The Technical Review Team will evaluate MA business plans using a standard rubric, which will help efficiently and fairly determine whether an MA should receive its full Indicative Planning Figure (IPF). As a reminder, the Technical Review Team is expected to approve 80% of plans without any modifications, and to approve additional plans after modifications are made. Reductions to IPFs are only used when an MA cannot or will not make the changes the TRT recommends.
IPPF is in a paradigm shift in terms of planning and allocation of budget which is at pilot stage.
At FGAE, we appreciate the virtual orientation and video link sent to us. It has been also participatory in terms of blogs and the webinar interactions.
Currently, we are exercising the Business Plan while we are also preparing our Annual program Budget of 2022.
Points of further clarifications:
– Projects versus funding sources versus our SP 2021-2025. FGAE has developed a new SP that consists of six outcomes and 14 Strategic Objectives: Can we put the 14 SOs as projects which are funded by IPPF, EKN and Packard Foundation?
– What is youth integrated?
– Service outlets: we used to plan and report services including CYPs in two kinds of outlets: 1) Own / static clinics, and 2) through other facilities. In the second type, we have public health facilities supported by FGAE, and private clinics which are socially franchised. For the panning year, we opt to maintain both associated clinics and private clinics as our second type of service outlets. What is your advice?
Adinew Husien
A/ Program Director,
Family Guidance Association of Ethiopia (FGAE)
Waiting response