Jive SBS Syndication Feed

Progress in aid effectiveness: IHP+Results generates discussion and debate

clearspace@human-scale.net — Tue, 01 Jun 2010 15:11:37 GMT

Debate about aid effectiveness monitoring and the status of accountability within the IHP+ have surrounded the publication of the IHP+Results 2010 Update.

Two members of the IHP+Results Advisory Group have published a sharp review of IHP+Results, the IHP+, and the efficacy (and importance) of monitoring aid effectiveness. The article appears in the Lancet, but you can also read it here.

Following the publication of a review of the IHP+ in the Lancet, a new blog on the role and work of IHP+Results has appeared here. The blog looks for the story behind the story.

Whether you agree with the post and article or not, sign in (or sign up) to leave a comment - we want to know what you think!

WHA IHP+Results Update 2010 - read it here!

clearspace@human-scale.net — Wed, 19 May 2010 12:50:55 GMT

The IHP+Results 2010 Update has been released at the 63rd World Health Assembly. At yesterday's meeting on mutual accountability we presented lessons learned from our 2009 implementation, and took part in the wider debate about mutual accountability in the IHP+. The session saw presentations on progress, constructive criticism and open questions, but above all showed a common will to make mutual accountability work better - in the words of one country government minister to 'make the donor-government relationship more symmetrical'.

We hope and believe that the experiences and tools outlined in this report will help provide the means to make that will effective.

You can download the report in English and in French by clicking the links below.

Growing success of our IHP+Results community

clearspace@human-scale.net — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 09:51:15 GMT

The numbers are in, we’ve analysed them and we can now reveal who’s engaging with IHP+Results process through the North South Observatory. Read on to find out more about the growing community that you’re part of….

Over 600 people have visited the site since October 2009, and the number of people who have signed up to participate in IHP+Results has increased over 20% since September – and over 400 people choose to read about our online content via our monthly newsletter. The IHP+Results community is growing increasingly quickly – sign up to be a part of it.

Our community is spread across 6 continents, in both North and South. This means that the IHP+Results North South Observatory really reflects the wide range of people involved in international development work: from civil society representatives, NGOs and academics to advocacy workers, and agency representatives.

We’re pleased that you’re visiting often – we get an average of 255 visits a week, twice as many as last month! There is a peak in the number of visitors around the time we send out the monthly IHP+Results update – it’s good to know you find our news interesting! Don’t just read what you find though - sign up to receive the update and to let us know what you want us to include next month.

Many visitors arrive from the IHP+ website, and many more from Google searches (56%): once you arrive, most of you keep reading for almost ten minutes before you move on – and most of you come back within a week to read some more…

All this means that we reached our 1000^th visit since monitoring began 6 weeks ago! Over 50% of you have visited for the first time in the last six weeks, and we are working hard to attract many more visitors. We look forward to many more visits as our results become available on the NSO. We hope you’ll comment on and contribute to our posts, documents and discussions.

The IHP+Results community is growing faster than ever, and increasingly gaining recognition for its work in transparency and accountability. We have been profiled on the isiAfrica website, where Bill Andrews called IHP+Results North South Observatory ‘…an excellent site leading the way in transparent reporting on aid effectiveness in the health sector”. So please recommend us to your colleagues and help us continue to develop the IHP+Results community as the primary place to hold IHP+ signatories accountable for their performance. Keep in touch and let us know how we can improve further!

IHP+Results Email Update 5

clearspace@human-scale.net — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 10:17:23 GMT

This month we report the initial findings from our in-country research.

