REGIONAL COMMITTEE
Provisional Agenda item 3.1
Sixty-sixth Session SEARO, New Delhi, India 10–13 September 2013
SEA/RC66/3 30 July 2013
WHO reform and Programme Budget matters: Implementation of Programme Budget 2012–2013 This working paper provides information on the implementation status of Programme Budget 2012–2013. It covers both technical and financial aspects of implementation. The initial section of the paper provides an overview of progress towards the achievement of office-specific expected results as determined during the mid-term review and the change in their status as per the update carried out in May 2013. It also provides the results of an informal internal assessment of the Organization-wide expected results that reflect major financial outlay by the South-East Asia Region. The latter part of the paper deals with financial implementation up to 31 May 2013. The approved budget for the South-East Asia Region for 2012–2013 is US$ 384.2 million and the revised budget is US$ 417.8 million. Operational budget as per approved workplans is US$ 410.5 million, of which 88% is funded (assessed contribution (AC) resources of US$ 98.1 million and voluntary contribution (VC) resources of US$ 265.8 million). The overall implementation rate against budget is 54%. The paper discusses the uneven distribution of resources across countries as well as across technical areas, i.e. strategic objectives (SOs). While India and Nepal country programmes have mobilized resources in excess of 90% of their budgeted amounts, funds have been mobilized to support less than 60% of the budgets for the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and Sri Lanka. Similarly, a review of technical areas reveals that SO1 and SO7 have already received funds up to 97% and 105% of their budgets respectively, while at the same time SO5 and SO6 show levels of resources lower than 60% of the budgeted figures. The Sixth Meeting of the Subcommittee on Policy and Programme Development and Management (SPPDM) held from 4 to 5 July 2013, reviewed the attached working paper and made the following recommendations:
Actions by Member States (1) (2) To work with the WHO Representatives to ensure close collaboration that will lead to enhanced financial implementation of objectives. To work with WHO Representatives to ensure that resource mobilization efforts are targeted to respond to the agreed priorities within the WHO country workplans.
Actions by WHO-SEARO (1) To distribute the most current financial implementation status, split by budget centre and strategic objective, to delegates of the Sixty-sixth Session of the Regional Committee. For WHO Representatives and the Regional Office to work with respective Member States to ensure the resource shortfalls in the WHO workplans are understood, and joint efforts are sought to fill them.
(2)
The working paper and the SPPDM recommendations are submitted to the Sixty-sixth Session of the Regional Committee for its consideration.
SEA/RC66/3
Technical implementation of Programme Budget 2012–2013 1. Technical implementation of Programme Budget is continuously monitored by the responsible officers of the budget centres and updated in the GSM. In addition, at the end of the first year of a biennium, a mid-term review monitoring exercise is a corporate requirement to which all country offices in the South-East Asia Region and Regional Office departments contribute. Technical implementation of Programme Budget 2012–2013 was reviewed up to 31 December 2012 as part of the mid-term review exercise. This involved the review of progress towards the achievement of office-specific expected results (OSERs), tracking and updating of indicator achievement values, and determining progress ratings for expected results (assigning “on track”, “at risk”, or “in trouble” ratings). The mid-term review also allowed for the identification of key achievements, new developments and challenges, financial and human resource related issues, and actions required to improve progress during the remainder of the biennium. 2. The summary of progress ratings for OSERs after the mid-term review in the South-East Asia Region shows that, out of a total 821 OSERs, 603 were considered “on track” for full achievement during the biennium, 116 were reported to be “at risk”, and 15 were reported to be “in trouble”. The budget centres have since instituted appropriate corrective actions for strengthened implementation of such OSERs. 3. In May 2013, the budget centres were requested to carry out an ad hoc update of the status of OSERs that were reported to be either “at risk” or “in trouble” during the mid-term review. The update, in light of the corrective actions taken by the budget centres, reflected the positive change in status for 96 OSERs reviewed and reported, from being either “at risk” or “in trouble” to being “on track”. Table 1 may be referred to for details regarding progress and the change in OSER status since the mid-term review. 4. Furthermore, an informal internal assessment of the Organization-wide expected results (OWERs) that reflects major financial outlay by the South-East Asia Region for Programme Budget 2012–2013 was carried out in May 2013. Out of the 79 OWERs that had South-East Asia Region implementation of activities linked to them, 9 OWERs accounted for more than twothirds (67%) of the total implementation (encumbrances plus expenditure) as on date. These were, in descending order of total implementation: OWERs 01.002 (certification of poliomyelitis eradication); 01.003 (neglected tropical diseases, including zoonotic diseases); 02.002 (policy and technical support prevention, treatment and care interventions for HIV/AIDS, malaria and TB); 02.001 (guidelines, policy, strategy and other tools developed for prevention, treatment and care for HIV/AIDS, malaria and TB); 13.005 (managerial and administrative support services necessary for the efficient functioning of the Organization); 01.004 (surveillance and monitoring of all communicable diseases); 01.001 (access of all people to vaccines of assured quality); 10.001 (service delivery policies and their implementation); and 05.007 (coordinated health sector response and recovery in humanitarian emergencies).
