Home | Main Page Title :Next Steps on Summit Follow-up and National Programmes of Action Document Type :Executive Directives (CF/EXD/...) Country :GlobalDocument Symbol/Series: CF/EXD/1991-014 Year Published : 1991 PDF Link : Detailed information (click on the twistee to see more) Executive Summary: Table of Contents Memorandum: Annex A:Next Steps on Summit Follow-up and National Programmes of Action Annex A: Summary of Country Progress Reports on Follow-up to The World Summit for Children Document Text: To: Regional Directors Country Representatives Assistant Representatives Division Directors Chief Executives of UNICEF National Committees From: James P. Grant Executive Dire mor Click to return to Table of Contents Next Steps on Summit Follow-up and National Programmes of Action Feedback from the recent Representatives meetings, Regional Directors meeting and the review of the 1991 Annual Reports indicates that encouraging progress is being made with regard to the preparation of the National Programmes of Action (NPAs) and other follow-up actions to the World Summit for Children. The present EXD is intended to update and reconfirm the tasks ahead for UNICEF with respect to WSC follow-up and NPA preparation in the coming months. More detailed guidance is contained in CF/EXD/1991-011 and the document E/ICEF/1991/17 both issued in July 1991 which elaborate on the contents as well as the processes related to the preparation of (1) a progress report on the Summit follow-up actions taken to date and (2) the National Programme of Action for the next 10 years. Progress Reports Field office responses to Annex A of the 1991 Annual Reports have given us a good preview of the progress being made on preparation of NPAs and other WSC follow-up actions. We are now looking forward to receiving the formal country progress reports which Governments have been requested to share with UNICEF by 31 December 1991. This will be the major basis for the first progress report to be presented to the UNICEF Executive Board in 1992. As advised in EXD 1991-011, in the case of developing countries, we are expecting the UNICEF Field Offices to prepare a summary of the country report (not to exceed 5 pages) and the Regional Office and relevant Geographic Section of PD to consolidate the country reports into a regional summary (not to exceed 10 pages) and to send it to reach NYHQ by 15 January 1992. In the case of industrialised countries PFO and DPA are expected to prepare the summary reports as advised in the same EXD 1991 011. Field Offices and PFO/DPA are encouraged to use the format of Annex A (attached) which is a slightly revised version of the Annex A to the 1991 Annual Report, in summarising the country reports. National Programmes of Action We expect that some 100 countries will have prepared their NPAs by early next year. With such encouraging response world-wide, we are now particularly keen to see that the NPAs are serious, well prepared, action-oriented documents. The quality and credibility of the NPAs is clearly more important than the speed with which these are completed. If it takes a little longer to prepare a high quality NPA, we should encourage the Government to take its time. Similarly, if a draft NPA has been prepared in a rush to meet the 31 December 1991 deadline, we should now encourage the Government to finalise it but taking the necessary time to elaborate and refine it into a high quality programme. While it is the Government's responsibility and prerogative to prepare and promulgate the NPA as it sees fit, UNICEF can advise and assist the Government in a number of ways. It is assumed that most UNICEF field offices will have been quite closely associated with the Government in the initial preparation of the draft NPAs. Depending on the extent of UNICEF's initial involvement and the Government's procedures and sensitivities regarding comments and advice on the draft NPAs, there may be additional opportunities for UNICEF to offer further comments and suggestions before the NPAs are finalised. Even in the case of finalised NPAs it might be worthwhile to review and offer comments which may be useful in further elaborating supportive programmes and projects which will be formulated or revised from time to time. The UNICEF Country Representatives are well placed to judge and advise HQs and ROs as to when and how formally we might offer our comments and suggestions. It is well appreciated, though, that the capacity of HQs and ROs to review and comment on the NPAs is going to be extremely limited since we expect to get over 100 such documents in the next six months. But considering that reviewing the NPAs gives us a unique opportunity to influence policies and actions for children over the next decade, this task should be given a "first call" on our time and effort over the next 6 to 9 months. Accordingly we need to organise and mobilise ourselves to devote a significant portion of the time of key staff members at field offices, regional offices and Headquarters for this task. This might imply some changes in the established workplan and travel for some staff. It is to be expected that the NPAs will be of widely varying quality. While some may be