# Presentation: 289981

## Planning and Designing IAEA Technical Cooperation Projects

**	****Country Programme Frameworks**
- 			*and *
- 		**Thematic Planning**

**Notes:**
Country Programme Frameworks and Thematic Planning are two very important elements of the TC Strategy

They are important to the Strategy itself, but also to project design

It is certainly possible to have a well designed project without consideration of CPF’s and Thematic Plans, but achieving a well designed project is much easier and much more likely if the CONTEXT of the project is consistent with national development plans and priorities.    Also important that a project designed is consistent with Agency experience with similar or closely related projects which have - and have not  -  been successful.   

All of this information is provided by the country’s CPF and by the relevant Agency Thematic Plan.

## Key Elements of the Strategy

- 	Country Programme Frameworks (CPF) and Thematic Planning are the two key *planning mechanisms and processes* outlined in the New Strategy for expanding the concept of Model Projects to the entire TC Programme

**Notes:**

Take special note that CPF’s and Thematic Plans are planning mechanisms and processes  -   and that they are not simply an administrative burden but rather absolutely central to the ultimate objective of spreading the discipline of Model Projects and good project design to the entire TC Programme

This is true because CPF’s are the mechanisms through which Member States’ most important needs, problems and opportunities are identified.

Thematic Plans contain the best information available to the Agency on nuclear technologies which have the greatest potential for real impact and which are most cost effective.

The two are very complementary.

## Why is it useful to plan Country Programmes?

*To get the maximum benefit from the limited resources of the TCP*
*To provide the opportunity and the mechanism to set priorities, *
*To ensure effective integration of the TCF into the major development efforts of Member States*

**Notes:**

Funding available to the average Member State is around $300K to $400K per year.   This is very small compared to the amount involved in major national projects and programmes.

It therefore makes good sense to plan the use of TC money  very carefully.   It is very similar to planning the use of the relatively small amount of discretionary money available to a family.   If one is not careful, it is very easy to spend a little here and a little there, and in the end have nothing important to show for it.    That is a lost opportunity.    

An important part of getting maximum benefit from TC funds is to be sure ALL options  -  all problems, needs and opportunities  -  are reviewed before making a decision.   

## Why is it useful to plan Country Programmes?

*Planning on a **country** basis is the only way to consider *_*all*_* possible projects and to chose those of highest priority to the Government*
*Provide a basis for assessment of the impact and sustainability of country programmes*

## The Purpose of Country Programme Frameworks  (CPF)

- CPF is a mechanism for planning the TC Programme for a given country
- Country programme planning is a continual process involving a constant dialogue between Member States and the IAEA
- Country Programme Frameworks provide a record of the current state of near-term planning

**Notes:**
It is necessary to be careful with terminology here.
The term “country programmes” refers to the set of active TC projects in any Member State.    This includes projects for which the Agency is providing experts, equipment and training as well as projects for which the support requested from the Agency has already been provided but which remain in an active state of implementation.    

Planning for how the active programme in any Member State will evolve in the future goes on constantly in the course of the many interactions between the Government and project counterparts, and Agency staff - particularly the officer in TC responsible for that particular Member State.  This process is an informal, continuing dialogue regarding development problems or opportunities which can be effectively addressed by nuclear technology, and the priority given to each by the Government.

The state of this forward planning at any time is often  recorded in what is referred to as a Country Programme Framework (CPF).    This record is very useful in ensuring good coordination and communication both within and between the Member State and the Agency.    It is also very useful in case of changes of personnel.     It is important to emphasize, however, that a CPF is a guide to current thinking on both sides as to future programming.     It is not a list of projects, but more of an identification of the development areas that the Member State and the Agency have agreed to work together in over the coming 4 to 6 years.     The CPF is a working document, and more of a guide to future programming and not a fixed commitment by either party.      

## Primary Objectives of the Country Programme Framework Process

- Member State - Agency agreement on the need to focus programming on a few priority topics
- Identification by the Member State of the priority problems and opportunities
- Joint exploration of opportunities for Model Projects
- Agreement that project requests and programming should follow the framework

**Notes:**
There are several important objectives of the continuing dialog on priorities and future programme planning.

One is to agree to focus efforts over the next few Programme cycles on a few priority areas.     Resources available through the Agency and within Member States are limited.    It  is generally agreed that it is more effective to chose a few areas, apply the limited resources there to achieve something significant, and then move on to other areas.    Choosing areas in which to work now does not mean that other areas will be neglected.    Work in other areas of need will simply be taken up in later Programme cycles.     

It is obviously up to the Member State to set its own priorities.    The Agency can perhaps help by identifying the areas in which nuclear technologies are most effective, but setting priorities is ultimately the prerogative and responsibility of the Member State.

The most significant problems and opportunities identified in this mutual dialogue as areas in which nuclear technology can assist are also those areas in which the greatest impact of the TCF will generally occur.    These areas are therefore prime candidates for Model Projects.    Thus the process of country planning, which takes place through a wide spectrum of interactions,  provides the systematic method for identifying Model Projects.     Once “models” are no longer needed, the process will consistently identify the best projects, and this is the ultimate purpose of the process.