North South Observatory Update November 2009 (Issue 5)
Every month we bring you the latest news and analysis of the IHP+Results process: monitoring and evaluating the IHP+, and the countries and partners who are signatories. This month: early findings from our in-country research. Our Country Representatives have completed their interviews and data collection and we have blogged some of the key themes that are emerging. Next month the IHP+Results Update will bring you our latest thinking from work on our first annual report, a draft of which will be submitted to the IHP+ SuRG in early 2010. Don’t miss the opportunity to comment and discuss what you read here - sign up to participate.
Early findings from our in-country research
Reports from Zambia show the effects of this year’s bumpy ride
IHP+ partners in Zambia suggest that the financial corruption scandal that broke earlier this year has had an immediate and negative effect on the health sector. The scandal broke the trust between partners and the Government and this has had a knock-on effect on funding and dialogue. Previous blogs from our Country Representative Thabale Ngulube (TJ), have discussed the importance of trust in the development process, and James Fairfax provides further insight from his analysis of the data that TJ has collected.
Improving data quality is key to strengthening M&E and a focus on results in Mozambique
Responses to our interviews in Mozambique suggest that monitoring and evaluation are a key area for health development there. Poor quality of information affects donors willingness to fund on results, and the results that are emphasised differ - with some more input focused, and others interested in outcomes. Read more to find out how partners, Civil Society and the MoH are working to harmonise and develop these and other aspects of their IHP+ work.
Harmonisation & Aligment predates the IHP+ in Cambodia, but there is room for improvement
In Cambodia, a clear picture is emerging of IHP+ relevant work, particularly on harmonisation and alignment, that predates the IHP+, which raises questions for some about the added-value of developing an IHP+ Country Compact there. However, there is also clear commitment to strengthening and using country systems and accountability mechanisms, as well as a clear recognition that much remains to be done. Read Tim Shorten’s blog to find out more.
Note on this newsletter
The overviews presented in this update do not reflect the perspectives of all IHP+ partners in these countries, nor do they attempt to comprehensively review all of the data collected. Instead they provide a flavour of IHP+Results' emerging findings. IHP+Results first annual progress report will be available in early 2010.
If you would like to subscribe to the IHP+Results newsletter please email laura@human-scale.net and write ‘subscribe’ in the subject heading	Twitter Updates Click here to follow IHP+Results on Twitter! Click here to read previous IHP+Results Updates

Emerging Themes: IHP+Results Research in Mozambique

clearspace@human-scale.net — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 12:01:21 GMT

A consensus is emerging from the information IHP+Results has collected in Mozambique. Here are a few general themes:

1) Many respondents considered the IHP+ Global and Country compacts a way to align all donors with the pre-existing SWAp mechanism, harmonising funding and monitoring and evaluation processes. While there is some consensus that the SWAp mechanism is strengthened, more effective monitoring and evaluation seems to be more of a hope than a reality. Respondents, including CSOs, noted that some donors were not participating and that this limited the effectiveness of these alignment processes. The Ministry of Health (MoH) highlighted the difficulty in moving faster in terms of coordination of actions and planning at the different levels of the system.

2) Respondents mentioned a perception that the IHP+ process would bring increased funding, especially on-plan funding, but this is not always reflected in the funding promised and disbursed. While the MoH reported that funding was not increasing (due to scarce resources), many donors were committing over the longer term, DFID in particular. The MoH reported unfilled funding gaps and a serious shortage of health personnel, to be mitigated by the implementation of a 5-year strategic plan for human resources. It was noted that the Joint Annual Evaluation often reported weakness in implementing plans. Others, including CSO respondents, noted that their participation in planning was not as easy and open at district as at central level. This was because, while M&E was relatively harmonised at national level, at district level different sets of indicators are used, making reporting much more cumbersome.

3) Funding was a critical area, both for supporting country plans and for using country systems. All of those respondents who signed the 2008 MoU, which specified that funding should be based on results, stated that their activities were consistent with country plans. However, the focus was more on inputs than on outcomes/results, and on trying to foster improvements rather than penalising results below expectations.. An area of weakness was procurement, considered by many respondents as reasonable for domestic purposes but not meeting international standards. The MoH recognised this, aimed at more training/recruitment of qualified staff and noted procurement delays had led to them not being able to spend all their allocated funding.

4) Poor quality of data also reduces the focus on results. Despite improvements in information systems results, as reported, were not of much help to make rational and results based funding., The majority of respondents were not satisfied with the quality of data; however they were reluctant to withdraw funding unless results were very bad, leaving decisions based most definitively on the overall objectives of the agency rather than on the reported results in-country. This reflects acknowledgement of both system progress over time and the genuine commitment of some donors to supporting further improvements in country reporting processes and procedures. Monitoring and evaluation were widely considered the weakest aspect of the system performance in Mozambique.