elaborate and precise enough to be ready for implementation, others - perhaps most - will be broad perspective plans which need to be translated into actionable project proposals. For most NPAs, active support from the UNICEF country offices and other technical support that can be mobilised within the country would suffice to make them actionable. But there will be some which will require considerable refinement and support from outside the country. UNICEF Regional Offices and HQ Programme Division should identify potential consultants and resource persons who can help country offices in this exercise. The Planning and Co-ordination Office at Headquarters is also developing a roster of consultants for this purpose. More specifically, I would expect the various parts of UNICEF to assume the following responsibilities with respect to the review of NPAs: 1. At the country level Depending on the process followed in preparing the NPA, UNICEF country offices should assist and encourage the Government to organise a review of the NPA inviting national experts, relevant NGOs, representatives of donor countries and aid agencies. Where appropriate, key UNICEF staff from the regional office and HQs might join in such a review. For UNICEF's comments, the guidelines for preparing the NPAs contained in document E/ICEF/1991/17 should prove particularly helpful. As additional guidance, three points merit further stressing: a) In proposing ideas and in reviewing and commenting on draft NPAs, UNICEF staff should use their expertise and advocacy skills to ensure that the goals and strategies of the Summit Plan of Action, duly adapted to national realities, become the major focus of the NPA. There is a need to watch out against the NPA becoming a vehicle for all kinds of programmes and projects which are useful but which do not greatly enhance the achievement of the Summit goals and strategies. It is important to be alert about this risk because some officials might be tempted to include their favourite projects in the NPA knowing that their Head of State/Government is likely to accord it a high priority and in the hope that donors too might be more willing to support a project included in the NPA. It will not be possible to garner strong national and international support for the NPA if it becomes a collection of too many useful but poorly targeted project proposals. b) The NPA should be a model of low-cost, high impact action proposals. We have stated that the achievement of all the goals in all developing countries would require an additional investment of some $20 billion a year, with two-thirds of it coming from developing countries themselves. It would therefore be obvious that no country would reasonably estimate external assistance amounting to billions of dollars per year. A reasonable estimate for most countries would be well under $100 million/year, and considerably less for smaller countries. If the costs identified in the NPAs indicate a much higher order of magnitude, especially in terms of external assistance required, the seriousness with which the NPA is viewed by the donors will be greatly undermined. We should therefore watch out against the NPAs becoming a vehicle for high-cost, prestige projects and unsustainable models of social services. The willingness of developing countries to consider restructuring of their own national budgets to give higher priority to reaching the Summit goals would be another credible indicator of the seriousness of the NPA. c) A good monitoring system that regularly alerts leaders and the public on progress and constraints in reaching declared goals is a powerful instrument for advocacy and mobilisation. Every NPA must contain monitoring mechanisms with the potential to be used as levers for action. 2. At the Regional Level Assisting country offices in reviewing the NPAs must be a priority task of all regional advisers for the next 6 to 9 months. Regional advisers should arrange to bring to the attention of country offices examples of innovative approaches from other countries in the region, and elsewhere. Where appropriate, they should also help secure the views of regional experts from other UN agencies and mobilise their technical assistance. 3. At Headquarters Level Headquarters should arrange a review of NPAs to provide comments and advice to the Country Representative and through him/her to the Government. The Geographic Section of PD should take the lead in organising such reviews inviting relevant sectoral specialists to participate and/or provide comments. Any particularly innovative or exceptional provisions of the NPA should be brought to the attention of the Directorate of PD, the Planning and Coordination Office and others as appropriate. It is understood that Headquarters capacity to undertake a meaningful review of all the NPAs will be severely stretched. Priority should, therefore, be given to reviewing the NPAs of a cross-section of countries identified with the involvement of the Regional Director, Programme Division and the Executive Office. NPAs from Industrialised Countries In the case of industrialised countries, we do not have the same level and frequency of contacts with national counterparts