References 20201125_EPSA Maturity Model Assessment Report.pdf

Admas Supply Chain Maturity Model V8 Assessment & Validation

Workshop Report

Q4 – Global Health Supply Chain Maturity

Assessment 2020

Q4 – GHSCMM _ADMAS

Table of Contents

Executive

Summary

....3 Maturity Model Assessment & Validation Workshop

......................................................................4 Objectives

..4

Outcomes

Methodology

...................4 Training &

Assessment

...5 Breakout

Sessions

.6 Summary of Responses at

Plenary.................................................................................................6 Findings

...........6 Summary of Assessment

Score:......................................................................................................7 Assessment

Output – Maturity Levels

Summary of

Performances

Comparative Analysis

Challenges & Lessons Learnt

.............................................................................................................. 19 Conclusion &

Recommendations

List of Participants (Assessment Workshop October 30 – November 1)

21 List of Participants (Validation Workshop 21-22 Nov

2020)

1.0 Executive Summary

The Ethiopian Pharmaceuticals Supply Agency (EPSA) supported by Pamela Steele Associates (PSA) through the Admas Programme is undertaking a large scale supply chain transformation as part of its ambitious journey to self-reliance through workforce capacity strengthening to achieve a high-performing supply chain that assures uninterrupted availability of products at the last mile by 2022. Supported by the Bill & Melinda Gate Foundation (BMGF) and the aspirations of the Federal Government of Ethiopia as laid out in the Health Sector Transformation Plan (HSTP) and the Pharmaceutical Sector Transformation Plan (PSTP), EPSA is aiming to achieve ongoing operational excellence beyond 2022, including a Silver level supply chain maturity at all levels, defined by the Global Health Supply Chain Maturity Model. This translates to at least 85–95% product availability at all last-mile and service delivery points, basic real-time visibility, regular funding execution and supply chain operation excellence managed by people with the requisite skills and clear standard operating procedures to guide activities.

To define a guided path of steady growth for the functional areas of the supply chain, the Admas program deployed the Global Health Supply Chain Maturity Model tool (version 8).

This tool defines the path to an ideal supply chain across five maturity categories, linking improved supply chain performance with increased product availability as the supply chain matures. The tool assesses the maturity of a supply chain across twenty impact criteria and across the overall health of the supply chain by awarding an outcome based on responses to pre-determined questions.

To support the Ethiopian Pharmaceuticals Supply Agency (EPSA) in assessing its supply chain maturity, a cross functional team of 100 participants were selected to participate in the maturity model assessment. Participants worked in the key functional areas of the supply chain directorates, including tender and contract management, warehousing and inventory management, distribution and fleet management, and general services in addition to representatives from across the 19 hubs. Representation for the validation workshop included 18 directors from the various directorates of EPSA including the Deputy Director General.

The assessment was conducted as a sequel to an assessment conducted in December 2019. Overall, both the maturity assessment workshop, held October 31 – November 1, 2020, and the validation workshop, held November 21 – 22, 2020, were successful and based on this exercise, the supply chain attained a maturity level of Bronze at 58.4% score, with 11 out of the 16 criteria reaching silver maturity level and five at bronze level. Details of these categories are presented in the body of the report.

The assessment ID on the ASCM live microsite is Ethiopia_Central EPSA_8_00001.

Q4 – GHSCMM _ADMAS

2.0 Maturity Model Assessment & Validation Workshops

The maturity model assessment and validation workshops were held independently between 30th October – 1st November 2020 and November 21st – 22nd 2020 at the pyramid hotels & resort, Bishoftu and Robby Hotel, Adama respectively to achieve the following objectives.

2.1 Objectives

The objectives of the maturity assessment workshop were to:

• Create a shared understanding among the various teams represented on the Maturity Model version 8, its differences from previous versions and its usefulness in assessing EPSA’s supply chain performance.

• Provide guidance to the team to carry out an assessment of their supply chain and determine its current maturity level, including reaching a consensus on the results and communicating them to the donor.

