Municipalities’ organisational capacity to support the implementation of the Multi-Sector Nutrition Plan in Burkina Faso

Figures & data

Table 1. Analytical framework established for capacity assessment at municipal level

Capacity dimensions	Capacity Area	Assessment topic/criteria
Organizational	Policies, programmes and frameworks	Existence of plan or document and nutrition integration
	Resources and Infrastructures	Availability of adequate skills to support services expansion
		Partnership and resource mobilization
	Coordination and partnership	Local coordination bodies for nutrition sensitive and/or nutrition specific actions
	Evidence-based decision making	Routine data collection and monitoring and evaluation

Table 2. Targeted regions and municipalities for data collection

Region	Municipalities	Number of focus group discussions
Nord	Tangaye, Oula	2
Sahel	Bani, Seytenga	2
Est	Diabo	1
Centre ouest	Zamo, Zawara	2
Centre est	Lalgaye, Bagré	2
Centre nord	Mané, Pissila	2
Centre sud	Guiba, Guiaro	2
Sud-ouest	Lorepéni, Perigban	2
Boucle du mouhoun	Bourasso, Douroula	2
Cascades	Sidéradougou	1
Plateau central	Loumbila, Zitenga	2
Hauts bassins	Bama, Toussiana	2
Total number of focus group discussions		22

Table 3. Municipalities’ diagnostic results highlighting strengths and weaknesses

Key diagnostic criteria	22 municipalities current situation
	Strengh	Weakness
Existence of plan or document and nutrition integration	Communal development plan drawn up and taking into account several sectors: food security, tourism, land, gender, sport and culture, transport, environment, health, and education. Existing support documents. Involvement of local technical agents for Communal Development Plan elaboration and implementation.	Plan’s financing needs are enormous compared to existing resources. Plan not yet aligned with the national economic and social development plan. No specific consideration for nutrition with a budget line.
Local nutrition coordination bodies	Municipal council sessions are held regularly. Some coordination bodies exist and are fairly organized: eg existence in municipalities, Coordination of School Management Committees with terms of reference defining roles and attributions.	Terms of reference for local structures not clearly defined and seem rather informal. Weak presence of an umbrella organization (e.g. agriculture, agrifood) and very informal. Lack of coordination body for nutrition.
Partnership and resource mobilization	Resource mobilization strategy/initiative: national/international inter-municipality twinning, advocacy, round table with municipality citizens, rentals on market infrastructure, taxes. Community sensitization on the town hall projects for fundraising. Strong involvement of municipal services for tax collection and strengthening of collaboration with technical services. Existence of cooperation development projects and programs. Availability of monitoring and audit capacities (accountant and procurement manager).	Difficulties to gather more resources because there are many priorities. Weak budget monitoring system. Insufficient number of technical and financial partners. Low municipalities’ own funds. Weak intertechnical service collaborations. Strong dependence on the state budget through the permanent fund.
Availability of adequate skills to support services expansion	Capacity building taken into account in the communal development plans. Existence of some structures, which support the municipality in capacity building. Existence of regional associations able to ensure skills enhancement.	Unequal distribution and insufficiency of decentralized technical staff at the local structures and villages level. Insufficient staff trained in nutrition (a few health workers and rarely among agriculture and livestock workers). Low existence of associations and community groups. Limited community-based nutrition and development approaches.
Routine data collection and monitoring and evaluation	Data on animal health (zoonosis). Disease screening, data on treatment of malnutrition, consultations, epidemiological surveillance, vaccination campaigns, etc. Data on animal foodstuff inspection, and on agricultural campaign. Agricultural production situation in the municipality. Data transmission to the prefecture, town hall and technical departments of the region; Feedback from the hierarchy.	No direct transmission, dissemination or reporting to the town hall. Lack of analysis at the operational and local level. Poor decision-making and action following data analysis. Health and education, routine and monitoring and evaluation data are collected and sent to the town hall. Data from other sectors are either transmitted to the prefecture or to the higher grade in the hierarchy (Provincial Directorate).

Table 4. Identified priority needs and opportunities for multi-sector nutrition actions

Summary of findings	Needs identified	Opportunities
Poor consideration of nutrition in municipal strategic documents	Increase nutrition integration into municipal development plans	Existence of nutrition integration guide to PCDs produced by REACH United Nations Burkina in partnership with the Ministry of Health
	Sufficient resources mobilization for the implementation of activities in priority sectors	Political commitment at the highest level of the state. The President is the Champion of the African Leaders for Nutrition of the african development bank
Local coordination bodies for nutrition sensitive and specific actions obsolete and underdeveloped	Consultation body for the local technical services by the municipality around various topic – sectoral and global consultation	Existence of PCDs. Existence of consultation body at the municipalities level that can integrate other topic and actors.
	Community associations/groups and new nutrition community approaches creation and development	Support to local capacity building initiatives by NGOs and United Nations agencies. Existence of mother-to-mother support groups with supervision from ASBCs
	Acceleration of umbrella organization establishment and the agricultural, agro-food sector	Existence of farmers group: farmer’s confederation, agricultural professional’s federation and the national federation of Agrifood and Processing Industries.
Partnership and resource mobilization in difficulty	Skills transfers increase from the regional to the municipal level	Good collaboration between health structures and municipalities within the current transfer of health centers management system; Existence of goldmine in several areas of the country which are potential sources through corporate social responsibility
	Networking and partnership skills improving
Lack of adequate skills to support the services expansion	Strengthening the technical competence in nutrition of health, agriculture, livestock, environment agents and town halls services)	Recruitment of nutritionists by the Ministry of Health to make them available to regional health directorates in order to provide support at all levels within the regions.
Weak accountability and information sharing	Dissemination of good practices	Routine data collection support by United Nations Agencies in Burkina Faso, via ENDOS
	Development of integrated data collection system involving key players
	Data sharing for guidance and decision making

ASBCs = Community-based health workers; CDP = Communal development plan; ENDOS = Health data warehouse; NGOs = Non-governmental organizations; REACH = Renewed Efforts Against Child Hunger