preparing their NPAs. Although we need not and cannot comment extensively on these NPAs, it is important for us to be generally knowledgeable about them. A useful contribution we can make is by citing good examples in our publications and in the Executive Director's speeches. In cases where the NPAs are woefully inadequate, we may also find some appropriate way of discreetly advising the concerned Government. The NPAs from industrial countries should be reviewed by PFO and DPA with appropriate involvement of the concerned Natcoms and the Geneva Office. The PD sectoral advisers should also acquaint themselves with the contents of the NPAs. The main purpose of this review is to make ourselves knowledgeable about how the industrial countries are following-upon their Summit commitments and to advise the senior management of UNICEF on any particularly noteworthy features of the NPAs that we can use for advocacy purposes. Summarising the Highlights of NPAs As the NPAs will come in different size, shape and languages, it would be most desirable for us to prepare a brief succinct summary of each NPA in a fairly standardised format. In the case of developing countries UNICEF country offices should prepare such a summary (not to exceed 10 pages), using the format recommended in Annex I of document E/ICEF/1991/17. In the case of industrialised countries, PFO and DPA should prepare the country summaries with help, where appropriate, of National Committees and/or external consultants. The major headings and suggested length of the summary could be as follows: Introduction ½ page Major problems and needs of children 1 page Status of children and women with respect to the Summit goals 1 page Prioritisation and Adaptation of goals ½ page Phasing and standards ½ page Resource requirements 1 page Restructuring of national budgets and aid allocation 1 page Implementation strategies and approaches 1 page Monitoring, research and evaluation 1 page International cooperation 1 page Highlights of some unique and innovative features of the NPA 1 page Please refer to Annex I of ICEF/1991/17 for suggested contents under each of the above headings. Establishing a Database on Summit follow-up/NPAs The international community looks to UNICEF as the one agency that will be a repository of information on what developing countries, donor agencies, NGOs and others are doing as a follow-up to the World Summit for Children. To respond to queries from the outside as well as to meet our own internal needs, it is essential that we develop some systems where relevant information can be stored, kept up to date and easily retrieved. We should be thinking of two phases: the one leading up to the completion and adoption of the NPA in each country and the phase of NPA implementation. The first phase requires timely data to track a rapidly changing situation. Most of the information is ephemeral and does not merit the development of elaborate systems to capture it. The Planning and Coordination Office at Headquarters produced global and regional compilations of the data provided in Annex A to the 1991 Annual Reports using a PARADOX programme. We are sending copies of the corresponding reports to all field offices and regional offices and would be grateful for any comments on both the product and the process. Something similar will be used to process the data from the summaries of country progress reports to be received by 15 January as a basis for preparing the consolidated report to the 1992 Executive Board. Until all countries have completed and adopted their NPAs there will be a need to update this information, but as 1992 progresses the need will shift to one for maintaining a database on the NPA itself and its implementation. Field offices should be thinking, if they have not already done so, of ways to broaden the databases they use to monitor the country situation and the progress of the country programme of UNICEF cooperation so that they include the NPA and its implementation. In the future it is expected that the Programme Manager system will help to bring all these aspects together, but field offices should not wait for such a system to be finalized before considering how to monitor NPA implementation. Regional offices and the geographic sections of PD should be in a position to provide summaries as requested of the situation as regards NPAs in their region and Summit follow-up by relevant regional institutions. Systems will be needed by PD advisory clusters for sector specific information and action by specialized agencies, by PFO for donor countries and agencies and by DPA for National Committees, NGOs and IGOs. A single, centralized database at headquarters on Summit follow-up does not seem either appropriate or useful. However, the databases maintained by various units of the organization should be readily accessible to all interested offices, including the Information Division, Planning and Coordination Office and the Executive Office. For this purpose, some common ways of expressing and classifying the information must be worked out. Further guidelines on this subject will be prepared and communicated as soon as possible. Meanwhile, opinions and suggestions on