Report of the twenty-sixth meeting of the Consultative Committee for Programme Development and Management

1 , W O R L D H E A L T H ORGANIZATION Z’wenty-sixth Meeting of the Consultative Committee for Programme Development and Management Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, 19-22 August 1994 Agenda Item 6 SEA/PDM/Meet.26/7 22 August 1994 REPORT OF THE TWENTY-SIXTH MEETING OF THE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE FOR PROGRAMME DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT e 1 IN PURSUANCE of the directive from the Regional Committee that the CCPDM meetevery six months to carry out a review of the implementation of the Organization’s collaborative programmes in the Member States, the twenty-sixth meeting of the CCPDM was held in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, from 19 to 22 August 1994. A summary of the Committee’s conclusions and recommendations are contained in this report, which has four distinct sections. S&ion 1 contains the deliberations of the CCPDM. on the “Review of Implementation of WHO’s Collaborative Programmes in the Member States during the first six months of the biennium 1994-1995, i.e. 1 January to 30 June 1994”. This section will be discussed by the Sub-committee on Programme Budget under its terms of reference l(b). &XtiOIl 2 contains its observations on the “Review of the Method of Work of the Regional Committee”. This section will be considered by the Regional Committee in the plenary session along with agenda item 14. SeCtiOll 3 contains the discussions of the CCPDM on the “Review of the Method of Work of the Consultative Committee for Programme Development and Management”. This section will be discussed by the Sub-committee on Programme Budget under its terms of reference 3 and brought to the attention of the Regional Committee under agenda item 11.1. SeCtiOIl 4 contains the comments of the CCPDM on the “Review of the Process and outcome of WHO programme management at country and regional levels”. c d T HE REGIONAL DIRECTOR convened the twenty-sixth meeting of the Consultative Committeefor Programme Development and Management (CCPDM) in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, from 19 to 22 August 1994, with the following terms of reference: l To review the implementation of WHO’s collaborative programmes in the Member States during the first six months of the biennium 1994-1995, i.e. from 1 January to 30 June 1994; l To review the process and outcome of WHO programme management at country and regional levels; and l To review the method of work of the Regional Committee and the Consultative Committee for Programme Development and Management. In his inaugural address, Dr Uton Muchtar Rafei, Regional Director, extended his warm greetings to the distinguished members of the CCPDM. Referring to the agenda for the current meeting of the CCPDM, he stated that two subjects of topical interest, viz. the method of work of the Regional Committee and the CCPDM, and the process and outcome of WHO programme management at the country and regional levels, were included. With regard to the agenda item concerning the review of the method of work of the Regional Committee and the CCPDM, the Regional Director informed the participants that this item had been included as a result of a recommendation of the Executive Board Working Group on the WHO Response to Global Change. He referred in this connection to the wide-ranging reforms being implemented by the Director-General with a view to making the Organization more relevant and responsive to the far-reaching socio-politica and economic changes that were taking place globally. He hoped that the members of the CCPDM would take this opportunity to review the existing mechanisms and the method of work of the regional bodies, in the context of the reform process, in order to harmonize their functioning with that of Executive Board and World Health Assembly. As regards the process and outcome of the CCPDM Working Group study on WHO programme management at the country and regional levels, the Regional Director noted that the implementation of the recommendations had had a positive impact on WHO programme management at the country and Regional Office levels. The rate and quality of programme impleme?rtation during 1992-1993 had improved. The CCPDM was to note that the progress of programme management and the improvement should be sustained. Referring to major public health problems which were not confined by geographical boundaries and, therefore, could not often be tackled by one country alone, the Regional Director pointed out that cooperative and collective action was called for to control health problems common to several countries, such as HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. It was possible to take such actions and give greater support through regional/intercountry programmes. This would require higher allocation of resources for regional/intercountry activities under the Regular Budget. The technical and financial resources of regional/intercountry programmes could also be used to effectively render technical cooperation, specially to least developed countries with small Regular Budget allocations. These countries would be able to get more support from the regionaYintercountry programme. Mr U Kyi Soe of Myanmar was unanimously elected Chairman, and Mrs Namita Pradhan of India Rapporteur of the meeting. The list of participants is attached (see Annei I). REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF WHO’S COLLABORATIVE PROGRAMMES IN THE MEMBER STATES DURING