5) Trust was a key theme. Some respondents reported a lack of trust among donors and between donors and the MoH, as well as a lack of trust in the strength of reporting mechanisms and the quality of the data. CSO respondents also mentioned that lack of trust also undermined mutual accountability. Most partners participated in the PAP partner evaluation system, but it was widely described as unenforceable, with no sanctions for poorly-performing partners. On a more positive note, one or two responses stood out for their emphasis on attempts to build trust and to create a dialogue in order to improve relations as well as the outcomes of the planning and implementation processes. These differences in approach seem to indicate a change from the consensus in early days of SWAp. It seems that, as with Zambia, partners are confronted with challenges to build increased trust and dialogue that are key to reliable and successful development in the health sector.

These are the key messages appearing across the responses to our Country Representative’s questions in Mozambique: are they reflected in your experiences? Do you have any other themes to add, or contradictory experiences? Sign up to leave us a comment and let us know what you think. For more early findings please see our blogs on Zambia and Cambodia.

This overview does not reflect the perspective of the Government of Mozambique, nor is it intended as a comprehensive review of all the data collected. A full progress report will be available in early 2010.

Emerging Themes: IHP+Results Research in Mozambique

clearspace@human-scale.net — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 16:57:30 GMT

A consensus is emerging from the information IHP+Results has collected in Mozambique. Here are a few general themes:

1) Many respondents considered the IHP+ Global and Country compacts a way to align all donors with the pre-existing SWAp mechanism, harmonising funding and monitoring and evaluation processes. While there is some consensus that the SWAp mechanism is strengthened, more effective monitoring and evaluation seems to be more of a hope than a reality. Respondents, including CSOs, noted that some donors were not participating and that this limited the effectiveness of these alignment processes. The Ministry of Health (MoH) highlighted the difficulty in moving faster in terms of coordination of actions and planning at the different levels of the system.

Civil Society report highlights health spending issues in Kenya

clearspace@human-scale.net — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 08:42:23 GMT

A report by Kenya AIDS NGOs Consortium (KANCO) has criticised the IMF for placing restrictions on MoH spending on health personnel. The report argues that adhering to the limit of 8% leaves Kenya dependent on donor funding for this kind of expenditure, effectively placing the management of the country’s health – including HIV/AIDS management and treatment – in the hands of donors.

A Double Problem

1. The independence of the MoH:

Limiting the independent decision-making capacity of the Kenyan MoH reduces its capacity to plan over the longer term, slows responses to changed circumstances, infringes democratic sovereignty and undermines innovation and independent thinking. The latter qualities are central to good governance, accountability and efficient and effective planning, outcomes sought by all those involved in the development process. It is clear that getting the balance right between monitoring, management, accountability and independence can be very difficult.

2. The dangers of reliance on donor funding:

Dependence on donor funding can have a debilitative effect on long term planning, in-country accountability and country-led priorities. And, in the current climate, let us not forget that funding is subject to changes in the financial circumstances of donor states and agencies. Extra funding is always welcome in health and development, but its worth is doubled when that funding is supplementary and in line with country priorities, as demonstrated by the widespread support for the Paris Principles and those principles as reflected in the IHP+ Global and Country compacts.

Recommendations for Change

The KANCO report shines a spotlight on the importance of country ownership when setting and implementing policies and making funding decisions. To improve the situation the report recommends:

Greater CSO involvement
More reliable funding patterns
More open decision-making processes.

All of these are principles are central to the IHP+ and to Kenya's Code of Conduct and so we would expect to see progress in these areas in our monitoring as part of IHP+Results. We have discussed these issues in other country contexts - see the Blog posts for Zambia, Burundi and Nepal - and we will feed this analysis into our first Annual Report in December.

I’d be interested to hear what you think of the current situation in Kenya and of the impacts discussed above: sign up to leave a comment and feed into our annual review.

Follow this link to see the full report.