• Undertake validation of the assessment result by EPSA management and agree and outline key actions as part of an improvement plan to guide the continuous improvement of their supply chain.

The following were the main objectives of the validation workshop:

• To comprehensively review EPSA maturity model through engaging departments who were not involved in Bishoftu’s workshop

• To undertake validation of the assessment result by EPSA management and facilitate buy in

• To reach consensus on the result and communicate it to the donor • To conduct a managerial competence assessment.

2.2 Outcomes

At the end of the workshop the cross-functional teams were expected to have: • Familiarised themselves with and gained a good understanding of the workings of the Global Health Supply Chain Maturity Model version 8

• Participated in a joint effort to assess their supply chain maturity and understood the performance level of their supply chain

• Participated in efforts to develop a performance improvement plan to improve their current supply chain performance; and

• Validated the assessment result from the maturity model assessment.

2.3 Methodology

The maturity model assessment workshop (October 30 – November 1) had three sessions: i. formal training to create a shared understanding of the maturity model tool

ii. a breakout session for assessment

iii. a plenary session to build consensus on the outputs of the assessment. The participants were selected based on their roles in the supply chain and their knowledge of EPSA processes.

Q4 – GHSCMM _ADMAS

The validation workshop (November 21 – 22) was targeted towards senior leadership and involved an overview of the maturity model and a review of the responses from the assessment workshop.

3.0 Training & Assessment

The workshop began with a formal training on the new digitalised version of the Global Health Supply Chain Maturity Model presented by PSA’s Technical Advisor for Supply Chain Visibility and Analytics. The presentation focused on the maturity model as a self-assessment tool that helps sites, supply chains, counties, regions and countries to independently assess supply chain needs. It also identified the usefulness of the maturity model in measuring progress by way of periodic self-assessments, identifying bottlenecks and performance gaps and prioritising improvement opportunities. In addition, it highlighted the usefulness of the maturity model in supporting the continual removal of constraints by way of improving visibility, increasing product availability, supporting greater supply chain efficiency, and maximising investments.

The presentation also discussed the maturity model’s focus on the theory of constraints, highlighting the lowest performing element or ‘weakest link’, which is the most problematic constraint that decreases the overall performance of the supply chain. Removing the ‘weakest link’ is a fast and effective way to improve performance and achieve supply chain goals. It also identified the maturity model’s ability to increase performance by focusing efforts on improving the weakest link’s constraints; helping teams stay on top of the dynamically shifting weakest link, which changes as a supply chain matures; and highlighting areas where maturity impacts the supply chain’s ability to function in each market environment.

The presentation identified assessments across 20 categories which help define ‘maturity capability levels’, including:

Table 1: Maturity Capability Levels

1 Service-Delivery Point (SDP)/HF Visibility 11 Infrastructure and Assets

2 SDP/HF Inventory Management 1

Performance Management

3 SDP/HF Order Management 1

Analysis and Evaluation

4 Warehouse/Store Visibility 1

Demand Planning

5 Warehouse/Store Inventory Management 1

Supply Planning

6 Warehouse/Store Order Management 1

Fund Management

7 Warehouse/Store Operations 1

Financial Management

8 Transportation 1

Governance

9 Expiry Management 1

Staff Training/Development

Procurement 2

Patient-Focused Performance

The assessment requires participants to highlight constraints that prevent supply chain improvements in each category. The constraints were grouped into 12 categories as follows:

Table 2: Constraints Categories

1 Human Resources 7 Infrastructure

2 Improvement-process knowledge 8 Government support

3 Enabling technologies 9 No public/private collaboration

4 Leadership/guidance 1

Other (please specify)

5 National guidelines 1

Not Applicable

6 Funding 1

Don’t Know

3.1 Breakout Sessions

Participants were broken out into two groups of 50 each to carry out the assessment in smaller teams. Each group consisted of representatives across the various functional areas of the supply chain, including the hubs. These sessions were facilitated by PSA’s technical resource professionals.