SEA/RC66/3 Page 2
Table 1: Progress and the change in OSER status since the mid-term review in January 2013 (strategic objective-wise) No. of OSERs reported upon 119 72 45 77 35 42 28 35 40 153 44 23 21 734 Status reported as per mid-term review (31 January 2013) On track 102 66 38 60 27 33 15 31 25 132 33 20 21 603 At risk 17 5 6 12 8 6 13 4 14 18 10 3 0 116 In trouble 0 1 1 5 0 3 0 0 1 3 1 0 0 15 % of "on track" OSERs vis-à-vis total reported 85.7 91.7 84.4 77.9 77.1 78.6 53.6 88.6 62.5 86.3 75.0 87.0 100.0 82.2 Status reported during ad hoc review (May 2013) On track* 117 71 44 73 35 41 19 35 38 139 44 22 21 699 At risk 2 0 1 3 0 0 9 0 2 12 0 1 0 30 In trouble 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 5 % of "on track" OSERs vis-à-vis total reported 98.3 98.6 97.8 94.8 100.0 97.6 67.9 100.0 95.0 90.8 100.0 95.7 100.0 95.2
Strategic Objective
No. of OSERs
SO1 SO2 SO3 SO4 SO5 SO6 SO7 SO8 SO9 SO10 SO11 SO12 SO13 Total
125 80 66 77 41 53 33 41 40 166 45 28 26 821
*Includes the withdrawn five (5) OSERs: SO3 (1); SO7 (2); SO9 (1), SO10 (1)
Financial implementation as at 31 May 2013 5. The approved budget for the South-East Asia Region for 2012–2013 is US$ 384.2 million and the revised budget is US$ 417.8 million. Operational budget as per approved workplans is US$ 410.5 million. Total resources are US$ 363.9 million; implementation (expenditure), including payroll costs up to May 2013, stands at US$ 221.8 million, which is 54% against budget and 61% against resources. Fund utilization (encumbrances plus expenditure) stands at US$ 258.2 million.