Making the difference: providing as opposed to promising

clearspace@human-scale.net — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 09:23:09 GMT

Burundi’s recent commitment, to provide (as opposed to promising) free health care to all children under 5 and pregnant women,provides an interesting insight into the nature of recipient-country commitments to expand health services:

Burundi – providing (as opposed to promising) free health care to all children under 5 and pregnant women (1.4 million children and 200,000 pregnant women)”

(Source: IHP+ website)

This proviso – providing, not promising – reflects a weak link in the international development chain. Political will is the backbone of any body of promises, and without this the promises are unlikely to be kept; but even where the will is present, practicalities can often lead to a failure to keep promises. Funding is announced but not made, or not in full, or not punctually. Initiatives are announced, but not implemented, or partially, or in a watered down manner.

A familiar concern

Burundi originally abolished user fees for childbirth (but not including routine health services for pregnant women) and the treatment of children under-5 in May 2006; this was extended in September 2008 to include services for all pregnant women. It seems from this announcement that this promise was never implemented: but why? First, Burundi’s ability to deliver this promise would have been heavily reliant on external funding (in 2006 about 50% of the health budget came from foreign assistance). It should be recognised that funding is not the only factor that enables theimplemention of sucha policy change. But when viewed alongside other announcements made at the same UN meeting, on 23 September, it prompts usto reflect on how concrete these high-level political announcements really are, and on the importance of effective accountability mechanisms.

Liberia committed to make the suspension of user fees permanent and to provide free health care for all, but with the following key caveat: “with the help of adequate donor finance” For more detail read the press release in full by clicking this link. Ethiopia, Nepal, Malawi, Ghana, and Sierra Leone also made commitments – but the outcome document makes clear that donors have yet to announce funding for these plans, thus leavingtheir implementation in doubt.

Ensuring that promises become provision

Is it fair to assume that the forum in which these promises were madedemonstrates that political will is in place? If so, how can we mitigate the practical difficulties to ensure that commitments are met and policies implemented? One way is to clarify and make explicit what the commitment is, what the timeframe is, and what exactly will be done in order to achieve that commitment. Here at IHP+Results we are working with IHP+ signatories to make IHP+ commitments - which are frequently broad in scope and general in theme - more specific and measurable to enable effective monitoring and evaluation. This in turn enables partners to communicate what they are doing to implement their commitments and where they need to improve– currently an area of identified weakness in the IHP+.

Follow our progress here, and let us know what you think – leave a comment, start a discussion, or add your evidence. Just sign up to participate.

Making the difference: providing as opposed to promising

clearspace@human-scale.net — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 09:11:58 GMT

Burundi – providing (as opposed to promising) free health care to all children under 5 and pregnant women

(1.4 million children and 200,000 pregnant women)”

(Source: IHP+ website)

A familiar concern

Ensuring that promises become provision

Follow our progress here, and let us know what you think – leave a comment, start a discussion, or add your evidence. Just sign up to participate.

IHP+Results Email Update 3

clearspace@human-scale.net — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 09:24:30 GMT

Read the top stories from the NSO this fortnight: join the debate and let us know what you think (just sign up to leave a comment). You can also download a pdf copy below.