In plenary, both teams converged at the end of the breakout session to harmonise responses across the twenty categories. Speaking in both English and Amharic, participants reached a consensus on their current practices along each question category. Clarifications on the definition of each category and objectives were provided by PSA to guide understanding and engagement. Four categories were excluded from the assessment as follows:

Table 3: Excluded Categories

Maturity Category Reasons for Exclusion on the Assessment

1 Service-Delivery Point (SDP)/HF Visibility

This category is out of scope for the Admas program.

2 SDP/HF Inventory Management

This category is out of scope for the Admas program.

3 SDP/HF Order Management This category is out of scope for the Admas program.

4 Patient-Focused Performance There was no representation from the patients present.

4.0 Findings

Each of the 20 categories is scored for percentage of process maturity, based on an average of answers in the category and ranked across five capability maturity levels as follows: • 20% = Canvas

• 40% = Bronze

• 60% = Silver

• 80% = Gold

• 100% = Accredited

The summary of responses provided in plenary across the 16 assessed categories and their corresponding capability levels on the maturity model are summed up below.

4.1 Summary of Assessment Score

On the overall, the result of EPSA’s supply chain maturity is at Bronze level with an aggregated score of 58.4%

Figure 1: Summary of assessment score and maturity level

4.2 Assessment Output – Maturity Levels

Eleven out of the sixteen categories assessed were at silver level maturity with five at the bronze level. The weakest links identified include Procurement, Performance Management, Demand Planning, Financial Management and Governance.

Figure 2: Summary of maturity scores/levels across various categories

4.0 Summary of Performances

Each category was ranked according to the response provided by the participants coinciding with each of the five maturity scale as follows:

Table 4: Performance across categories

Maturity Category Score Rank Maturity Category Score Rank

1 Warehouse/Store Visibility

66.7

Silver 9 Performance Management

53.3

Bronze

2 Warehouse/Store Inventory Management

70% Silver 1

Analysis and Evaluation 60% Silver

3 Warehouse/Store Order Management

65% Silver 1

Demand Planning 50% Bronze

4 Warehouse/Store Operations

60% Silver 1

Supply Planning 60% Silver

5 Transportation 60% Silver 1

Fund Management 60% Silver

6 Expiry Management 70% Silver 1

Financial Management 40% Bronze

7 Procurement 50% Bronze 1

Governance 40% Bronze

8 Infrastructure and Assets

60% Silver 1

Staff Training/Development

70% Silver

In comparison to outcomes on previous assessments, the maturity radar below shows the progresses across all maturity categories:

Figure 3: Maturity level radar

I. Warehouse/Store Visibility

Assessment Question Consensus Responses Provided in Plenary Level

1. How is product located at the warehouse(s)/store(s)?

Electronic WMS with batch and bin tracking used to track product in warehouse(s)/store(s)

Gold

2. Describe the ability to identify order status within the warehouse(s)/store(s)?

Ability to track order status Silver

3. How is inventory information in the warehouse shared with others in the SC?

Inventory information sent to supply chain periodically

Silver

Overall Score for Category 66.7% Silver

Constraints categories preventing supply chain improvement here include:

Improvement Process Knowledge, Enabling Technologies, Leadership & Guidance, Infrastructure

Performance Improvement Plan Required

Maturity Category Action Plan Resources Required

Responsible

Warehouse/Sto re Visibility

Initiatives to improve visibility into incoming & outgoing inventory including past and present inventory.

A system for sharing inventory information near real time needs to be implemented.