SEA/RC66/3 Page 3
Assessed contribution (AC) 6. The total AC funds available to the Regional Office for South-East Asia at this time are US$ 99.2 million including RD’s reserves. The AC funds have been allocated to countries and Regional Office in the ratio of 75:25. Of the total available AC, US$ 59.4 million are allocated to staff costs, US$ 38.7 million to activities and US$ 1.1 million to RD’s reserves. The overall implementation rate against resources is 65% (staff 68% and activities 60%). 7. Table 2 shows the status of AC budgets and resources for the South-East Asia Region countries and the Regional Office as a whole. Table 2: Programme Budget 2012–2013: AC budget, expenditure and fund utilization (as of 31 May 2013) by country (figures in US$ million) AC budget/ resources 10.4 3.0 12.6 9.6 4.3 3.1 7.4 7.9 4.6 5.7 2.2 70.8 27.3 98.1 % expenditure to available budget/ resources 70% 78% 55% 70% 46% 71% 59% 70% 68% 60% 77% 64% 67% 65% Fund utilization (expenditure + encumbrance) 8.5 2.5 8.1 7.1 2.4 2.4 5.2 6.2 3.5 4.0 1.7 51.6 18.9 70.5 % fund utilization compared to available budget/ resources 82% 83% 64% 74% 56% 79% 71% 78% 76% 69% 79% 73% 69% 72%
Budget centre
Expenditure
Bangladesh Bhutan India Indonesia Democratic People’s Republic of Korea Maldives Myanmar Nepal Sri Lanka Thailand Timor-Leste Country total Regional Office South-East Asia Region total
7.3 2.3 6.9 6.7 2.0 2.2 4.3 5.6 3.2 3.4 1.7 45.5 18.2 63.7
SEA/RC66/3 Page 4
8.
Table 3 shows the status of AC budgets and resources by strategic objective. Table 3: Programme Budget 2012–2013: AC budget, expenditure and fund utilization (as of 31 May 2013) by strategic objective (figures in US$ million) % expenditure compared to budget/ resources 61% 69% Fund utilization (expenditure + encumbrance) 4.9 4.9 % fund utilization compared to available resources 67% 80%
Strategic objective
AC budget/ resources
Expenditure
1. Polio, surveillance, IHR and neglected diseases 2. HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria 3. Noncommunicable diseases and mental health 4. Health of mothers, children, adolescents and ageing people 5. Emergency preparedness and response 6. Risk factors for health 7. Determinants of health 8. Health and environment 9. Nutrition and food safety 10. Health systems 11. Medical products and technology 12. WHO leadership and governance 13. WHO management and administration Grand total
7.3 6.1
4.5 4.2
6.9
4.0
57%
4.6
67%
8.0
4.7
59%
5.5
69%
3.6 2.7 1.3 5.3 2.2 23.7 3.6 10.5 16.9 98.1
2.5 1.7 0.5 3.5 1.3 15.3 2.0 7.2 12.3 63.7
68% 62% 41% 66% 58% 64% 56% 70% 73% 65%
2.7 1.9 0.7 3.8 1.4 17.0 2.5 7.3 13.1 70.5
75% 69% 54% 71% 65% 72% 69% 71% 78% 72%
SEA/RC66/3 Page 5
Voluntary contribution (VC) 9. The VC resources available to the Region stand at US$ 265.8 million. Of these total resources, US$ 49 million represent carry-over from the 2010–2011 biennium and US$ 216.8 million have been mobilized during the current biennium. The overall implementation (expenditure) of VC resources is US$ 158.2 million. 10. Table 4 shows the status of VC budgets and resources for the South-East Asia Region countries and the Regional Office as a whole. Table 4: Programme Budget 2012–2013: VC budget, expenditure and fund utilization (as of 31 May 2013) by country (figures in US$ million) Budget centre Bangladesh Bhutan India Indonesia Democratic People’s Republic of Korea Maldives Myanmar Nepal Sri Lanka Thailand Timor-Leste Country total Regional Office South-East Asia Region total VC budget 18.7 2.0 89.6 29.0 23.8 0.4 39.4 16.6 3.4 6.1 4.1 233.0 79.5 312.4 Available VC resources 12.4 1.8 88.2 22.6 13.7 0.3 33.6 15.2 1.7 4.0 2.7 196.1 69.7 265.8 % resources compared to budget 66% 89% 99% 78% 58% 80% 85% 91% 50% 66% 65% 84% 88% 85% Expenditure 5.8 0.7 63.3 12.4 7.1 0.1 16.3 9.2 1.4 2.7 1.4 120.4 37.7 158.2 % expenditure to available resources 46% 41% 72% 55% 52% 43% 49% 61% 80% 68% 53% 61% 54% 60% Fund utilization (expenditure+ encumbrance) 7.8 0.8 78.1 14.3 9.1 0.2 18.9 10.5 1.5 3.0 1.4 145.7 42.0 187.7 % fund utilization compared to available resources 63% 45% 89% 63% 66% 59% 56% 69% 91% 76% 54% 74% 60% 71%
11. The problem of uneven distribution of resources persists across countries as well as across technical areas. WHO Country programmes such as in India and Nepal have, at 31 May 2013, mobilized resources in excess of 90% of their budgeted figures, whereas the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and Sri Lanka, for example, have mobilized funds to support less than 60% of their budgets. 12. The distribution of VC funds to strategic objectives continues to be uneven, as shown in Table 5. While SO1 and SO7 have already received funds of up to 97% and 105%, respectively, of their budgets, SO5 and SO6 have received less than 60%.
