Any better? A follow-up content analysis of adolescent sexual and reproductive health inclusion in Global Financing Facility country planning documents.

BACKGROUND: The Global Financing Facility (GFF) supports national reproductive, maternal, newborn, child, adolescent health, and nutrition needs. Previous analysis examined how adolescent sexual and reproductive health was represented in GFF national planning documents for 11 GFF partner countries. OBJECTIVES: This paper furthers that analysis for 16 GFF partner countries as part of a Special Series. METHODS: Content analysis was conducted on publicly available GFF planning documents for Afghanistan, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, CAR, Côte d'Ivoire, Guinea, Haiti, Indonesia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Tajikistan, Vietnam. Analysis considered adolescent health content (mindset), indicators (measure) and funding (money) relative to adolescent sexual and reproductive health needs, using a tracer indicator. RESULTS: Countries with higher rates of adolescent pregnancy had more content relating to adolescent reproductive health, with exceptions in fragile contexts. Investment cases had more adolescent content than project appraisal documents. Content gradually weakened from mindset to measures to money. Related conditions, such as fistula, abortion, and mental health, were insufficiently addressed. Documents from Burkina Faso and Malawi demonstrated it is possible to include adolescent programming even within a context of shifting or selective priorities. CONCLUSION: Tracing prioritisation and translation of commitments into plans provides a foundation for discussing global funding for adolescents. We highlight positive aspects of programming and areas for strengthening and suggest broadening the perspective of adolescent health beyond the reproductive health to encompass issues, such as mental health. This paper forms part of a growing body of accountability literature, supporting advocacy work for adolescent programming and funding.

Main findings: Adolescent health content is inconsistently included in the Global Financing Facility country documents, and despite strong or positive examples, the content is stronger in investment cases than project appraisal documents, and diminishes when comparing content, indicators and financing.Added knowledge: Although adolescent health content is generally strongest in countries with the highest proportion of births before age 18, there are exceptions in fragile contexts and gaps in addressing important issues related to adolescent health.Global health impact for policy and action: Adolescent health programming supported by the Global Financing Facility should build on examples of strong country plans, be more consistent in addressing adolescent health, and be accompanied by public transparency to facilitate accountability work such as this.

Are rhetorical commitments to adolescents reflected in planning documents? An exploratory content analysis of adolescent sexual and reproductive health in Global Financing Facility country plans.

BACKGROUND: The Global Financing Facility (GFF) offers an opportunity to close the financing gap that holds back gains in women, children's and adolescent health. However, very little work exists examining GFF practice, particularly for adolescent health. As momentum builds for the GFF, we examine initial GFF planning documents to inform future national and multi-lateral efforts to advance adolescent sexual and reproductive health. METHODS: We undertook a content analysis of the first 11 GFF Investment Cases and Project Appraisal Documents available on the GFF website. The countries involved include Bangladesh, Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Kenya, Liberia, Mozambique, Nigeria, Tanzania and Uganda. RESULTS: While several country documents signal understanding and investment in adolescents as a strategic area, this is not consistent across all countries, nor between Investment Cases and Project Appraisal Documents. In both types of documents commitments weaken as one moves from programming content to indicators to investment. Important contributions include how teenage pregnancy is a universal concern, how adolescent and youth friendly health services and school-based programs are supported in several country documents, how gender is noted as a key social determinant critical for mainstreaming across the health system, alongside the importance of multi-sectoral collaboration, and the acknowledgement of adolescent rights. Weaknesses include the lack of comprehensive analysis of adolescent health needs, inconsistent investments in adolescent friendly health services and school based programs, missed opportunities in not supporting multi-component and multi-level initiatives to change gender norms involving adolescent boys in addition to adolescent girls, and neglect of governance approaches to broker effective multi-sectoral collaboration, community engagement and adolescent involvement. CONCLUSION: There are important examples of how the GFF supports adolescents and their sexual and reproductive health. However, more can be done. While building on service delivery approaches more consistently, it must also fund initiatives that address the main social and systems drivers of adolescent health. This requires capacity building for the technical aspects of adolescent health, but also engaging politically to ensure that the right actors are convened to prioritize adolescent health in country plans and to ensure accountability in the GFF process itself.

Health for all by all-pursuing multi-sectoral action on health for SDGs in the WHO Eastern Mediterranean Region.