WIM Director

Priority (High/Low) Difficulty (High/Low) Contact For Help

Timeline

High High DDG Outbound

March 2021

II. Warehouse/Store Inventory Management

Assessment Question Consensus Responses Provided in Plenary

Level

4. How does/do the warehouse define the optimum level of inventory to maintain?

Dynamic policy on how much inventory should be maintained at the warehouse(s)/store(s) with defined min/max levels

Silver

5. How is the current physical count of inventory in the warehouse determined?

Regular (at least quarterly) inventory physical count

Gold

Overall Score for the Category 70% Silver

The constraints identified as preventing supply chain improvements here include:

Improvement process knowledge, Enabling Technologies, Leadership & Guidance, Infrastructure, and the lack of accountability

Performance Improvement Plan Required

Maturity Category Action Plan Resources Required

Responsibl e

Warehouse/Sto re Inventory Management

Quarterly review of inventory segmentation used to define levels of inventory to hold

WIM Director

Priority (High/Low) Difficulty (High/Low) Contact For Help

Timeline

High Low DDG Outbound

March 2021

III. Warehouse/Store Order Management

Assessment Question Consensus Responses Provided in Plenary

Level

6. How are facility orders processed at the warehouse?

Established frequency to review and process orders

Silver

7. What is the typical order ship date request from the warehouse(s) to HF(s)?

Orders have short ship-date requests (within one week of order)

Gold

8. How are open orders in the warehouse(s) identified and resolved?

Open orders occasionally reviewed and resolved if problematic

Silver

9. What is the complete-and-on time delivery rate of warehouses to SDPs/HFs?

Less than 80% Bronze

Overall Score for the Category 65% Silver

The constraints identified as preventing supply chain improvements for warehouse order management include

Improvement process knowledge, Enabling Technologies, Leadership & Guidance, and Infrastructure

Performance Improvement Plan Required

Maturity Category Action Plan Resources Required

Responsi ble Person

Warehouse/Stor e Order Management

Ensure orders are created and processed immediately upon request from SDP & hubs.

Actively review and resolve open orders weekly.

WIM

Director

Priority (High/Low) Difficulty (High/Low) Contact For Help Target

Timeline

High Low Outbound DDG March

IV. Warehouse/Store Operations

Assessment Question Consensus Responses Provided in Plenary Level

10. How are orders prepared for shipment?

Ability to prepare inventory for shipment in less than one week from order receipt

Bronze

11. What is the inventory accuracy of the warehouse(s)/store(s)?

Less than 80% Bronze

12. What method of quality control is used in warehouse(s) to ensure product integrity?

A quality inspection process is performed during all phases of operation (e.g., receipt, stocking, picking, staging)

Accredited

Overall Score for Category 60% Silver

The cluster of constraints identified as preventing supply chain improvements for warehouse operations include:

Human Resources, Improvement process knowledge, Enabling Technologies, Leadership & Guidance, National Guidance and Infrastructure

Performance Improvement Plan Required

Maturity Category Action Plan Resources Required Responsibl e

Warehouse/Sto re Operations

Service level agreements (SLAs) for receiving and shipping within a specified time period are met Regular stock count for Inventory Accuracy

WIM

Director

Priority (High/Low) Difficulty (High/Low) Contact For Help Timeline

High Low DDG Outbound March

V. Transportation

Assessment Question Consensus Responses Provided in Plenary Level

13. How is the movement of goods throughout the supply chain determined?

Basic scheduled delivery mechanism Silver

14. How are product deliveries communicated to facilities?

Facilities are informed of scheduled deliveries by upstream parties

Silver

15. How is the receipt of product at facilities verified?

Completed POD is returned to warehouse(s)/store(s)

Silver

Overall Score for Category 60% Silver

The cluster of constraints identified as preventing supply chain improvements for transportation include:

Improvement Process Knowledge, Enabling Technologies, Leadership & Guidance, Infrastructure, and lack of government’s support

Performance Improvement Plan Required

Maturity Category Action Plan Resources Required

Responsible

Transportation Ensure transport arrives in time for warehouse appointments with

DFM Director defined SLAs that are actively measured and managed.

Ensure HFs and Hubs can access delivery schedules, supporting on time delivery in line with SLAs that can be measured and managed.

