[Ip-health] EB136: WHO Evaluation of the global strategy and plan of action on public health, innovation and intellectual property

Thiru Balasubramaniam thiru at keionline.org
Fri Dec 19 08:23:54 PST 2014


http://keionline.org/node/2156

EB136: WHO Evaluation of the global strategy and plan of action on public
health, innovation and intellectual property

The World Health Organization (WHO) convenes its 136th Executive Board in
Geneva from 26 January 2015 to 3 February 2015. Among the topics up for
discussion at EB136 is the proposed evaluation of WHO"s global strategy and
plan of action on public health, innovation and intellectual property
(document EB136/31). The mandate for this overall program review of the
global strategy and plan of action emanates from WHA62.16, paragraph 6,
which requests the WHO

to conduct an overall programme review of the global strategy and plan of
action in 2014 on its achievement, remaining challenges and recommendations
on the way forward to the Assembly in 2015 through the Executive Board.

The evaluation of WHO's implementation of the global strategy and plan of
action on public health, innovation and intellectual property was first
broached at WHO EB in May 2013
<http://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/EB133-REC1/B133_REC1-en.pdf#page=35>.
During this Executive Board, the WHO secretariat circulated document
EB/133/7, Suggested approach for the evaluation of the implementation of
the global strategy and plan of action on public health, innovation and
intellectual property
<http://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/EB133/B133_7-en.pdf>. This 2012
document by the Secretariat proposed the following approach for the
evaluation:

12. The evaluation would be conducted by an external independent evaluator,
selected by the Secretariat through an open tender.

13. The evaluator would be an independent external organization or team
with an appropriate knowledge of the subject of the evaluation and skill
mix, as well as relevant experience in performing evaluations involving
innovation strategies in public health and access to medical products and
technologies.

14. The evaluator would develop the evaluation methodology, conduct the
analysis and deliver a report of the findings, including recommendations.

15. The Secretariat would provide the necessary support to the evaluator
during the evaluation exercise (finalization of methodology, identification
of partners, facilitation of contacts, identification of relevant
documentation and data).

During EB133 discussions on public health, innovation and intellectual
property in May 2013, the WHO secretariat provided the following insight
into WHO's evaluation of the Global Strategy and Plan of Action on Public
Health, Innovation and Intellectual Property (GSPOA). It is telling that
the WHO secretariat refers to the GSPOA in the past tense noting that it
"was a medium-term strategic plan for 2008–2015" but noting that "some
activities would continue after 2015" including WHA66.22 which requested
WHO to report to the Health Assembly on health research and development
demonstration projects in 2015, and to convene an open-ended meeting of
Member States prior to the World Health Assembly in May 2016." If the GSPOA
is indeed a "medium-term strategic plan for 2008-2015", this poses an
interesting quandary, what next? Perhaps one possibility would be for WHA68
in May 2015 to extend the mandate of WHO's Global Strategy and Plan of
Action on Public Health, Innovation and Intellectual Property.

In terms of developing the evaluation methodology for assessing how the
GSPOA has been implemented, Dr. Kieny intimated that the Secretariat would
prefer to use "a consultancy with appropriate knowledge and experience"
stressing the need to "ensure independence and use of appropriate
methodology".

Dr KIENY (Assistant Director-General), thanking speakers for their useful
suggestions, recalled that the global strategy and plan of action on public
health, innovation and intellectual property was a medium-term strategic
plan for 2008–2015. Monitoring and evaluation were built into the strategy
as part of element 8 (establishing monitoring and reporting systems) and
the indicators to measure performance had been adopted in resolution
WHA62.16. Implementation had begun in 2008, and the Secretariat had
provided progress reports in 2010 and 2012. However, some activities would
continue after 2015, and she drew attention in that regard to resolution
WHA66.22 on follow up of the report of the Consultative Expert Working
Group on Research and Development: Financing and Coordination, which
requested the Director-General, inter alia, to report to the Health
Assembly on health research and development demonstration projects in 2015,
and to convene an open-ended meeting of Member States prior to the World
Health Assembly in May 2016.

It had not been possible in the progress report to provide more detail on
the evaluation methodology, and further information would be made available
on the WHO website. The Secretariat was planning to review five to seven
countries in detail, element by element, since the allocated resources were
not sufficient for a detailed case study of all countries. Efforts would be
made to build on the PAHO Regional Platform on Access and Innovation for
Health Technologies and other platforms in different regions; the
Secretariat was also building a global platform. Although the global health
research and development observatory that the Director-General had been
requested to establish in resolution WHA66.22 would be useful for the
purposes of reporting, it would not be fully operational by the 2015
deadline.

The evaluation was complex and in order to ensure independence and the use
of appropriate methodology, the Secretariat would prefer to use a
consultancy firm with appropriate knowledge and experience. The details of
the evaluation and all the results would be provided to Member States.

The DIRECTOR-GENERAL said that the current workplan finished in 2015 and
consisted of eight elements that were all being implemented at different
rates, and efforts would be needed to achieve coherence and ensure a
comprehensive evaluation using the indicators agreed in resolutions already
adopted. Given its technical nature, the evaluation exercise should be
conducted by experts in order to ensure that the correct methodology was
being used. However, the evaluation methodology and terms of reference must
not be affected by conflicts of interest or vested interest. As part of the
culture of evaluation being developed under WHO reform, the Evaluation
Monitoring Group, which comprised Officers of the Executive Board, had
already provided Member State oversight of the second-stage evaluation. If
the Board was agreeable, she would request that Group to provide Member
oversight and ensure transparency concerning the evaluation exercise.

In terms of the timeline for the independent evaluation of the GSPOA,
EB/136/31 proposes the following. The WHO secretariat proposes that the
"evaluation management group" be established in January 2015, with the
terms of reference and request for proposals for potential members of the
team finalized in March 2015. The selection of the evaluation team and the
finalization of contracts will be done in June 2015. Although this is an
independent evaluation, it is unclear from EB/136/31 as to whether the EB
will have any oversight of the work of the evaluation management group of
the global strategy and plan of action on public health, innovation and
intellectual property.

4. In order to facilitate the process leading to the presentation of the
evaluation report, the
Secretariat proposes the following timeline, which is in line with the WHO
evaluation policy:

(a) January 2015: Establish the evaluation management group.

(b) March 2015: Finalize and approve the terms of reference for the
evaluation, and request proposals for potential members of the evaluation
team.

(c) June 2015: Select the members of the evaluation team and finalize the
contracts.

(d) August 2015: Issue an inception report, which presents the plan of
action, the timeline and the terms of reference.

(e) September 2015 to September 2016: Facilitate the evaluation exercise
and monitor the
outputs.

(f) January 2016 and May 2016: Report to the Executive Board and the World
Health Assembly on the progress of the evaluation.

(g) October 2016: Review and finalize the evaluation report.

(h) January 2017 and May 2017: Submit the report to the Executive Board and
the World Health Assembly.



More information about the Ip-health mailing list