drug supply – Lack of incentive for manufacturers of drugs to prequalify
Difficult to coordinate between governments and NGOs
– Reporting treatments
– Coordinating drug delivery
• Different levels of government engagement – need specific approaches
• Difficulties with the last mile of drug delivery
• No single person coordinating STH at UNICEF
• WHO, UNICEF, Vitamin Angels and World Vision to coordinate
• Improve and coordinate reporting – coverage may be higher than we think
Draft—for discussion only
1
SAC
Targets
Strategies and
commitments
Barriers
• Primary goal remains increasing coverage for school-aged children to reach WHO target
• We propose an overarching STH strategy to:
– 1) help drive STH momentum and publicity to generate demand for PC
– 2) go beyond individual perspective of MoH or MoE and push cross-sectoral engagement
• We will ensure increasing effectiveness and efficiency of school-based de-worming
– Can make use of existing structures in schools- eg. UNICEF WASH activities are already in
schools which can be extended to cover de-worming
• We propose a communications plan to provide critical info at a country level, publicize benefits of
STH MDA to governments and WHO country offices, and highlight benefits of cross-sectoral
working
• New GPE strategy post-replenishment to incentivize de-worming in country plans; process already
started
• We will make use of WFP essential package of interventions as a vehicle to drive school MDA
• We believe govt partnership is key to achieving coverage targets: MoH working with MoE, coming
together with agencies but owning the programs from the start
• We believe country focus makes sense to bend the curve. This is useful for advocacy, but we
cannot take our eye of the other countries- not always so easy for small countries. Use '5+' model?
• MoE and MoH joint-working essential but difficult to achieve- who should own programs, who
should fund, who should conduct M&E etc
• Challenge is not external resources, but more the effort required to get programs institutionalized
• Need research to understand and communicate benefits of de-worming more clearly but will
continue to be difficult to acquire definitive evidence- can just use communications instead?
Draft—for discussion only
2
WASH (I/II)
Which other partners are required at the table?
• Add USAID, CARE, Save the Children, Hilton to the core group
• Further engage private funders (Proctor & Gamble, Charity Water) and academic institutions
• Critical to engage Advocacy in determining how best to reach private sector / funders
• Critical to categorize each partner as to engagement in water, sanitation and/or hygiene
Targets
What are relevant indicators for this workstream?
• Existing indicators include open defecation, latrine or sanitation facility coverage (schools, households,
clinics), water storage, handwashing
– Potential new indicators: shoe wearing, children playing with animals
• Challenge is that most data is self-reported or observational
– Opportunity as MDA done at schools and households to gather WASH data
What are the right targets for this workstream?
• WASH equivalent of WHO targets established in joint monitoring programs by UNICEF and WHO – e.g.,
universal access to latrines in schools by 2025
Strategies
and
commitments
What are some short-term, no regrets opportunities we can focus on now?
• USAID, DFID, World Bank, and Gates Foundation all engage in WASH efforts and should work internally
to bring their strategies together.
• WASH can use NTD to determine which geographies to target, and NTD can provide WASH with health
indicators and share the amazing health impact
– Critical role for donors to incentivize grantees
– Work with advocacy partners to publicize positive impact of WASH/ NTD collaboration
How can we ensure long-term, country-led impact?
• Systematic measurement of health outcomes-based indicators critical for long-term impact
• Need inter-ministerial coordinating committees to establish joint national plan
– Opportunity to provide guidelines and principles of engagement for coordination
– Critical to align committee work with national-level priorities
Draft—for discussion only
3
WASH (II/II)
Barriers
Which other barriers are missing from this list?
• Difficult to aggregate investments
– Water, sanitation work tied to food programs; hygiene work tied to maternal health work
• No system set up to measure health based outcomes for WASH (potentially for STH / NTD – need to
tangibly make link to nutrition and other broader health outcomes)
How and where can this group of partners work together to overcome those barriers and execute the
strategies discussed earlier?
• WASH can use NTD to determine which geographies to target, and NTD can provide WASH with health
indicators and share the amazing health impact
Leverage
the
Collaboration
Which opportunities to leverage the Collaboration would you pursue?
• We have a collaboration level vision, but we can also have a mission for this WASH group that can be
shared as common goal
– How can each sector contribute to how collaboration will achieve the vision?
• Different voices are compelling in different places, and we all have different access to different groups –
we can use our voice to support each other in the partnership
Which additional opportunities are you aware of?
• Opportunity to engage with Sanitation and Water for All partnership, an emerging multi-lateral initiative
with developing countries, some donor countries, and funder organizations
– Commitment from Gates, USAID, WaterAid
What is the value in a country focus?
• Enormous value in a country focus after aligning on set of indicators
– E.g., One scenario that Gates Foundation hopes to test requires WASH intervention to bring down
transmission level – where are WASH partners currently working?
Draft—for discussion only
4
Advocacy and resource mobilization
Strategies and commitments
Priority next steps: Talking points for all the partners (to be developed by Secretariat)
• Consensus on "what are we selling" - present it as a package – show where they can leverage existing platforms
• Consistent messaging of impact of reducing STH across sectors and synthesize known data
Generate demand at country level with consistent messages of impact
• Elevate STH (deworming, nutrition, and sanitation) on the policy agenda – foster MoH and MoE conversations
• World without Worms or Children without Worms campaign
• Manage the risk of taking STH out of NTD agenda – but rather adding the cross-sector
• What is the evidence? Build the data and communicate the data that is available to support STH control so
there is consistent messaging around impact
• Articulate a clear story of impact of deworming on nutrition, educational outcomes, gender issues, and long
term economic growth --- build the case going both ways
• Develop case studies for organizations who want to get involved (e.g., with Scale up for Nutrition, MoH/MoE
looking together)
Facilitate country conversations
• Top 5 high burden countries and try to do a cross-sector meeting to emphasize the conversation; sub-regional
convenings to do training/awareness
• Bringing the right conversations together within the country
Focus on sustainability and capacity at country
• Empowering the NTD coordinators/ steering committees to move beyond technical and take on advocacy
• Scope of funding from donors to have resources for advocacy/ capacity building on the country level
• Should we prioritize that any funds toward STH (or NTDs) go through the government?
Increase resources available for STH --- donor country
• Showing that cross-sector impact can generate and broaden the funding base
• Advocating nutrition funders to add deworming to enhance the impact of their programs
• Identify "catalogue" of concrete investable / actionable concept notes, actionable government plans
Draft—for discussion only
5