Priority (High/Low) Difficulty (High/Low) Contact For Help

Timeline

High Low DDG Outbound

March 2021

VI. Expiry Management

Assessment Question Consensus Responses Provided in Plenary Level

16. What policies, guidance, and/or SOPs are in place at the SDP/HF and warehouse/store levels to identify and manage expired product?

FEFO picking policy for expiration is followed and audited

Gold

17. What practices are in place at SDP/HF and warehouse/store levels to dispose of expired product?

Staff actively track and document expired product

Silver

Overall Score for Category 70% Silver

The cluster of constraints identified as preventing supply chain improvements for expiry management include:

Improvement process knowledge, Enabling Technologies, Leadership & Guidance, Funding, Infrastructure, and the lack of government’s support, no public/private collaboration

Performance Improvement Plan Required

Maturity Category Action Plan Resources Required Responsible

Expiry Management Standardised FEFO picking process is followed and audited and problem-solving occurs regularly to minimise potential for expired product.

Ensure staff actively track and document expired products, including pulling them out from storage and disposing them off at designated sites according to policy/SOPs.

WIM

Director

Priority (High/Low) Difficulty (High/Low) Contact For Help Timeline

High Low DDG Outbound March

VII. Procurement

Assessment Question Consensus Responses Provided in Plenary Level

18. How long does it take to procure product

N/A N/A

19. How is the procurement quantity determined?

Procurement quantity is based on supply plan

Gold

20. What is the typical frequency for the procurement of product?

Semiannually or less frequently Canvas

Overall Score for Category 50% Bronze

The cluster of constraints identified as preventing SC improvements here include:

Improvement process knowledge, Enabling Technologies, Leadership & Guidance and Funding

Performance Improvement Plan Required

Maturity Category Action Plan Resources Required Responsible Person

Procurement Implement frameworks and CPFR policy to reduce procurement lead time

CMD Director

Priority (High/Low) Difficulty (High/Low) Contact For Help Target Timeline

High Low DDG Inbound March 2021

VIII. Infrastructure and Assets

Assessment Question Consensus Responses Provided in Plenary

Level

21. How are products maintained in secure and sound condition at facilities?

Facilities have policies/guidance/SOPs to keep product dry

Bronze

22. To what extent is internet access available at facilities?

Internet is available at 100% of facilities Gold

Overall Score for Category 60% Silver

The cluster of constraints identified as preventing SC here include

Improvement process knowledge, Enabling Technologies, Leadership & Guidance, and Infrastructure

Performance Improvement Plan Required

Maturity Category Action Plan Resources Required Responsibl e

Infrastructure and Assets

Ensure all sites are kept dry, secure and accessible only by authorised personnel and in optimal environmental conditions specific to product type

Gen. Serv.

Director

Priority (High/Low) Difficulty (High/Low) Contact For Help Timeline

High Low DG March 2021

IX. Performance Management

Assessment Question Consensus Responses Provided in Plenary

Level

23. How are problems and opportunities for improvement identified?

Measurement of basic key performance indicators (KPIs)

Silver

24. Describe the skill level of staff in identifying and solving problems?

Some staff have awareness of problem solving skills (e.g., root-cause analysis)

Bronze

25. To what extent are teams empowered to solve problems independently?

Teams can take action on some KPIs (less than 50%) prior to scheduled scorecard/dashboard reviews

Silver

Overall Score for Category 53.3% Bronze

Constraints identified as preventing SC improvements here include:

Improvement Process Knowledge, Enabling Technologies, and Leadership & Guidance

Performance Improvement Plan Required

Maturity Category

Action Plan Resources Required

Responsibl e

Performance Management

Decision-making process are built on reliable data.

Staff trained in basic problem-solving skills and lean tools (e.g., process mapping, standardised work, 5 Whys). Regular scorecard/dashboard reviews are conducted.

Empower teams to be able to take actions on at least 50 - 80% of their KPIs.