THE FIRST SIX MONTHS OF THE BIENNIUM 1994-1995, i.e. FROM 1 JANUARY TO 30 JUNE 1994 THE CCPDM noted that the programme delivery in financial terms, during the first six months ofthe biennium 1994-1995 for the Region as a whole, was twenty-six per cent excluding earmarking and thirty one per cent including earmarking (document SEA/PDM/Meet.26/3). The Committee was 0 informed that the implementation rate varied from country to country and it was too early to draw any conclusions since this was the first six months of the biennial programme budget. With regard to programme delivery by component, the Committee noted that some components such as fellowships, supplies and equipment, and local cost subsidy, registered relatively low performance. The CCPDM had earlier reviewed on several occasions the causes for slow programme implementation. More attention had been given to financial aspects of programme delivery. The qualitative aspects of implementation also needed to be looked into. The countries should give priority to the planning of realistic activities during the preparation of detailed plans of action and their scheduling to facilitate timely implementation of planned activities, avoiding the surrender of funds to WHO Headquarters at the end of the biennium. If some activities had to be delayed or postponed, other activities could be advanced, and towards the end of the first year, composite replanning should be undertaken. During its review of the implementation of programmes financed by UNDP, UNPPA and voluntary agencies, the Committee noted that WHO’s extrabudgetary funds from UNDP and UNPPA had declined due to a change in policy in favour of national execution. On the other hand, there was an increase in extrabudgetary funding due to the flow of funds from the donors for the Global Programme on AIDS and the involvement of the World Bank in the health sector in certain countries. The Committee felt that it was imperative to maintain a consistent improvement in performance of the programmes funded by extrabudgetary resources with a view to attracting more resources for health development in the countries. D\uring the discussions, the following observations were made: l Qualitative aspects of programme implementation should receive more attention in order to ensure that the utilization of WHO’s resources was in line with WHO’s policies and guidelines. l WHO should make concerted efforts to mobilize additional resources from bilateral donors and agencies like the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank and regional banks so that the health development activities of major concern at the country level were not affected. l Some constraints were encountered in the preparation of lists of supplies and equipment due to the non-availability of specific catalogues or adequate information on the equipment. It would be useful to provide information on programme delivery during the same period of the previous biennium in order to enable the Member States to make a comparison and to measure the performance in the current biennium. In certain cases, there were frequent changes of national programme managers in charge of the WHO collaborative activities at the country level, which impeded progress and resulted in delayed implementation. Factors such as language skill, selection of the right candidates and other procedural delays in finalizing nominations also impeded speedy implementation of fellowship components. WHO financial resources for country health programmes formed a small part of the national budget, but WHO funds were flexible enough to effectively support specific areas in a specific manner to help countries channel larger resources. The South-East Asia Region had registered less than total programme implementation during the past biennium as compared to other regions of WHO. In the South-East Asia Region, nearly 75 per cent of the regional budget was allocated to country activities. Hence it was imperative that countries should improve their respective country programme implementation in order to avoid the surrender of funds to WHO Headquarters at the end of the biennium. Surrendered funds were not available either for country or intercountry programmes. After detailed discussions, the CCPDM recommended the following: (I) Member States and WHO should make renewed efforts to further improve programme delivery under the Regular Budget in both financial and qualitative terms, keeping in view the recommendations made by the CCPDM Working Group on Programme Management. (2) Member States and WHO should pay particular attention to timely implementation of programmes supported by extrabudgetary resources in order to ensure further mobilization of resources from these sources for the benefit of Member States. (3) The CCPDM should undertake a review, through a sub-group, of the modalities and mechanisms of mobilizing and utilizing extrabudgetary resources at the country and regional levels, and make a report thereon to the CCPDM. (4) The Regional Office should provide Member States with the latest catalogues and information on supplies and equipment in order to facilitate timely submission of requests for supplies and equipment by national authorities. Repot-f of the 7lvenfy-sixfh Meeting of fhe CCPDM 7 cl REVIEW OF THE METHOD OF WORK OF THE REGIONAL COMMITTEE THE CCPDM reviewed the working paper relating to the agenda item (documentSEA/PDM/Meet.26/5.1) and noted recommendation No.16 of the Executive Board Working Group report on the WHO Response to Global Change. The recommendation required that the Regional