The costs of Suaahara II, a complex scaled-up multisectoral nutrition programme in Nepal.

Limited evidence exists on the costs of scaled-up multisectoral nutrition programmes. Such evidence is crucial to assess intervention value and affordability. Evidence is also lacking on the opportunity costs of implementers and participants engaging in community-level interventions. We help to fill this gap by estimating the full financial and economic costs of the United States Agency for International Development-funded Suaahara II (SII) programme, a scaled-up multisectoral nutrition programme in Nepal (2016-2023). We applied a standardized mixed methods costing approach to estimate total and unit costs over a 3.7-year implementation period. Financial expenditure data from national and subnational levels were combined with economic cost estimates assessed using in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with staff, volunteers, community members, and government partners in four representative districts. The average annual total cost was US$908,948 per district, with economic costs accounting for 47% of the costs. The annual unit cost was US$132 per programme participant (mother in the 1000-day period between conception and a child's second birthday) reached. Annual costs ranged from US$152 (mountains) to US$118 (plains) per programme participant. Personnel (63%) were the largest input cost driver, followed by supplies (11%). Community events (29%) and household counselling visits (17%) were the largest activity cost drivers. Volunteer cadres contributed significant time to the programme, with female community health volunteers spending a substantial amount of time (27 h per month) on SII activities. Multisectoral nutrition programmes can be costly, especially when taking into consideration volunteer and participant opportunity costs. This study provides much-needed evidence of the costs of scaled-up multisectoral nutrition programmes for future comparison against benefits.

Scaling up nutrition through multisectoral planning: An exploratory review of 26 national nutrition plans.

With a growing consensus on the need to address malnutrition in a comprehensive and multisectoral way, there has been increased attention on the processes and factors for multisectoral nutrition planning to be successful. To guide countries, the Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) Movement developed a checklist that defined characteristics of good national nutrition plans. This exploratory review used the framework of the Checklist to assess 26 national multisectoral nutrition plans (MSNPs) developed between 2014 and 2020. The MSNPs were assessed against a subset of 31 Checklist characteristics defined as basic plan components. Although the level of detail varied across the reviewed plans, the majority included core components that are important to facilitate effective planning and implementation, such as an assessment of the nutritional status and determinants of malnutrition for children under 5 years of age, a commitment to global recommendations related to reducing malnutrition, actions consistent with global evidence and responding to identified issues/gaps, governance arrangements to facilitate coordination, and identification of capacity-building needs/actions to support effective implementation. Common gaps across plans included risk analysis and mitigation, defined responsible agencies for each action, an assessment of the financial gap and defined mechanisms for financial tracking and resource allocation, and mechanisms to coordinate operational research. These findings provide a high-level, multi-country review of multisectoral nutrition planning that can support future policymakers, technical assistance providers and regional and global stakeholders to consider the foundational elements of and further validate and address common shortcomings in developing such a plan.

Global VAX: A U.S. contribution to global COVID-19 vaccination efforts, 2021-2023.

In December 2021 the U.S. Government announced a new, whole-of-government $1.8 billion effort, the Initiative for Global Vaccine Access (Global VAX) in response to the global COVID-19 pandemic. Using the foundation of decades of U.S. government investments in global health and working in close partnership with local governments and key global and multilateral organizations, Global VAX enabled the rapid acceleration of the global COVID-19 vaccine rollout in selected countries, contributing to increased COVID-19 vaccine coverage in some of the world's most vulnerable communities. Through Global VAX, the U.S. Government has supported 125 countries to scale up COVID-19 vaccine delivery and administration while strengthening primary health care systems to respond to future health crises. The progress made by Global VAX has paved the way for a stronger global recovery and improved global health security.

Perspectives on Implementation Considerations and Costs of Malaria Case Management Supportive Supervision.

Between 2012 and 2017, the U.S. President's Malaria Initiative-funded MalariaCare project supported national malaria control programs in sub-Saharan Africa to implement a case management quality assurance (QA) system for malaria and other febrile illnesses. A major component of the system was outreach training and supportive supervision (OTSS), whereby trained government health personnel visited health facilities to observe health-care practices using a standard checklist, to provide individualized feedback to staff, and to develop health facility-wide action plans based on observation and review of facility registers. Based on MalariaCare's experience, facilitating visits to more than 5,600 health facilities in nine countries, we found that programs seeking to implement similar supportive supervision schemes should consider ensuring the following: 1) develop a practical checklist that balances information gathering and mentorship; 2) establish basic competency criteria for supervisors and periodically assess supervisor performance in the field; 3) conduct both technical skills training and supervision skills training; 4) establish criteria for selecting facilities to conduct OTSS and determine the appropriate frequency of visits; and 5) use electronic data collection systems where possible. Cost will also be a significant consideration: the average cost per OTSS visit ranged from $44 to $333. Significant variation in costs was due to factors such as travel time, allowances for government personnel, length of the visit, and involvement of central level officials. Because the cost of conducting supportive supervision prohibits regularly visiting all health facilities, internal QA measures could also be considered as alternative or complementary activities to supportive supervision.

Prioritizing and Funding Nepal's Multisector Nutrition Plan.

BACKGROUND: Nepal has a long tradition of designing good multisectoral nutrition policy. However, success of policy implementation has varied. More evidence on how to successfully carry out multisector nutrition policy is needed. OBJECTIVE: We tracked the influence of Nepal's multisectoral nutrition plan (MSNP) on the process of priority setting and budgeting from 2014 to 2016. METHODS: This study used a mixed-method longitudinal design to track qualitative and budgetary changes related to MSNP processes nationally as well as in 3 districts. Qualitative changes in each study area were assessed through interviews, observation, news content, and meeting notes. Changes in allocations and expenditures were calculated based on budget documents, work plans, and validation interviews. RESULTS: Improved understanding of the MSNP was documented nationally and in study districts but not in VDCs. Human resources, ownership, bottom-up planning, coordination, advocacy, and sustainable structures all emerged as important factors within the enabling environment. Evidence suggests the MSNP influenced improvements in the last 3 factors. We also found notable increases in activities and financing for nutrition-allocations increased steadily between FY 2013-2014 and FY 2015-2016, and 28% of total nutrition allocations in the final year came from new or expanded MSNP-affiliated activities. Data from 3 districts highlight challenges linking local planning and budgeting to central-level structures. CONCLUSIONS: The MSNP appears to have strengthened the nutrition system in Nepal and increased priority and funding for nutrition. Next steps include strengthening linkages to the districts and below. Other countries can learn from the MSNP's success in increasing investment for nutrition.