M & E Director

Priority Difficulty (High/Low) Contact For Help

Timeline

High Low M & E Directorate

March

X. Analysis and Evaluation

Assessment Question Consensus Responses Provided in Plenary

Level

26. How does data analysis and evaluation occur?

Data analysed for process deviation (e.g., missing orders, delays) to prevent problems

Silver

27. How frequently are analysis findings reviewed?

Reviews of analysis findings occur at a regular frequency (quarterly or less often)

Gold

Overall Score for Category 60% Silver

Constraints identified as preventing supply chain improvements for A&E

Improvement process knowledge, Enabling Technologies, and Leadership & Guidance

Performance Improvement Plan Required

Category Action Plan Resources Required

Responsibl e

A & E Monthly data & process reviews/analysis required

M & E Director

Priority Difficulty (High/Low) Contact For Help

Timeline

High Low M & E Directorate

March

XI. Demand Planning/Management

Assessment Question Consensus Responses Provided in Plenary

Level

28. How is the demand plan created? Demand plan has been created (based on previous-year plan)

Silver

29. How frequently is the demand plan checked for accuracy?

Demand plan can be tracked for accuracy (biannual - twice a year)

Bronze

Overall Score for Category 50% Bronze

The cluster of constraints identified as preventing supply chain improvements for demand planning and management include:

Improvement process knowledge, Enabling Technologies, and Leadership & Guidance

Performance Improvement Plan Required

Maturity Category

Action Plan Resourc es Require d

Responsibl e

Demand Planning

Initiatives to support demand planning to be based on actual consumption.

Tracking Demand Plan for Accuracy at least quarterly.

QMSD

Director

Priority (High/Low)

Difficulty (High/Low) Contact For Help

High Low DDG Inbound

March

XII. Supply Planning/Management

Assessment Question Consensus Responses Provided in Plenary

Level

30. How is the supply plan created?

Supply plan has been created (from demand plan)

Silver

Overall score for category 60% Silver

The cluster of constraints identified as preventing SC improvements here include:

Improvement process knowledge, Enabling Technologies, Leadership & Guidance and Funding.

Performance Improvement Plan Required

Maturity Category

Action Plan Resources Required

Responsi ble Person

Supply Planning Transition supply plans creation to be based on inventory policies

QMSD

Director

Priority (High/Low)

Difficulty (High/Low) Contact For Help

Target Timeline

High Low DDG Inbound March

XI. Fund Management

Assessment Question Consensus Responses Provided in Plenary

Level

28. How are funding sources and commitments tracked and monitored?

Funding commitments are tracked and documented

Silver

Overall Score for Category 60%

The cluster of constraints identified as preventing supply chain improvements for demand planning and management include:

Improvement process knowledge, Enabling Technologies, and lack of government’s support

Performance Improvement Plan Required

Maturity Category

Action Plan Resources Required

Responsibl e

Fund Management

Gaps in funding are identified based on analysis and actively managed

Finance Director

Priority (High/Low)

Difficulty (High/Low) Contact For Help Timeline

High Low DG March

XI. Financial Management & Costing

Assessment Question Consensus Responses Provided in Plenary

Level

29. How are supply-chain costs tracked?

Cost baseline completed Bronze

Overall Score for Category 50% Bronze

The cluster of constraints identified as preventing SC improvements here include:

Improvement process knowledge, Enabling Technologies, and Leadership & Guidance

Performance Improvement Plan Required

Maturity Category Action Plan Resources Required

Respon sibl e

Financial Management & Costing

Ability to track supply-chain costs monthly Financial deviations from target are actively managed

Finance Director

Priority (High/Low) Difficulty (High/Low) Contact For Help

High Low DDG Inbound March

XIII. Governance

Assessment Question Consensus Responses Provided in Plenary

Level

31. To what extent are team roles and responsibilities within the supply chain understood?

Team goals are defined, tracked, and actively managed on a regular frequency (rhythm of business)

Bronze

32. How would you describe leadership roles within the supply chain?

Leadership roles are fully staffed Bronze

Overall Score for Category 40% Bronze

The cluster of constraints identified as preventing SC improvements here include:

Human Resources, Improvement Process Knowledge, Enabling Technologies, and Leadership & Guidance

Performance Improvement Plan Required

Maturity Category Action Plan Resources Required Responsibl e

Governance Ensure team goals are defined, tracked and actively managed.