## “Framework” may be misleading

- Frame and Framework usually refer to:
- structure,  casing,  support, substructure, foundation, groundwork, skeleton, ......
- Implies some _thing_ which is fixed and rigid

**Notes:**

Planning is an essential part of making maximum progress in the minimum time and with minimum expense. 

The result of not having a plan is allowing yourself and your future to be determined by others or by events.

But, planning involves looking into the future, and, therefore, planning is not easy.   The thing that makes planning seem to be more difficult than it really is is the impression that one has to know the future, that once a planning decision is made the planner is locked in.    We all know that things can change  -  and that they usually do.   

A plan can not be rigid.   A plan must be flexible in order to adapt to things that change or to things that did not work out the way they were expected to.

A rigid plan is probably worse than no plan at all.   

## “Framework” may be misleading

- “Country Programme Framework” is not a rigid structure, but a planning tool and the (changing) plans that result.
- Country Programme Framework is therefore a _*process*_ - a continuing process - with a _*product*_ (a plan) which changes with time

## CPF as a Process

- An instrument of policy dialog between MS and TC
- A means to compare needs and priorities with capabilities and resources
*All *interactions between MS and TC contribute to the process
- A continuing activity

**Notes:**
It is important to understand that one does not convene a meeting and decide on a CPF.    Neither is it something that results from a special planning visit by Agency representatives.

A CPF is the result of all interactions between a Member State and Agency representatives.   It is a continuing activity.

It is reasonable then to ask when   -  at what point in the process  -   a CPF - is written. 
No doubt that special focused efforts involving meetings and visits back and forth will be necessary.    Still, it is unlikely that a good CPF will result from one visit or one meeting.   The first CPF may well be the most difficult.

Once a CPF is in place, both the Agency and the Member State should  be monitoring progress in carrying out the plan.    It will usually  become clear to all participants in the process when  the original plan is outdated and in need of revision.    At the same time, the continuing dialog between the Member State and the Agency will most likely also have identified what changes should be made.    

## CPF as a “Product”

- Outline of the TCF Programme for a MS for the next 4-6 years.
- Identifies opportunities for the use of nuclear technology to produce significant benefits
- Jointly prepared and signed- a mutual agreement
- Identifies demand for nuclear technologies - and helps the IAEA set priorities

**Notes:**
The CPF process does result in a document  -  but it can not be overemphasized that it is a working document  -  I.e. one that should be expected to change as time goes on and/or the situation changes.

A CPF will be a useful working document if it is limited to a relatively short time period.    A plan for a longer period  -  say the next 10 years  -  will necessarily  be much more general, and much less useful in practical terms.

A CPF is a joint agreement, but the content should primarily reflect the views and priorities of the Member State.

In addition to being useful in allocating funds from the Technical Cooperation Fund, CPF’s help the Agency identify the technologies and applications that are most useful to Member States.    This, in turn, helps the Agency set priorities for many decision with longer term implications  -  such as staffing in various technical areas.

## Country Programme Frameworks  are:

- Primarily a means for a Member State to direct how they want TC support to be used in that country
- An opportunity to ensure that Technical Cooperation funds are used according to Member States’ needs and priorities
*but it is a mutual agreement*

## Necessary Input to a  Good CPF

- Good understanding of the Member State’s
- needs, problems and opportunities
- existing capability
- priorities and existing national (and international) programmes
- Knowledge of past IAEA support and the capabilities that exist
- Knowledge of the many applications and potential benefits of nuclear technology

**Notes:**
Most of this is just common sense.

If you are going to make a plan, what do you need to know beforehand?

What are the Member State’s needs, problems and opportunities, and which of them are the most important?

Which of these are areas in which nuclear technology might make a significant contribution?    The Agency’s experience will often be just as important as that of the Member State on this matter.

What capabilities already exist?    What would need to be added in order to solve the problem, meet the need or take advantage of the opportunity?

## Typical Content of a CPF

- I.   Programme Review
- 	a.  Assessment of past and current technical cooperation
- 	b.  Lessons learned from previous TC activities
- 	c.  Review of Member State’s scientific, technological and human resources
- 	d.   National development priorities

**Notes:**

This list reflects the logic of the previous panel   -   the common sense of what is needed to make a good, useful plan.

## Typical Content of a CPF

- II.   Analysis
- 	a.   Review of radiation safety profile
- 	b.   Sectoral review of multilateral and bilateral development activities
- 	c.   Problem analysis and comparative assessment of options

## Typical Content of a CPF

- III.   Programme Framework
- 	a.   Identification of a set of end-user specific problems to which nuclear science can contribute
- 	b.   Implementation strategy
- 	c.   Application of lessons learned
- 	d.   Resources required to implement the planned programme

## References

- Two references:
- 	*An example CPF for the fictitious country “ABC,”*  and
- 	*Draft Guidelines for Country Programme Frameworks*
- have been distributed with this Handbook or
- are available at the Handbook website

**Notes:**
In earlier presentations we have discussed the fact that things are generally defined in two ways:   theory and practice.