Committees study their own methods of work with a view to harmonizing their work with the work of the Regional Office, other regions, the Executive Board and the World Health Assembly. Accordingly, the forty-seventh session of the Regional Committee would review its functions with a view to revising, if required, its method of work. The CCPDM noted that, in the South-East Asia Region, this subject had been reviewed earlier by the CCPDM and the Regional Committee in another context. In ‘November 1993, a sub-committee of the Regional Committee, convened under resolution SEALRC46/R6, analysed the possible implications of implementing the recommendations of the Executive Board Working Group and noted that the Regional Committee worked in accordance with the WHO constitutional provisions and its own rules of procedure and that the present arrangements by which information was shared with the Board seemed to be adequate. As such, the existing arrangements might continue. If any changes were to be introduced, these should first be discussed by the Regional Committee. The CCPDM was informed that its deliberations on this subject would be submitted in a report to the forty-seventh session of the Regional Committee under Agenda item 14. A point was raised on the modalities adopted by the Executive Board, in considering the resolutions passed by the Regional Committee and on how the Director-General ineluded information from the Region in his report to the Health Assembly. It was clarified that the Regional Director submitted a report to the Director-General on Regional Committee matters immediately after the conclusion of the session. He also submitted a written statement to the Executive Board every year on significant regional developments, including Regional Committee matters, highlighting, important resolutions adopted by the Regional Committee. These reports were considered by the Executive Board at its January session. As regards specific issues on which the Director-General was required to make a report to the Executive Board or the World Health Assembly, he requested the Regional Offices to submit the necessary progress reports. There was general agreement on the suggestions for consideration in the working paper relating to the functions of the Regional Committee and on their implications for its method of work. The CCPDM, after detailed discussions, arrived at the following consensus: 1. Coordination of the Work of the Regional Committee with that of the Executive Board and the World Health Assembly (a) The practice of nominating a competent and experienced ofticial at appropriate level to represent the Region at the Executive Board should be continued. (b) The person designated by a country to be a member of the Executive Board from the Region should continue for the full term of three years on the Board in order to maintain continuity. 8 Report qf the Twenty-sixth Meeting of the CCPDM (c) The Executive Board members representing the Region should receive full briefing from WHO on the functions of the Executive Board and its method of work. They should also orient themselves on the regional health development issues with the assistance of the WHO Regional O@ce. (d) It would be useful to include persons currently serving as Executive Board members in the respective country delegations to the Regional Committee, in order to maintain strong links between the Executive Board and the Regional Committee so as to promote regional interests at the global level. Alternatively, Executive Board members not included in country delegations may be invited separately by the Regional Director. to attend the session as observers. (e) The review of agendas of the Executive Board and the World Health Assembly, included as a separate agenda item, should be carried out more carefully by the Regional Committee, and more time should be devoted for this purpose by the Regional Committee. If) Members representing the Region on other global bodies, such as the Joint Coordination Board of the Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases, the Policy and Coordination Committee of the Special Programme on Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, and the Management Advisory Committee of the Action Programme on Essential Drugs, should orient and familiarize themselves fully on important issues from a regional perspective. (g) The country delegates from the Region should meet in the context of the pre- World Health Assembly meeting convened each year by the Regional Director, and evolve, inter alia, a common strategy on important regional health development issues in relation to the World Health Assembly agenda. 2. Follow-up of the Proceedings of the Regional Committee session To follow up the decisions and resolutions adopted by the Regional Committee, countries should submit, in due course, a progress report on the actions taken at country level to the Regional Director for submission as a report to the next session of the Regional Committee. 3. Drafting Committee on Resolutions The CCPDM endorsed the suggestion that, as a regular practice, a drafting committee on resolutions be constituted by the Regional Committee during its session. This committee should meet as many times as possible during the session and pay greater attention to screening draft resolutions from the technical and financial points of view before they are presented for adoption by the Regional Committee. 