SEA/RC66/3 Page 6
Table 5: Programme Budget 2012–2013: VC budget, expenditure and fund utilization (as of 31 May 2013), by strategic objectives 1 to 11 (figures in US$ million) VC budget Available VC resources % resources compared to budget % expenditure compared to available resources Fund utilization (expenditure + encumbrance) % fund utilization compared to available resources 77%
Strategic objective
Expenditure
1. Polio, surveillance, IHR and neglected diseases 2. HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria 3. Noncommunicable diseases and mental health 4. Health of mothers, children, adolescents and ageing people 5. Emergency preparedness and response 6. Risk factors for health 7. Determinants of health 8. Health and environment 9. Nutrition and food safety 10. Health systems 11. Medical products and technology
143.7
139.5
97%
92.4
66%
107.2
69.1
56.8
82%
28.2
50%
36.8
65%
4.1
3.1
77%
1.9
59%
2.0
64%
7.9
7.2
91%
3.8
54%
4.2
59%
27.2
11.1
41%
5.9
53%
7.1
64%
7.4 1.6 4.0 1.8 17.6 3.4
4.2 1.7 3.3 1.4 15.0 2.4
57% 105% 82% 76% 85% 70%
2.8 0.9 1.3 0.8 7.7 1.3
67% 55% 41% 59% 51% 53%
2.9 1.1 1.8 1.0 9.3 1.5
69% 65% 54% 76% 62% 61%
Financing dialogue to address misalignment of funding and WHO priorities 13. The first financing dialogue meeting established in WHO to help address misalignment of funding and WHO priorities was held in June 2013, with a second meeting scheduled for November 2013. The objective of this dialogue to include the WHO Secretariat, Member States and donors, is to ensure that contributions flowing into the Organization are well aligned with Programme Budget 2014–2015 priorities, that the level of flexibility in VC budgets is increased, and to identify under-funded areas for focused resource mobilization efforts.
REGIONAL COMMITTEE
Provisional Agenda item 3.1
Sixty-sixth Session SEARO, New Delhi, India 10–13 September 2013
SEA/RC66/3 Add.1 4 September 2013
WHO reform and Programme Budget matters: Implementation of Programme Budget 2012–2013 Document SEA/RC66/3, WHO reform and Programme Budget matters: Implementation of Programme Budget 2012–2013, provided details on implementation through May 2013. This addendum provides updated implementation status through July 2013. The approved budget and revised budget for 2012–2013 remain at US$ 384.2 million and US$ 417.8 million, respectively. As at 31 July 2013, the operational budget, per approved workplans, is US$ 404.5 million. The total resources are US$ 381.9 million and total expenditures stand at US$ 250.8 million. Thus, implementation (expenditure), as at 31 July 2013, stands at 62% against budget and 66% against resources. The relevant updated tables are enclosed in this addendum.
SEA/RC66/3 Add.1
Financial implementation as at 31 July 2013 1. The approved budget for the South-East Asia Region for 2012–2013 is US$ 384.2 million and the revised budget is US$ 417.8 million. Operational budget as per approved workplans is US$ 404.5 million. Total resources are US$ 381.9 million; implementation (expenditure), including payroll costs up to July 2013, stands at US$ 250.8 million, which is 62% against budget and 66% against resources. Fund utilization (encumbrances plus expenditure) stands at US$ 283.8 million.