The WHO Eastern Mediterranean Region is endowed with deep intellectual tradition, interesting cultural diversity, and a strong societal fabric; components of a vibrant platform for promoting health and wellbeing. Health has a central place in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for at least three reasons: Firstly, health is shaped by factors outside of the health sector. Secondly, health can be singled out among several SDGs as it provides a clear lens for examining the progress of the entire development process. Thirdly, in addition to being an outcome, health is also a contributor to achieving sustainable development. Realizing this central role of health in SDGs and the significance of collaboration among diverse sectors, the WHO is taking action. In its most recent General Program of Work 2019-2023 (GPW 13), the WHO has set a target of promoting the health of one billion more people by addressing social and other determinants of health through multi-sectoral collaboration. The WHO Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean Region, through Vision 2023, aims at addressing these determinants by adopting an equity-driven, leaving no one behind approach. Advocating for Health in All Policies, multi-sectoral action, community engagement, and strategic partnerships are the cornerstone for this approach. The focus areas include addressing the social and economic determinants of health across the life course, especially maternal and child health, communicable diseases, non-communicable diseases, and injuries. The aspirations are noteworthy - however, recent work in progress in countries has also highlighted some areas for improvement. Joint work among different ministries and departments at country level is essential to achieve the agenda of sustainable development. For collaboration, not only the ministries and departments need to be engaged, but the partnerships with other stakeholders such as civil society and private sector are a necessity and not a choice to effectively pursue achievement of SDGs.

Analysis of tobacco control policies in Nigeria: historical development and application of multi-sectoral action.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco use is a major risk factor for non-communicable diseases and policy formulation on tobacco is expected to engrain international guidelines. This paper describes the historical development of tobacco control policies in Nigeria, the use of multi-sectoral action in their formulation and extent to which they align with the World Health Organisation "best buy" interventions. METHODS: We adopted a descriptive case study methodology guided by the Walt and Gilson Policy Analysis Framework. Data collection comprised of document review (N = 18) identified through search of government websites and electronic databases with no date restriction and key informant interviews (N = 44) with stakeholders in public and private sectors. Data was integrated and analyzed using content analysis. Ethical approval was granted by the University of Ibadan and University College Hospital Ethics Review Committee. RESULTS: Although the agenda for development of a national tobacco control policy dates back to the 1950s, a comprehensive Framework Convention for Tobacco Control (FCTC) compliant policy was only developed in 2015, 10 years after Nigeria signed the FCTC. Lack of funding and conflict of interest (of protecting citizens from harmful effect of tobacco viz. a viz. the economic gains from the industry) are the major barriers that slowed the policy process. Current tobacco -related policies developed by the Federal Ministry of Health were formulated through strong multi-sectoral engagement and covering all the four WHO "best buy" interventions. Other policies had limited multi-sectoral engagement and "best buy" strategies. The tobacco industry was involved in the development of the Standards for Tobacco Control of 2014 contrary to the long-standing WHO guideline against engagement of the industry in policy formulation. CONCLUSIONS: Nigeria has a comprehensive national policy for tobacco control which was formulated a decade after ratification of the FCTC due to constraints of funding and conflict of interest. Not all the tobacco control policies in Nigeria engrain the principles of multisectorality and best buy strategies in their formulation. There is an urgent need to address these neglected areas that may hamper tobacco control efforts in Nigeria.

Alcohol policies in Malawi: inclusion of WHO "best buy" interventions and use of multi-sectoral action.

BACKGROUND: Harmful use of alcohol is one of the most common risk factors for Non-Communicable Diseases and other health conditions such as injuries. World Health Organization has identified highly cost-effective interventions for reduction of alcohol consumption at population level, known as "best buy" interventions, which include tax increases, bans on alcohol advertising and restricted access to retailed alcohol. This paper describes the extent of inclusion of alcohol related "best buy" interventions in national policies and also describes the application of multi-sectoral action in the development of alcohol policies in Malawi. METHODS: The study was part of a multi-country research project on Analysis of Non-Communicable Disease Preventive Policies in Africa, which applied a qualitative case study design. Data were collected from thirty-two key informants through interviews. A review of twelve national policy documents that relate to control of harmful use of alcohol was also conducted. Transcripts were coded according to a predefined protocol followed by thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Only three of the twelve national policy documents related to alcohol included at least one "best buy" intervention. Multi-Sectoral Action was only evident in the development process of the latest alcohol policy document, the National Alcohol Policy. Facilitators for multi-sectoral action for alcohol policy formulation included: structured leadership and collaboration, shared concern over the burden of harmful use of alcohol, advocacy efforts by local non-governmental organisations and availability of some dedicated funding. Perceived barriers included financial constraints, high personnel turnover in different government departments, role confusion between sectors and some interference from the alcohol industry. CONCLUSIONS: Malawi's national legislations and policies have inadequate inclusion of the "best buy" interventions for control of harmful use of alcohol. Effective development and implementation of alcohol policies require structured organisation and collaboration of multi-sectoral actors. Sustainable financing mechanisms for the policy development and implementation processes should be considered; and the influence of the alcohol industry should be mitigated.