Presented by Dr Sussan Bassiri, Director, Administration and Finance, at the 66th session of the WHO Regional Committee for Europe.

1. Draft proposed WHO programme budget (PB)
2018–2019: the European Region’s perspective
Dr Sussan Bassiri
Director
Administration and Finance

2. Outline
Full cycle through the lens of the
12th General Programme of Work (GPW12)
• 2014–2015: assessing progress made in the 1st
biennium of GPW12
• 2016–2017: applying lessons learned and continuing
priorities
• 2018–2019: consolidating and refining the priority areas

3. WHO/Europe PB14–15 in numbers
• WHA-approved PB (US$ 225 million) was increased
by 6% (US$ 239 million); all increase in Outbreak
and crisis response
• WHA-approved PB was 95% funded
• Financial implementation of the approved was 89%

4. PB14–15 by category
• Variation in implementation
directly related to financing
level
• Better alignment of funding
and allocated budget
• Even implementation of
available funds (91%–98%)
• Many technical
achievements across
6 categories
best funded
least funded

5. Financial resources in 2014–2015
• 48% fully or highly flexible funds
• 52% highly specified voluntary contributions (VC)
• 9% more assessed contributions (AC) and
core voluntary contributions account (CVCA)
allocated in 2014–2015 from the global level than
in 2012–2013  greater fairness in financing
underfunded and priority areas

6. WHO/Europe top donors in 2014–2015
-
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
UnitedStatesofAmerica
EuropeanCommission
Germany
GAVIAlliance
Switzerland
UnitedKingdomofGreat
BritainandNorthern
Ireland
RussianFederation
GeneralitatdeCatalunya,
Spain
Norway
UnitedNationsCentral
EmergencyResponseFund
(CERF)
• USA – single largest donor
(19% of all VC)
• European Commission and
Germany – 8% each
• European Member States
fund ~ 22% of approved PB
for WHO/Europe, in
addition to AC and CVCA
• Picture similar to previous
bienniums  WHO/Europe
vulnerability due to limited
donor base

7. Lessons learned from 2014–2015
• Significant increase in outbreak and crisis responses in
2014–2015 resulted in challenges to find a balance between
planned core activities and response to emergencies given
unvarying level of core human resources
• Political changes in countries and limited financial and human
resources were the main challenges for implementation,
similar to previous bienniums

8. Lessons learned from 2014–2015
• Strong commitment at the country level is a key for success
• Collaboration and partnerships are critical
• Sustainability of actions is essential to maintain achievements
• Technical capacity at the country level needs to be
strengthened
• Unfinished agendas to be considered
Please see detailed analysis of lessons learned in Regional
Committee document

9. 2016–2017: applying lessons learned
• Early operational planning 2016–2017 allowed continuity of operations
and early start of implementation
• Early allocation of flexible funds prior to biennium start increased
predictability and ensured smooth start
• Bottom-up planning approach for 2016–2017 led to more realistic budget
levels
• Roll-out of the country matrix of roles and responsibilities, promotes
clarity and transparency of actions between regional and country levels

10. 2016–2017: continuing priorities
• WHA-approved PB increased
by 6% in emergencies
• Implementation on track
• WHA-approved PB 84%
funded, incl. projected VC
• Better alignment of funding to
the approved budget, “pockets
of poverty” still exist
-
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1 2 3 4 5 6 Emergencies
US$,million
Category
WHA budget
Current budget allocations
Funds available
Implementation
best funded
least funded

11. Development of PB18–19 to date
February – May 2016
• Setting strategic direction from the regional
level
• Identification of priorities at the country level
• Identification of regional and global priority
work
• Costing of outputs for all priorities
May 2016
Regional consolidation and review of priority
outcomes, with related outputs and costing
June 2016
Global consolidation and review of
priorities by category and
programme area networks, and
Global Policy Group
July 2016
Development of the draft global
PB18–19
July – Aug. 2016
Development of the Regional Perspective on
PB18–19
Sept. 2016
RC66 reviews draft global PB18–19, draft Regional
Perspective
GLOBAL LEVEL REGIONAL LEVEL

12. Development of PB18–19
• Continuity – bottom-up planning identified priorities built on the priority-
setting of 2016–2017
• Stable budget – same base budget level as 2016–2017 with adjustments
based on application of the Strategic Budget Space Allocation
(~US$ 3 million)
• Alignment of budget and priorities – good correspondence between priorities
and budget level by category
• Alignment with SDGs – the 2030 Agenda taken into account during various
steps in the PB development process
• Emergency reform – followed separate planning process; approved by
WHA69; integral part of the draft PB18–19

13. Frequency of programme areas cited as priorities
• Country consultations:
10 priority health
outcomes were identified,
excluding Emergencies
• Highest demand
(= number of countries
choosing specific
priorities) for categories
2 and 3
• Continuity of priorities
from 2016–2017
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
NCD
Health services
TB
Mental health
Health info.
Mother&Child
Health policies
Medicines
VPI
Environment
HIV
AMR
Nutrition
SDH
Violence&injuries
Ageing
Disabilities
NTD
GER
Number of countries
* does not include programmes under emergency reform

14. Proposed PB18–19
Categories and programme areas
WHA PB
2016–2017
PB 2018–2019
proposed
% Change
Categories 1–6, excluding Health
Emergencies Programme
219.47 222.50 1%
Subtotal base programmes, incl.
Health Emergencies Programme
235.40 258.60 10%
Outbreak and crisis response 3.0
Poliomyelitis 7.40 5.90 -20%
Total PB 245.80 264.50 8%

15. Proposed PB18–19 compared to
allocated PB14–15 and PB16–17
• Clear increase of budget in priority
areas across bienniums
• Readjusted budget where necessary
(e.g. categories 1 and 3)
• Effect of emergency reform in
category 5
• Strategic orientations for Region for
PB18–19 shown in the Regional
Committee document
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Cat 1 Cat 2 Cat 3 Cat 4 Cat 5 Cat 6
US$million
PB14-15
PB16-17
PB18-19

16. Financing of PB18–19
• Financial dialogue: fully funded PB14–15, good projections
for PB16–17, uncertain prospects for PB18–19
• Current projections  financing is 48% of proposed budget
• High reliance on few donors, high earmarking, and
«pockets of poverty» still exist. More flexibility is needed
on donor side
• Financial dialogue, web portal, emergency reform, SDGs
expected to affect PB18–19 financing but effects are still
uncertain
Financing Projections
Flexible US$ 103
million
Voluntary US$ 24
million
Total US$ 127
million

17. Next steps in developing PB18–19
Sept. 2016
RC66 reviews draft global PB18–19, draft Regional
Perspective
Jan. 2017
EB reviews revised PB18–19
incorporating input from all RCs
Oct. – Dec. 2016
Region contributes to revision of the global
PB18–19 based on feedback from
Regional Committees (RCs)
July – Sept. 2017
Preparation and presentation to RC67 of
the regional implementation plan for
PB18–19
GLOBAL LEVEL REGIONAL LEVEL
May 2017
Consideration of draft PB18–19 by
70th World Health Assembly