Leadership roles are fully staffed, with ongoing development of leadership capability.

DG

Priority (High/Low) Difficulty (High/Low) Contact For Help Timeline

High Low DG March 2021

XIV. Staff Training/Development

Assessment Question Consensus Responses Provided in Plenary

Level

33. How knowledgeable are staff regarding SCM processes, practices, and tools?

Staff are encouraged to pursue additional supply-chain related certifications

Gold

34. What expertise do staff have in supply-chain improvements?

Most staff have experience with SC improvements and basic skills required to be effective in their roles

Silver

Overall Score for Category 70% Silver

The cluster of constraints identified as preventing supply chain improvements to staff training and development include:

Human Resources, Improvement process knowledge, Enabling Technologies, Funding, Infrastructure, and the lack of government’s support

Performance Improvement Plan Required

Maturity Category Action Plan Resources Required

Respon sibl e

Staff training/Development

All staff have experience with SC improvements, expertise in the skills required to be effective in their roles, and most are able to train other staff

HR Director

Priority (High/Low) Difficulty (High/Low) Contact For Help Timeline

High Low HR Directorate March

5.0 Comparative Analysis

Below is the comparative analysis of the output of this assessments relative to the last conducted assessment in March 2020

Table 5: Comparative Analysis of Assessments

Maturity Category Aug. 2019 Dec. 2019 Nov.

Trend

1 Warehouse/Store Visibility Canvas Canvas Silver Improved

2 Warehouse/Store Inventory Management

Bronze Silver Silver No Change

3 Warehouse Order Management

Gold Accredited Silver Declined

4 Warehouse/Store Operations Bronze Bronze Silver Improved

5 Transportation Bronze Silver Silver No Change

6 Expiry Management Bronze Bronze Silver Improved

7 Procurement Silver Bronze Bronze No Change

8 Infrastructure and Assets Canvas Gold Silver Declined

9 Performance Management Bronze Bronze Bronze No Change

Analysis and Evaluation Silver Silver Silver No Change

Demand Planning Bronze Silver Bronze Declined

Supply Planning Gold Accredited Silver Declined

Fund Management N/A N/A Silver N/A

Financial Management N/A N/A Bronze N/A

Governance Canvas Bronze Bronze No Change

Staff Training/Development Bronze Canvas Silver Improved

6.0 Challenges & Lessons Learnt

The areas that the workshop identified as most challenging included:

• Not all the categories in the Maturity Assessment are supported in the Admas programme, e.g quantification. Additionally, certain categories do not meet the needs of the sector, e.g. procurement.

• Number of participants: Hundreds of participants were shortlisted for the maturity assessment workshop. While this is a good number to drive large scale awareness for the supply chain maturity model tool, the inherent challenge with this is the difficulty to build a consensus on each category of criteria being asseseesd due to varying degrees of understanding and the complexities of managing all contributions to reach a consensus.

• Distribution of participants: It was impressive to have participants drawn from the two tiers of the supply chain, including the hubs and central. Future assessments need to account for teams from the Health Facilities to ensure a cross-representation of people from every category being assessed.

• Choice of venue: The choice of venue was good considering the availability of four adequate meeting rooms for the breakout sessions. However, internet facilities at the hotel were weak and version 8 of the maturity model tool must be carried out online in real time. This constraint challenged the exercise.

7.0 Conclusion & Recommendations

The assessment and validation workshop achieved its objectives for the four day period during which it took place. Participants gained an understanding of the maturity model tool, participated in the hands-on exercise of assessing the maturity of their supply chain, built a consensus and gained a well-rounded understanding and confidence in how their day-to day activities impact the overall positioning and maturity of EPSA’s supply chain.