this subject will be gratefully received by the Planning and Coordination Office. No doubt it will take a good deal of time and cooperation to develop a multi-level system satisfactory to all. Some trial and error will be inevitable, but I am confident that we can develop dependable databases in the coming months that will be helpful for our work for many years to come. cc: Chiefs, Geographic Sections, Programme Division Click to return to Table of Contents Annex A: Summary of Country Progress Reports on Follow-up to The World Summit for Children The purpose of this summary is to facilitate the preparation of a Consolidated Report to UNICEF's Executive Board and UNICEF's input to the Secretary General's Report to the General Assembly. The report will be based on a combination of features that many countries have in common and particularities that single out some countries for special comment. Details of Summit follow-up in your country that are neither common features of the process nor particularly remarkable in themselves will not be used in preparing the reports mentioned. Please try to keep this in mind as you prepare the summary. Also please note that, while this summary basically follows the format of Annex A to the 1991 Annual Report, its contents should be based on the government's report as of December 1991 as requested in E/ICEF/1991/17, whereas the Annual Report's Annex A reflected the views of the UNICEF office as of September 1991. In cases where the government has not produced a progress report by 31 December 1991, the UNICEF office should prepare the following summary anyway, indicating clearly that it is not based on a government document but rather on the office's best assessment of the situation. This summary has three sections. The first is a simple checklist and the other two provide for short narrative answers. I. The following checklist will appear for all countries in an annex to the Consolidated Report. Please circle or fill in the appropriate answer, conscious that the government will receive a copy of the report. Try as far as possible to fit the category provided or, if none of them apply, to suggest an alternative category that can be expressed succinctly while also explaining your reasons for suggesting this category. National Goals Identified YES NO Overall Strategy Formulated YES NO Sectoral Strategies Developed YES NO Budgetary Allocations Reviewed YES NO (For developed countries) Aid allocations reviewed YES NO Cost estimates done or in process for at least some goals YES NO Sub-national levels involved YES NO NGOs, Civic groups &/or private sector involved YES NO Monitoring mechanisms established (not simply contemplated) YES NO Expected date of completion of NPA (or date completed) MONTH ___ YEAR ____ II. Please provide a succinct narrative summary for each of the following points to the degree that they are relevant: 1. Status of NPA preparation. Describe very briefly and explain. 2. Describe the process by which the NPA is being (was) prepared, including: the entity responsible for overall coordination, institutions involved, both governmental and non-governmental, as well as international agencies. It is of particular interest if the institution responsible for national budgetary allocations is significantly involved in NPA preparation. 3. Characterize the NPA as to how complete, definitive and detailed it is or is likely to be, and whether the central government's NPA will be reflected in similar programmes at sub-national levels. 4. Relationship of the NPA with the National Development Plan, where such exists: Are the goals and strategies of the NPA being, or likely to be, incorporated into the country's overall development plan? If so, how significant is this, and if not, why not? 5. Regarding the goals set by the NPA, some adaptation, priority setting and phasing is to be expected. Describe whether and how this has taken place giving specific instances (e.g.: the target set for a particular goal is lower or higher than that formulated by the Summit). 6. Efforts to estimate the resource requirements for achieving the goals are of particular interest. Please indicate the sectors or specific goals for which this has been (is being) done. 7. Does the NPA include a restructuring of national budgets and aid allocations? If so, which sectors are affected, both negatively and positively (e.g. increase for education, decrease for armaments). 8. Please summarize both the overall strategy of the NPA for achieving its goals as well as the major sectoral strategies, to the extent that these have been developed. 9. Describe the measures taken to establish baseline information for the goals and develop monitoring mechanisms for measuring progress. If this is absent from the government's summary this fact should be noted. III. Most NPAs will have one or more distinguishing features, such as the way they were (are being) prepared, the institutions involved, the strategy adopted or proposed, financing mechanisms, monitoring procedures, etc., which will make it possible to cite individual countries as examples in the text of the Consolidated Report. Please summarize such features. Click to return to Table of Contents