4. Preparation of the Report of the Regional Committee The current practice of preparation of summary minutes of the Regional Committee session could be discontinued and, instead, a summary report reflecting the discussions on the various agenda items and resolutions be prepared. Rule 19 of the Rules of Procedure of the Regional Committee may have to be amended suitably. Reportof the Twenty-sixth Meeting of the CCPDM 9 5. Nomination of Country Delegates (a) Member States should nominate representatives to the Regional Committee session and the World Health Assembly at appropriate level who are conversant with the issues and procedures. (b) The nomination of country delegations should be timely. Member States should also maintain continuity of membership of the country delegation by nominating at least one member with prior Regional Committee experience. Report of the Twenty-sixth Meeting of the CCPDM 11 REVIEW OF THE METHOD OF WORK OF THE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE FOR PROGRAMME DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT THE CCPDM noted the genesis of its establishment in 1982 to review the programme budgetimplementation and to undertake in-depth review of the Regional Director’s Annual Report. It also considered other matters of regional interest as referred to it by the Regional Director. In September 1989, the CCPDM decided to discontinue the in-depth review of the Regional Director’s Annual Report. At the present session, the review of method of the work of the Regional Committee had necessitated the need to review the method of the work of CCPDM also. The CCPDM noted the suggestions made in the working paper (section 3 of document SEA/PDM/Meet.26/5.2) proposing revised tasks to be undertaken by the CCPDM in the future in the light of (a) the need to shift its focus more to programme development in conformity with regional health priorities, and (b) to undertake specific programme reviews with a view to assessing the impact of WHO collaborative activities and resources. During the discussions, the following observations were made: l Over the years, due to the failure to achieve full implementation of the biennial budget, particularly at the country level, a considerable amount of funds had to be surrendered to WHO Headquarters. l The deletion of the task of the six-monthly cumulative review, of programme budget implementation deprived the CCPDM of making a qualitative review of the implementation process. The review could be carried out in summary form on an annual basis, leaving the CCPDM free to devote more time to programme development issues, focusing more on regional health priorities and programme development to support countries in dealing with major health problems. l In order for the CCPDM to make technical evaluations along with financial monitoring, it would be essential to closely monitor programme implementation at the country level. For example, the WHO Representative could convene regular meetings of programme managers and other project staff to carry out technical reviews and monitor programme implementation at the country level. The Country Support Team mechanism could also be involved in this task, and the joint Government-WHO mechanism should be more active in programme review. l While redefining the tasks of the CCPDM, it would be better to strike a balance between the periodic programme budget performance review by the CCPDM and the programme development priorities and health issues of common regional concern. l A change from the present routine and mechanical way of reviewing the programme budget implementation was indeed necessary. The CCPDM would meet to review programme budget implementation during budget years (even-numbered years). In non-budget years 12 Report of the Twenty-sixth Meeting of the CCPDM (odd-numbered year), the CCPDM, in an endeavour to strengthen the regional approach and solidarity, should devote its time more to reviewing the health situation and priorities and to also the emerging health problems of concern to the Region. l The periodic meetings of the CCPDM afforded the opportunity to the representatives of the Member Countries to meet each other and exchange notes on matters of health development and innovative approaches. The review of programme budget implementation by the CCPDM made a positive contribution to the acceleration of programme delivery. The CCPDM meeting in April afforded an opportunity for the members to discuss pending programme matters with the Regional Office staff. It was, therefore, felt that the present six-monthly meetings of the CCPDM should continue. l It is a fact that, at the Executive Board and the World Health Assembly, the presentation of this Region’s issues lack focus and strength. It would be in order for the CCPDM to devote more of its time to programme development issues of regional priorities. l The CCPDM should also review the resolutions of the Executive Board and the World Health Assembly with regard to regional implications. The CCPDM made the following recommendations: (I) Periodic review of programme implementation by both the CCPDM and the Sub-Committee on Programme Budget of the Regional Committee was a duplication. Hence, the tasks assigned to the CCPDM need to be revised. The CCPDM should review programme budget implementation in a summary form for six and eighteen month periods of the biennium with greater emphasis on the quality of programmes and outcomes. (2) The intensity of review of programme budget implementation at the country level needs to be strengthened through periodic meetings with WHO Representatives and more involvement of the joint WHO/Government coordination body, for example by organizing workshops/meetings/retreats