Assessed contribution (AC) 2. The total AC funds available to the Regional Office for South-East Asia at this time are US$ 99.2 million including the Regional Director’s reserves. The AC funds have been allocated to countries and the Regional Office in the ratio of 75:25. Of the total available AC, US$ 59.9 million are allocated to staff costs, US$ 38.9 million to activities and US$ 0.4 million to the Regional Director’s reserves. The overall implementation rate against resources is 72% (staff 75% and activities 69%). 3. Table 1 shows the status of AC budgets and resources for the South-East Asia Region countries and the Regional Office as a whole. Table 1: Programme Budget 2012–2013: AC budget, expenditure and fund utilization (as of 31 July 2013) by country (figures in US$ million) AC budget/ resources 10.5 3.0 12.6 9.5 4.4 3.2 7.3 8.0 4.7 5.9 % expenditure to available budget/ resources 78% 82% 60% 79% 56% 77% 69% 76% 76% 69% Fund utilization (expenditure + encumbrance) 9.1 2.7 8.7 7.9 3.1 2.8 5.9 6.6 3.8 4.4 % fund utilization compared to available budget/ resources 86% 90% 69% 83% 69% 85% 81% 83% 82% 76%
Budget centre
Expenditure
Bangladesh Bhutan India Indonesia Democratic People’s Republic of Korea Maldives Myanmar Nepal Sri Lanka Thailand
8.2 2.4 7.5 7.5 2.5 2.5 5.1 6.1 3.5 4.1
SEA/RC66/3 Add.1 Page 2
Budget centre
AC budget/ resources 2.2 71.3 27.5 98.8
Expenditure
% expenditure to available budget/ resources 81% 72% 73% 72%
Fund utilization (expenditure + encumbrance) 1.8 56.8 21.0 77.8
% fund utilization compared to available budget/ resources 83% 80% 76% 79%
Timor-Leste Country total Regional Office South-East Asia Region total
1.8 51.2 20.1 71.3
4.
Table 2 shows the status of AC budgets and resources by strategic objective. Table 2: Programme Budget 2012–2013: AC budget, expenditure and fund utilization (as of 31 July 2013) by strategic objective (figures in US$ million) % expenditure compared to budget/ resources 70% 76% Fund utilization (expenditure + encumbrance) % fund utilization compared to available resources 77% 84%
Strategic objective
AC budget/ resources
Expenditure
1. Polio, surveillance, IHR and neglected diseases 2. HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria 3. Noncommunicable diseases and mental health 4. Health of mothers, children, adolescents and ageing people 5. Emergency preparedness and response 6. Risk factors for health 7. Determinants of health 8. Health and environment 9. Nutrition and food safety
7.3 6.1
5.1 4.7
5.6 5.2
7.1
4.8
67%
5.4
76%
8.3
5.2
63%
6.0
72%
3.8 2.7 1.3 5.3 2.2
2.5 2.0 0.7 3.9 1.5
66% 74% 53% 74% 67%
3.0 2.2 0.8 4.2 1.8
79% 83% 62% 79% 78%
SEA/RC66/3 Add.1 Page 3
Strategic objective
AC budget/ resources
Expenditure
% expenditure compared to budget/ resources 72% 65% 76% 80% 72%
Fund utilization (expenditure + encumbrance) 18.7 2.8 8.0 14.1 77.8
% fund utilization compared to available resources 79% 77% 77% 84% 79%
10. Health systems 11. Medical products and technology 12. WHO leadership and governance 13. WHO management and administration Grand total
23.7 3.6 10.5 16.9 98.8
17.2 2.3 7.9 13.5 71.3