North South Observatory Update Week of 12 October 2009 (Issue 3)
Welcome to IHP+Results update! Every two weeks we will inform you of what has been happening in the independent evaluation of the IHP+ (IHP+Results) and on our website, the North South Observatory (NSO). You can read all these postings and updates on the NSO – just click on the links. Anyone can read our content, and if you want to comment or contribute to IHP+Results, simply sign up to participate.
What’s new on the NSO
Innovative Health Financing
The prominent public commitments made by world leaders at the recent International Financing meeting at the UN General Assembly on 23 September are highly relevant to the IHP+Results agenda. We have started to look at how these match up with the ten recommendations of the High Level Taskforce on Innovative International Financing for Health Systems. We also want to understand what this means for IHP+ countries: read Shaun Conway’s Financing blog for more details.
IHP+Results aligns with Ethiopia country processes
Ethiopia is the first country to have an annual review during our evaluation,. This provides a key opportunity for IHP+Results to access data on progress in Ethiopia's health outcomes, including on the implementation of Ethiopia's IHP+ compact, and to align with this country-led process. With all the key IHP+ signatories and other major players represented, it provides a great opportunity to learn more about actual and perceived progress, and expectations of the IHP+. We will also be looking how the annual review process works as an accountability mechanism in Ethiopia. Read Hailom Banteyergu’s blog for more details.
Working with the OECD/DAC on aid effectiveness
How is IHP+Results working with the OECD/DAC Task Team on Health as a Tracer Sector (TT HATS) and where does it add value on aid effectiveness in the health sector? The TT HATS is meeting on Friday 16th October and in preparation, Tim Shorten has posted a blog answering some of these questions.
Who we are, what we do	Top Discussions
The International Health Partnership and related Initiatives (IHP+) was launched in September 2007 to accelerate action to scale up coverage and use of health services, to achieve the health Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). IHP+Results has been appointed by the IHP+ Scaling-up Reference Group, to provide an independent, evidence-based assessment of the progress that signatories have made in implementing their IHP+ commitments. We provide a mechanism to continuously monitor how IHP+ signatories perform by documenting and rating the specific actions they are taking to fulfil their IHP+ commitments over the 3-year period to 2011. We have started this process in 10 IHP+ countries.	What information should go into the first IHP+Results annual report? How should transparency be implemented in development? Follow IHP+Results on Twitter
If you would like to unsubscribe from the IHP+Results newsletter please email laura@human-scale.net and write ‘unsubscribe’ in the subject heading. Twitter Updates

IHP+Results Update Issue 2

clearspace@human-scale.net — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 10:27:54 GMT

How does IHP+Results monitor and assess the commitments made in the IHP+? What are the key indicators we plan to monitor for our annual report? What is the latest news from our Country Researchers? Read on to find out more - and don't forget you can subscribe to these updates by emailing ihpresults@human-scale.net - just write 'subscribe' in the subject line.

North South Observatory Update Week of 28 September 2009 (Issue 2)
Welcome to IHP+Results update! Every two weeks we will inform you of what has been happening in the independent evaluation of the IHP+ (IHP+Results) and on our website, the North South Observatory (NSO). You can read all these postings and updates on the NSO – just click on the links. Anyone can read our content, and if you want to comment or contribute to IHP+Results, simply sign up to participate.
What is IHP+Results?
Independent assessment of the IHP+
The International Health Partnership and related Initiatives (IHP+) was launched in September 2007 to accelerate action to scale up coverage and use of health services, to achieve the health Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). IHP+Results has been appointed by the IHP+ Scaling-up Reference Group, representing the IHP+ signatories, to provide an independent, evidence-based assessment of the progress that signatorieshave made in implementing their IHP+ commitments. The overall purpose of IHP+Results is to strengthen accountability within the IHP+. IHP+Results is a process managed by the North-South Consortium (led by Responsible Action, including the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and Oxfam GB).
IHP+Results for accountability
We are providing a mechanism to continuously monitor how IHP+ signatories perform by documenting and rating the specific actions they are taking to fulfill their IHP+ commitments over the 3 year period to 2011. We have started this process in 10 IHP+ countries. IHP+ Results will produce an annual progress report that showcases successes, but also highlights where expectations are not being met. Our report to Heads of agencies and Ministers of Health will enable the IHP+ signatories to demonstrate their own accountability and to mutually hold each other to account. We will also work with civil society in IHP+ countries to provide the means for public accountability. A one page monitoring scorecard is being produced for each IHP+ signatory. This shows their main actions relevant to the IHP+ with ratings of progress. We are committed to the principles of Transparency, Participation and Mutual Accountability. Our documentation and evidence for ratings is publicly accessible through the North-South Observatory (NSO).
Updates from the NSO
Read the latest news on the IHP+ process in Mozambique. Cesar Sousa reports on the IHP+, the SWAp, and cooperation in the health sector. Does the IHP+ duplicate the SWAp and other processes, or give strength to them? Progress with data collection - Tim Shorten provides an overview of the information received from IHP+ signatories on their IHP+ actions. First Annual Report – James Fairfax, discusses the IHP+Results first annual progress report. Do you agree with the key questions on Ownership & Accountability that we need to ask?
Keep up with news in your area	Top Discussions
Interested in a particular country or Results Area? You can receive email notifications when a new comment or blog is added – follow these 3 simple steps.	What is the status of CSO involvement in Zambia’s political process? Does the CoC in Kenya mean the IHP+ is unnecessary? How can the CoC be enforced?
If you would like to unsubscribe from the IHP+Results newsletter please email laura@human-scale.net and write ‘unsubscribe’ in the subject heading.	Twitter Updates Click here to follow IHP+Results on Twitter!