Both are important.

The guidelines for CPF’s address the theory.

The fictitious example is a start on a practical example.    Member States are encouraged to obtain as many examples of what the Agency considers to be “good”   CPF’s for real countries from the Department of Technical Cooperation.   

Additional practical examples may be made available by the Agency on the internet site for this Handbook.

## Thematic Planning

- The Technical Cooperation Programme is characterized by technical *themes* such as isotope hydrology and radiation protection
- Thematic Planning is a management tool through which the Agency carefully examines which nuclear technologies can provide Member States with significant benefit and how they should be applied

**Notes:**
The meaning of the term Thematic Planning is less obvious.   The terminology is less familiar.

Useful to have a considerable amount of classroom discussion to fully clarify the idea.    Again, it will be a matter of both theory, or definition, and practice.  

Several practical examples are available for review.

## Thematic Planning

- Provides a guide to Member States on nuclear technologies with proven applicability and benefit, and good cost/benefit characteristics
- A planning tool that compliments CPF by providing a resource on proven Agency technologies and their application

**Notes:**
Member States should really dominate the process of country planning.    

However,  the Agency has the advantage of having experience with nuclear technologies  -  those that have been around a while as well as recent developments  -   and with the application of those technologies in a variety of circumstances.     It is important to take this into account, and Thematic Plans are one of the best ways to do this.

## Thematic Planning

- Thematic Planning by the Agency does not take the place of country planning
- Rather, Thematic Planning *complements* the Country Programme Framework process by providing reference materials on technologies that have proven to be beneficial in development programmes

## Thematic Planning

- Contributes to “resource mobilization” by presenting information on proven technical solutions and project designs to typical problems
- Such information should increase the level of confidence of potential donor organizations in projects involving these technologies

## Thematic Planning

- The main functions of thematic plans are:
- to identify best practices in a given thematic area
- to assess nuclear techniques against conventional techniques under similar conditions
- to ascertain the emphasis that the Agency should stress within a given thematic area

## Thematic Planning

- to ascertain what pre-conditions are necessary in a country to ensure work in a given thematic area will have impact, and
- to identify other partners working in a thematic area and the countries they are planning to work in

## Thematic Planning

- 	A more detailed discussion of Thematic Planning entitled *Thematic Planning for Technical Cooperation *is provided as a reference to this presentation under Additional Information

## Thematic Planning

- In addition to this reference, the following examples of Thematic Plans are also provided under Additional Information:
- Radiation Sterilization in Tissue Banking
- Isotope Hydrology in Dam Safety and Sustainability

**Notes:**
These practical examples of real thematic plans may well clarify the difference between CPF’s and thematic plans better than further discussion.

## Thematic Planning

- Isotopic Evaluations to Add Value to Nutritional Interventions
- Sterile Insect Technique for Old and New World Screwworm Eradication

## Thematic Plans 

- Information on Thematic Planning in the following
- areas is available through the Department of
- Technical Cooperation Radiation Protection
- Nuclear Safety
- RIA for Neonatal Screening
- Isotope Hydrology in Groundwater Management

## Review of the Full Project Cycle

- The following slides present the full project cycle, from original concept through implementation and evaluation, in graphical form
- The series shows how the various aspects of the Strategy come into the process

## Slide 28

**Notes:**

We begin by representing all project ideas for a given project cycle by this panel.     Consider it as a page on which  all such project ideas are listed.

Each of the project ideas that would be shown here will be reviewed in selection and appraisal process.      

## Slide 29

**Notes:**
All project ideas are reviewed taking various considerations into account.

One such consideration would be the CPF  -   which should reflect the Member State’s priorities.    

Thematic plans may also affect or influence some project ideas.

As a result of CPF’s and Thematic Plans, some project ideas will be postponed or rejected, and removed from consideration at least for this one project cycle.

## Slide 30

**Notes:**
The reduced set of project ideas  -  all now consistent with the CPF and with the Agency’s thematic plans -  are then subject to further review.

The projected impact of each project will be compared

The relative priority of each proposal will be compared

The availability of an alternative technology will be consider.

As a result of these additional considerations the number of projects that will actually be proposed to the IAEA is further reduced.

The smaller panel at the end represents the projects that emerge from all of these considerations as those few that will actually be sent to the IAEA.

## Slide 31

**Notes:**

The Agency then goes through an appraisal process in which each proposal is reviewed technically and administratively.

As a result of this part of the process the projects which will actually be funded is determined.    Normally this is fewer than the number proposed by each Member State.    Thus, again the panel representing all such projects is shown reduced in size.

Each approved project can now be planned in detail and project implementation begins.

## Project Identification

**Project Identification**

**&**

**Selection **

**Process**

**Notes:**

Implementation of different projects usually requires different amounts of time.     Here, for simplicity, the representation shows them all being completed together.

Evaluation of the completed projects is based on the objectives and performance indicators agreed on earlier.

## Slide 33

**Notes:**

The true impact of a project will very often not be seen until well after the project itself is completed.    Thus impact assessment usually takes place later.