with the possible participation of the programme managers directly involved in implementation. The Regional Ofice could also provide support by deputing staff of the Country Support Team as necessary. The report of such reviews could be summarized for inclusion in the documentation for the CCPDM, for its review. (3) The CCPDM should undertake a study of the regional health situation and trends, determine regional priorities and give guidance on programmes of regional concern. (4 ) The health problems affecting several countries e.g. AIDS, malaria and drug abuse, should be addressed more vigorously at the regional level through well-planned regional programmes finded adequately from the Regular Budget of the Region as a whole. (5) There was a need to rationalize and enhance the allocations for intercountry programmes for tackling emerging health problems of common concern to the Region in order to strengthen the regional approach and solidarity. The Member Countries may agree to contribute to this increase (of resources for the regionabintercountry programme) by suitable adjustments in country allocations. This would bring the intercountry programme in the South-East Asia Region more in line with those in other regions of WHO. (6) There should be greater involvement of the countries in the formulation of the intercountry programmes in line with regional programme priorities which could eflectively absorb additional intercountry resources and produce greater impact. Report of the Twnty-sixth Meeting of the CCPDM 13 (7) The CCPDM should review and scrutinize the resolutions as also the agendas of the Executive Board and World Health ‘Assembly with regard to their implications on the Region, and its report should be brought to the attention of the Regional Committee. In view of the above, the draft terms of reference of the CCPDM are given in Annex 2. t?eDort of the Twen?y-sixth Meeting of the CCPDM 1 5 REVIEW OF THE PROCESS AND OUTCOME OF WHO PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT AT COUNTRY AND REGIONAL LEVELS THE CCPDM noted that a Working Group of the CCPDM had conducted an in-depth review ofthe management of WHO collaborative programmes in the Region in 1992 and also visited the WHO Regional Offices for the Eastern Mediterranean and the Western Pacific to observe the methods and processes followed for programme development and management. The rep,ert of the CCPDM Working Group Study on WHO Programme Management was submitt M and the Regional Committee meetings held in Kathmandu in September 1 9 9 2 . Committee considered and endorsed the report of the CCPDM Working Group Study recommendations therein. The CCPDM was also informed about the actions initiated at th and Regional Office levels to;implement the recommendations of the Working Group, p those which had been stressed by the Regional Committee and that, at its twenty-third meeting in April 1993, the CCPDM hadfroviewed in detail the actions taken by the Member States and the Regional Office on the various recommendations. The CCPDM noted that the implementation of the recommendations of the CCPDM Working Group had had a positive impact on WHO programme development and management at both country and Regional Office levels. As a result, programme implementation had registered a marked improvement during the biennium 1992-1993. While reviewing how the implementation of the CCPDM Working, Group recommendations had contributed to improvement of programme delivery, the CCPDM no&d the actions initiated by Member States and the Regional Office, as given in the working paper (document SEA/PDM/Meet.26/4). The CCPDM appreciated the efforts made by the national authorities and the Regional Office staff to implement the recommendations of the CCPDM Working Group. During the discussions, the following observations were made: l WHO’s resources in many countries were thinly spread over numerous programme areas. As a consequence, many national programme managers were not too concerned with the outcome of the use of WHO”s resources. But the guidelines for the preparation of the 1996-1997 programme budget laid stress on Iinking programme activities to expected outputs/outcomes. l Current delegation of authority to the WHO Representatives included authority to conclude contracts, and financial, programme and administrative matters, authority for local purchase and authority to make programme changes. Delegation of authority to WHO Representatives was under constant review in the Regional Office within the framework of WHO’s financial rules and procedures. This was also being looked into by one of the WHO core groups vis-a-vis the process of WHO’s response to global change. l Efforts are being made to link the Administration and Finance Information (AFI) system through the Local Area Network (LAN) in the Regional Office and to link it ultimately with the WHO Representative’s offices in order to improve and make more effective the exercise of programme monitoring at the country level. 