IHP+Results Update Issue 1

clearspace@human-scale.net — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 08:03:09 GMT

All the latest news and results from the NSO and the IHP+ monitoring and evaluation process

North South Observatory Update Week of 14 September 2009 (Issue 1)
Welcome to IHP+Results update! Every two weeks we will inform you of what has been happening in the independent evaluation of the IHP+ (IHP+Results) and on our website, the North South Observatory (NSO). You can read all these postings and updates on the NSO – just click on the links. Anyone can read our content, and if you want to comment or contribute to IHP+Results, simply sign up to participate.
What’s new on the NSO
Scorecards: evaluating progress
We are in the process of collecting data from IHP+ signatories that forms the basis of our independent assessment. You’ll find blogs with updates on our process on the NSO. We will be producing up to 31 scorecards which you will be able to see on the NSO in the coming months. They will provide an at-a-glance assessment of what progress signatories have made against their IHP+ commitments.
The latest updates from IHP+ countries
Kenya: Learn how IHP+Results data collection is working in harmonisation with existing processes from Teniin Gakuruh, our Country Researcher in Kenya. Cambodia: David Wilkinson, our Country Researcher in Cambodia, considers issues around the IHP+Results data collection process among IHP+ partners. You’ll also find the latest from Zambia by our Country Researcher Thabale Ngulube on the IHP+ process, and from Nepal where Country Researcher Shanta Lall Mulmi considers the impact of budget allocations and political disruption in Nepal.
IHP+Results Developments
If you’re new to the NSO, then take a look at this. Tim Shorten from IHP+Results attended the second annual IHP+ inter-agency country health sector teams’ meeting in Mali last June. He describes the IHP+Results approach and our plans to complete an independent assessment over the next three years. We welcome your comments. Results Area Blogs You can follow the themes around which IHP+Results is organising its independent assessment. You can read them under health financing, country systems, ownership and accountability, management for development results, and under health systems strengthening.
Coming up...	Top Discussions
You can now contribute and comment on the NSO by email. To find out how, please see these simple steps. IHP+Results has completed our communications plan for the coming year. For more information on please contact Melissa Davis.	Is the IHP+ contributing the Health Systems Strengthening? How to link IHP+Results monitoring to CSO activities?
If you would like to unsubscribe from the IHP+Results newsletter please email laura@human-scale.net and write ‘unsubscribe’ in the subject heading.	Twitter Updates Click here to follow IHP+Results on Twitter!

Quick, Easy, Up To Date – Follow IHP+Results on Twitter

clearspace@human-scale.net — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 09:08:30 GMT

Get quick and simple access to news and recent content here on the North South Observatory for IHP+Results. Follow us on Twitter – we will update you on latest content and discussions here on the NSO as well as posting you useful sites and hot topics.

What is Twitter?

If the name means nothing to you, don’t worry. Twitter is a great new way to get the key information quickly and easily. It’s a summary of about 20 words which gives you the main points – and the link too, if there is an article or site involved. This is called a tweet. You can see our tweets here – if you want to reply, just follow this link to join Twitter.

Get in touch, Keep up to date

You can send us a message by posting a tweet with @IHPResults at the beginning: ask us a question, send us an interesting link, or comment on our work. We’d love to hear from you! If you’re a seasoned Twitter user, why not follow us? You can also get an RSS feed of our posts, for example for your Google Reader.

