1. UN Reform Agenda Implementation Implications for UNAIDS Implications for UNAIDS

2. Why UN Reform  Interdependent world  Need for coherent and strong UN  Key role in ensuring progress towards MDGs  Flexible and coherent to respond to; Operational and policy needs States in conflict Low income countries Emerging economies Developed countries

3. Need for Reform  UN not optimally configured  Need for coherence and synergy  Perform as one be more than some of its parts  Utilise unique universality, neutrality  Operate in security, development and humanitarian spheres  Perform role of ; Convenor Standard-setter Advocate Expert Monitor Coordinator Manager of programmes

4. Shortcomings of the UN  Dysfunctional global order  Conflict prone state system  Deep political disagreements  Chasms: rich and poor, powerful, powerless  Differences of interest  Differences of interest shape reform efforts  Keep UN contradictory and divided

5. Constraints to UN reform at country level  Poorly defined agency roles, responsibilities  Lack of harmonised cycles and procedures  Inadequate implementation tools  Weak quality assurance and oversight  Competing rather complementary priorities

6. High level Panel Recommendations  Development  Funding  Humanitarian assistance  Environment  Gender Equality  Business Practices  Further streamlining and consolidation

7. “Deliver as One” at country level  Programme activities consolidated  Empowered RC manage One UN  UN system-wide ownership of RC system  UNDP restructured: Operational work on policy coherence and positioning of Country Team Withdraw from sector-focused policy and capacity work  One leader, One Programme, One budgetary framework

8. Pilot Countries  Albania  Rwanda  Cape Verde  Tanzania  Mozambique  Uruguay  Pakistan  Vietnam

9. Risks  AIDS overshadowed by competing priorities?  Visibility and work of UNAIDS overshadowed?  Erosion of ground gained  Reduction in resources for AIDS  Alienation of specialised agencies

10. Challenges  Member states not keen on budgetary framework: funds through RC  Examples cited not typify coherence of UN  Pilots delay implementation of country-level reform on large scale  Non Ex Com members commitment in doubt  Governmental board to oversee one programme under discussion  Resistance by agencies to rid of UNDAF: lose oversight and accountability  Make aid contingent on progress on aspects of reform

11. Issues, challenges faced by Pilots  Programmatic coherence and strategic focus  Funding  Keeping management and overhead light  National ownership  Authority and accountability of RC  Role of UNDP as manager of RC system, programmatic role  Top down approach  Inclusiveness vs speed of implementation

12. Opportunities  Lessons: Joint programme including specialised agencies  One UN team foster UNAIDS work on UN Reform  Overcome reluctance by agencies to be involved on joint programmes  Experience with funding mechanisms through RC system: PAF PSF  Experiences from joint UN teams and programmes critical for One UN  Budgetary framework basis for financing programme of support

13. UNAIDS Experience on UN Reform  Governance  Civil society  Management  Policy coherence  Operational Coherence  Results oriented UBW  Multi donor basket funding

14. UNAIDS at Country Level  Full member of Country Team  Rename UCC as Country Director  Strengthen work on joint programming  Offer UNAIDS lessons on UN Reform

15. Joint UN Teams milestones UN Reform and international efforts to improve aid effectiveness 12 December 2005 Jan- May 2006 June 2005 March 2005 2002 - 2005 Harmonisation and coordination Making the Money work: 3 Ones in Action Formation of Global Task Team (GTT) Global Task Team Report Establishment of Joint Teams UN Secretary General Letter to UN Resident Coordinators Direction to establish UN Country Teams Consultations Guidance paper Official release UNDGO UNAIDS Joint AIDS Teams Joint Planning Joint Programming 19 May 2006

16. Current Status 83 Joint Teams * source: UNAIDS Mid-Term Survey 2006

17. 83 53 43 22 Percentage of 98 countries surveyed Percentage of 132 countries with UNTG ESTABLISHMENT OF JOINT UN TEAMS Current Status 84,69% 54,08% 43,88% 22,45% 64,16% 40,97% 33,24% 17,01%

18. 40 17 23 30 Percentage of 98 countries surveyed Percentage of 132 countries with UNTG ESTABLISHMENT OF JOINT PROGRAMMES Current Status 40,82% 17,35% 30,61% 23,47% 30,92% 13,14% 23,19% 17,78%

19. Programme of Support Agency A Programme Agency B Programme Agency C Programme Agency D Programme Agency E Programme Agency F Programme Joint Programme on Care Joint Programme on Prevention Joint Advocacy Joint Resource Mobilization Technical Support Plan Joint Monitoring & Evaluation J o i n t P r o g r a m m i n g

20. Challenges SG letter seen as directive to RC only Accountability mechanisms: lack of integration Joint programming and joint planning Lack of capacity: resources and guidelines Lack of financial and administrative procedures Weak capacity of UN staff in priority thematic areas Measuring performance Integration of UN Theme Group

21. Issues Qualitative assessments One size fits all? Joint planning and programming guidelines RC, TG Chair, UCC consultations Implementation of PCB recommendations Challenges and opportunities: “One UN” concept Resource mobilisation