It also facilitated an understanding of the supply chain’s weakest links and the gaps in its current processes. Improvements are required in these places to support consistent improvement to achieve an average gold standard maturity across all key categories assessed by the maturity model.

This report therefore recommends providing strong on-the-ground support to EPSA in respect of the identified action plans to ensure that processes that require minimal effort, particularly related to changes in policies and practice, are implemented within the referenced timelines.

List of Participants

(Assessment Workshop October 30 – November 1) S/N Name Directorate S/N Name Directorate

1 Aamanuel Regea WIMD 32 Lidiya Equbay WIMD

2 Abdulfata Delil CMD 33 Maereg Yohannes WIMD

3 Abdurahman Haji WIMD 34 Manaye Wubalem AA2

4 Abel Solomon CMD 35 Marta Kiflom CMD

5 Abrehaley Beyene TMD 36 Mastewal Abebaw WIMD

6 Admasu Wobante WIMD 37 Mebre Mekonnen WIMD

7 Agegnehu Nadew WIMD 38 Mekwanint Nega AA1

8 Agizew Ytagesu WIMD 39 Meles Jorge DFD

9 Amanuel Melak WIMD 40 Meron Yakob WIMD

10 Anguach Adugna DFD 41 Mesfin Liben DESSIE

11 Aniley Muniye CMD 42 Mesfine Berhe WIMD

12 Asnake Hailye HAWASSA 42 Mesfine Woretaw TMD

13 Aweke Delelgn CMD 44 Michael Zewge WIMD

14 Ayele Mamo DFD 45 Mihiret Getahun DFD

15 Aynalem Misganaw WIMD 46 Mizan G/Yohannes WIMD

16 Azmeraw Mulualem CMD 47 Moges Gulelat GSAD

17 Behailu Geste ARBA MINCH 48 Mohammed Ahmed TMD

18 Belete Tesema TMD 49 Mulubet Tesfaye TMD

19 Belisti Beza CMD 5

Mulugeta Abera CMD

20 Bereket Dansa DFD 5

Mustefa Geda DFD

21 Bereket Tezera WIMD 5

Nahom Gemechu CMD

22 Biniyam Getachew DIRE DAWA 5

Nebiyu Demis CMD

23 Birhanu Lemesa WIMD 5

Nebiyu Yitbarek DFD

24 Birtukan Ayana WIMD 5

Nuhamine Elias WIMD

25 Biruk Tadesse WIMD 5

Rebuma Ambisa NEKEMT E

26 Henok Getnet CMD 5

Ruth Mulugeta TMD

27 Huliye Aynaw WIMD 5

Samrawit Girma TMD

28 Hymanot Dibaba GSAD 5

Seifu Moges TMD

29 Jia Uga TMD 60 Selam Mehammed TMD

30 Kibret Wendafrash CMD 61 Shiferaw Bekele DFD

31 Kibru Teferi CMD 62 Simret Yemane WIMD

List of Participants (Validation Workshop 21-22 Nov 2020)

S/N Name Position Location

1 Haftu Berhe Director for QMS Head Office

2 Tsedey Alemu Finance program/delegate Head Office

3 Abreham Sime DU Head Office

4 Engidayehu Dekeba Chief of staff Head Office

5 Ebsa Teshome Director for Gs Head Office

6 Yitamen Ayele Director for IT Head Office

7 Fekadu Tadesse Director for Legal Head Office

8 Mulusew Ayalneh Director for Ethics Head Office

9 Siferaw Bekele Director for DFM Head Office

10 Alemtsehay Data Director for FY Head Office

11 Ashenafi Erena Director for GG Head Office

12 Nahom Gemechu Director for CMD Head Office

13 Gedamnesh Asferaw Director for WIM Head Office

14 Tsigabu Gebru Director for M&E/delegate Head Office

15 Zinash Demissei Director for HR Head Office

16 Tadesse Shewangizaw Director for Audit Head Office

17 Yohannes Shiferaw Director for Reverse logistics Head Office

18 Tesfalem Adraro DDG/out bound Head Office