16 Report of,fhe ?Wenty-sixth Meeting of the CCPDM l Even though WHO’s resources were used as seed money to attract extrabudgetary resources, there was also a considerable a downward trend in mobilization of funds from extrabudgetary resources. l There was a need to review how the Country Support Team could be actively involved in participating in programme planning, review and coordination at the country level. l Due to frequent turn-over in programme managers at country level, there is a need for their periodic training in WHO programme development and management by the Country Support Team during their visit to countries. l There should be specific outputs and a time-frame for implementation of each recommendation of the CCPDM Working Group with a view to facilitating the monitoring of the impact of the implementation of recommendations at the country and regional levels. Therefore, a further review of the progress made on the implementation of the recommendations of the CCPDM Working Group might be required after 2-3 years. l The computerized management information system should be linked up between the WHO Representative’s office and the Ministry of Health in order to facilitate better interaction and monitoring of programme implementation. l Detailed plans of action, being a management tool, should be an instrument designed to facilitate programme implementation. Considering the flexibility in the use of WHO’s resources vis-a-vis the national budget, such plans of action were not a constraint to further reprogramming as necessary. l There was a need to keep programme managers fully informed about WHO’s financial rules and regulations during the planning, formulation and implementation processes. After detailed discussions, the CCPDM made the following recommendations: (I) Member States should consider allocating WHO Regular Budget resources to selected priority programmes. This would likely achieve a measurable impact on programme activities in terms of expected outputs\outcomes. (2) The CCPDM should undertake, after two years, a further review of progress at the country and Regional Ofice levels in the implementation of recommendations of the CCPDM Working Group on WHO Programme Management. (3) The Country Support Team mechanism could be made more effective, especially in certain countries, and support programme planning and implementation review. Member States should also plan in advance the timing of Country Support Team visits, if required. (4) The Regional Ofice should make available to all Member States in the Region the latest financial rules and regulations of WHO: (5) Member States could consider linking up the computerized management information system between the WHO Representative’s ofice and the Ministry of Health, with a view to facilitating better interaction and monitoring of programme implementation. Report of the Twenty-sixth Meeting oft@ CGPDM 1 7 Annex I LIST OF PARTICIPANTS BANGLADESH Prof. Tehmina Hussain Joint Secretary (Coordination) Ministry of Health & Family Welfare Dhaka Dr (Mrs) Khairun Nahar Director (Planning) Directorate-General of Health Services Dhaka BHUTAN Dr Jigmi Singay Director Directorate of Health Services Thimphu DPR KOREA Mr So Chang Sik Chief of Division Department of International Organization Ministry of Foreign Affairs Pyowang Mr Kwon Sung Yon WHO National Programme Officer Ministry of Public Health Pywwng INDIA Mrs Namita Pradhan Director, International Health Ministry of Health and Family Welfare New Delhi INDONESIA Dr Nyoman Kumara Rai Chief, Bureau of Planning Ministry of Health Jakarta 18 Report of the Twenty-sixth Meeting of the CCPDM MALDIVES Mr Mohamed Hameed Assistant Director, Planning and Coordination Ministry of Health & Welfare M a l e Mr Ahmed Salih Assistant Director, Human Resources Development Ministry of Health & Welfare M a l e MONGOLIA Mr D. Bayarsaihan General Director, Directorate of Economy and Cooperation Ministry of Health Ulaanbaatar Mrs U Buyandelger Officer, Ministry of Health Ulaanbaatar MYANMAR Mr U Kyi Soe Director-General, Department of Planning and Statistics Ministry of Health Yangon Dr Ohn Kyaw Deputy Director, International Health Division Ministry of Health Y angon NEPAL Dr R.N. Sinha Director-General, Department of Health Services Ministry of Health Kathmandu Dr B.D. Chataut Director, Planning and Foreign Aid Division Department of Health Services Ministry of Health Kathmandu Dr B.L. Shrestha Director, Epidemiology & Disease Control Division Department of Health Services Ministry of Health Kathmandu Report of the Twenty-sixth Meeting of the CCPDM 19 SRI LANKA Dr M.A.L.R. Perera Director-General of Health Services Ministry of Health and Women’s Affairs Colombo Dr K.C.S. Dalpatadu Acting Deputy Director-General (Planning) Ministry of Health and Women’s Affairs Colombo THAPIdUVD Dr Piya Siriphant Director, International Health Division Ministry of Public Health Bangkok WHO SECRETARIAT Dr Uton Muchtar Rafei, Regional Director Dr M.Z. Husain, Director, Programme Management Mr G. Koulischer, Director, Support Programme Mr Y. Younan, Budget and Finance Officer Mr R.V. Narasimhan, Ag. Administrative Officer to Director, Programme Management Mr S. Vedanarayanan, Special Assistant, Programme Coordination Mr M.R. Kanagarajan, Senior Administrative Secretary Twenty-sixth Meeting of the CCPDM Annex 2 DRAFT TERMS OF REFERENCE OF THE CCPDM 1. To review country and intercountry programme budget implementation in a summary form in financial and qualitative terms for six and eighteen month periods of the biennium. 2. To appraise the regional health situation and trends and recommend regional health priorities and related regional programmes, and prepare a report to the Regional Committee. 3 . To examine and finalize the formulation of the intercountry programme budget proposals for the ensuing biennium. 4 . To examine the agendas and resolutions of the Executive Board and the World Health Assembly with regard to their regional implications and prepare a note for the consideration of the Regional Committee. 5 . To consider any other matters relating to programme development and management as referred to it by the Regional Director.