Contribute to IHP+Results by Email: Find out How

clearspace@human-scale.net — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 16:24:43 GMT

Want to respond to a blog post or comment on a document quickly and easily? Want to see what’s new but don’t want to visit the site every day? We’re really excited that the North South Observatory (NSO) can now capture thoughts and comments that you send in by email - eliminating the time and effort previously required to go to the site to post comments. Just use our email-in facility, which you can set up in three simple steps.

1) Sign Up to Participate

The first step is to sign up to the NSO. Anyone can read our site, but signing up allows you to participate by leaving comments etc, including via email - remember, you can’t contribute by email if you haven’t signed up. If you have already signed up, don’t forget to sign in!

2) Choose Your Area of Interest

Check out your favourite groups: for example, if you are interested in developments in Cambodia, go to the Cambodia group page: to see a list of groups click browse, choose 'groups'', then select one or more groups from the list. You can do this on individual documents, discussions and blogs as well as whole groups. On each page you will find the actions pane, a box about halfway down the right side. It looks like this:

By clicking ‘receive email notifications’ you will automatically get an email whenever someone adds a document, comment or blog post. If you can only see ‘stop email notifications’, it means you are already getting these emails (because you have already contributed to that group). If you have previously commented on existing content, or created new content, you will automatically receive an email that shows the latest additon/change whenever that content is amended. In these cases, just follow step 3 below.

3) Send Your Email!

When you receive an email notification you will be able to see what content has been added and you can simply reply to the email: just write the body text in the main part of the email. Click send, and your email will automatically appear as a comment on the document or blog or discussion – it’s that simple! Any attachments you include in your email will also be included as part of your comment. You can also use the email-in facility to contribute completely new content – just write the title in the subject of your email, put the body text in the main part of your email, and choose where you want your content to appear by selecting the correct email address from this list.

So, three steps:

Sign up
Choose to receive email notifications from groups/documents/discussions/blogs you are interested in
Reply to the notifications (or send your original content by sending an email to the relevant group, using the email list).

Is the IHP+ really making progress?

clearspace@human-scale.net — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 16:30:16 GMT

Is the IHP+ really making progress?

If you want to our progress in tracking the implementation of commitments that countries and agencies have made, check out our Results Area pages. IHP+Results has divided the commitments made in the Global and Country compacts into the following Results Areas: Health Financing, Country Systems, Ownership and Accountability, Managing for Development Results, and Health Systems Strengthening. We are using these Results Areas (chosen for their links to the OECD/DAC aid effectiveness process) to organise our work, to define research questions, to synthesise our findings.

Check out the Results Area Blogs

Each Results Area (RA) has a lead who will write a regular blog to keep you up to date on progress and developments in their thinking. In their first posts, the RA Leads set out the kinds of issues that they will cover over the coming months and introduced the research questions that they will answer in order to assess progress in implementing the IHP+. Click on the links above to access each Results Area’s blog.

The latest blog entries look at our research questions in greater detail and analyse the data sources necessary to answer them. Your views are eagerly sought to contribute to our evidence-gathering. Check out the latest post in Country Systems – and see how IHP+Results will help strengthen accountability within the IHP+ and communicate the results of the initiative.

Asking Questions, Drawing Conclusions

The RA Blogs are an excellent place to follow the IHP+Results process in more detail, to find the latest news and keep up to date with new findings. Anyone can read the RA blogs - or sign up to ask questions, take part in discussions and offer your answers.

Jive SBS Syndication Feed

Progress in aid effectiveness: IHP+Results generates discussion and debate

WHA IHP+Results Update 2010 - read it here!

Growing success of our IHP+Results community

IHP+Results Email Update 5

Twitter Updates

Emerging Themes: IHP+Results Research in Mozambique

Emerging Themes: IHP+Results Research in Mozambique

Civil Society report highlights health spending issues in Kenya

Making the difference: providing as opposed to promising

Making the difference: providing as opposed to promising

IHP+Results Email Update 3

Twitter Updates

IHP+Results Update Issue 2

Twitter Updates

IHP+Results Update Issue 1

Twitter Updates

Quick, Easy, Up To Date – Follow IHP+Results on Twitter

Contribute to IHP+Results by Email: Find out How

Is the IHP+ really making progress?