Key Elements of an NPER
|
31
ersonnel time dedicated to nutrition-related programs. This means that, to p adequately identify personnel allocations, the NPER team needs to (1) decide which of the ministries’ core personnel from key sectors are involved in nutrition; and (2) review the functions of these personnel and understand how much time is allocated to identified nutrition-related interventions. If there is not enough information to carry out such an analysis, the default position is to leave out personnel costs reported at the aggregated ministry level and note any potential underestimation. General principles on using weights. Table 3.3 shows the various ways that existing NPERs have approached the use of disaggregation weights for bundled operational budgets and personnel costs. Given the large variance across NPERs, future NPERs should consider the following general principles when determining whether to use weights: • Any international comparisons of nutrition spending (total or for subcategories such as nutrition-specific or nutrition-sensitive interventions) must clarify the use of different methodologies across countries. • Weights should not be used as a proxy to discount for the nutrition impact of nutrition-sensitive interventions, even when such interventions are very costly (see box 3.4). • When presenting data, indicate whether nutrition-sensitive expenditures are weighted or unweighted. If disaggregation weights are used for bundled budgets (for example, bundled operational budgets, personnel cost), the methodology should be clearly spelled out in an annex. TABLE 3.3
Use of disaggregation weights for bundled budgets
Weights used or not used COUNTRY
YEAR
BUNDLED OPERATIONAL BUDGET
PERSONNEL COST
Bangladesh
2019
No
No
Bhutan
2020
No
No
Indonesia
2020
Yes (for example, JKN: 1 percent)a
Partly yes (salaries in district-level budgets are included without any weights, but it is unclear whether salaries at the central or village level are included)
Nepal
2019
No
No
Rwanda
2020
No (there are ongoing discussions and reform efforts to make nutrition budget data more granular)
No
Sri Lanka
2020
No
Yes (for each ministry/department that implements nutrition interventions, the ratio of total human resources costs has been estimated with respect to total nonhuman resource costs, and the same ratio of human resource costs has been applied for all nutrition-related expenditures by each ministry)b
Tanzania
2018
Yes (The term “apportionment percentage” is used: weights ranged from 0 to 100 percent, based on interview notes and policy documents, and the default value of 10 percent was used if a value could not be determined)
Yes (for ministries, department, agencies, and local government authorities with nutrition-relevant activities, both the budget and expenditures for salaries were included, apportioned by the percentage of nonsalary recurrent and development budget allocations that were deemed to be related to nutrition)
Sources: Ahmed et al. 2020; Finance Division, Government of the Republic of Bangladesh and UNICEF 2019; Piatti-Fünfkirchen et al. 2020; Tanzania, MoFP and UNICEF 2018; World Bank 2019a, 2020a, 2020b. Note: JKN = Jaminan Kesehatan Nasional (National Health Insurance, Indonesia). a. See box 3.5 in the main text. b. However, there were two exceptions: (1) for school programs, teachers’ salaries (which represent about 80 percent of total human resource expenditures) were excluded from the assigned human resource costs; and (2) for national water, sanitation, and hygiene programs, human resource costs were not added because these are large-scale programs that are outsourced to firms, and labor costs are largely covered by project costs.