Voluntary contribution (VC) 5. The VC resources available to the Region stand at US$ 283.1 million. Of these total resources, US$ 49 million represent carry-over from the 2010–2011 biennium and US$ 234.1 million have been mobilized during the current biennium. The overall implementation (expenditure) of VC resources is US$ 179.5 million. 6. Table 3 shows the status of VC budgets and resources for the South-East Asia Region countries and the Regional Office as a whole. Table 3: Programme Budget 2012–2013: VC budget, expenditure and fund utilization (as of 31 July 2013) by country (figures in US$ million) Available VC resources 13.4 1.8 99.4 23.0 % resources compared to budget 76% 97% 111% 79% % expenditure to available resources 49% 52% 69% 62% Fund utilization (expenditure+ encumbrance) 8.4 1.1 80.9 15.8 % fund utilization compared to available resources 63% 62% 81% 69%
Budget centre
VC budget
Expenditure
Bangladesh Bhutan India Indonesia Democratic People’s Republic of Korea Maldives
17.7 1.8 89.3 29.0
6.6 0.9 69.1 14.3
17.7
13.7
78%
8.5
62%
9.7
71%
0.4
0.4
83%
0.2
54%
0.2
56%
SEA/RC66/3 Add.1 Page 4
Budget centre
VC budget
Available VC resources 34.8 170 2.1 3.9 2.7 212.2 70.9
% resources compared to budget 89% 92% 65% 65% 65% 93% 90%
Expenditure
% expenditure to available resources 55% 64% 76% 73% 63% 64% 62%
Fund utilization (expenditure+ encumbrance) 22.4 13.1 1.7 3.2 1.8 158.3 47.7
% fund utilization compared to available resources 64% 77% 83% 81% 67% 75% 67%
Myanmar Nepal Sri Lanka Thailand Timor-Leste Country total Regional Office South-East Asia Region total
39.3 18.4 3.1 6.1 4.2 227.0 78.7
19.2 10.8 1.6 2.9 1.7 135.8 43.7
305.7
283.1
93%
179.5
63%
206.0
73%
7. The problem of uneven distribution of resources persists across countries as well as across technical areas. WHO country programmes such as in Bhutan, India and Nepal have, at 31 July 2013, mobilized resources more than 90% of their budgets, whereas Sri Lanka, Thailand and Timor-Leste, for example, have mobilized funds to support less than 70% of their budgets. 8. The distribution of VC funds to strategic objectives continues to be uneven, as shown in Table 4. While SO1 and SO7 have already received funds of up to 107% of their budgets, SO5 and SO6 have received less than 65%. Table 4: Programme Budget 2012–2013: VC budget, expenditure and fund utilization (as of 31 July 2013) by strategic objectives 1 to 11 (figures in US$ million) Available VC resources % resources compared to budget % expenditure compared to available resources Fund utilization (expenditure + encumbrance) % fund utilization compared to available resources
Strategic objective
VC budget
Expenditure
1. Polio, surveillance, IHR and neglected diseases 2. HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria
143.0
152.4
107%
101.7
67%
113.9
75%
67.9
58.5
86%
31.6
54%
40.3
69%
SEA/RC66/3 Add.1 Page 5
Strategic objective
VC budget
Available VC resources
% resources compared to budget
Expenditure
% expenditure compared to available resources
Fund utilization (expenditure + encumbrance)
% fund utilization compared to available resources
3. Noncommunicable diseases and mental health 4. Health of mothers, children, adolescents and ageing people 5. Emergency preparedness and response 6. Risk factors for health 7. Determinants of health 8. Health and environment 9. Nutrition and food safety 10. Health systems 11. Medical products and technology
4.0
3.2
80%
2.1
66%
2.3
70%
7.7
7.3
94%
4.6
63%
5.0
69%
23.2
11.1
48%
8.2
74%
8.8
79%
6.9 1.6 4.1 1.8 17.7 3.3
4.3 1.7 3.8 1.4 15.2 2.4
62% 107% 92% 77% 86% 73%
3.2 1.1 1.7 0.9 9.3 1.5
74% 62% 43% 63% 61% 61%
3.3 1.3 2.0 1.1 11.1 1.7
76% 73% 54% 79% 73% 71%