I think this problem related to the country level all ountry that received the fund from global fund should be transparency and accountibility in the expenditure in each program for benifit taget and improved the quality of funding.

Dear GF, I Think all countires need GF participation. in related this question, my suggest: 1. GF must make a list of all problems related sustainable funding.2.much problem in HIV/AIDS,TB, malaria especially in indonesia (my country)and GF must be serious to fight it.GF must open mind to hear us. GF make sure and indirect to contacs us, i think its a good way to scalling up GF programme. we already prepare in field to operate, to combat HIV/AIDS,TB Malaria problem in remote area in east Indonesia, but how can we start, if we havent funds to do it? I think, a small steps not only is a good action. it's an important action.Our community waiting GF. God Bless all GFstaff and us. Regards, Abraham FanggidaE

There is need to analyse the process of fund allocation/program evaluation of principle and sub recipients of Global Fund. This will go a long way in fine tuning/streamlining the process of fund allocation by the recipients. In order to achieve the above, there will be need for decentralization of the Global Fund office to accommodate zonal and state activities for grassroot coverage in the countries. Physical visits/assessment of organizational capacity for organizations applying for funds, this will make for informed choice/decision about such organizations. Funding organizations based on areas of expertise and capacity. Organizational capacity building to scale-up sustainability/program implementation.

Improved governance will likely enhance accessibility of Global Fund to the citizens and to have their problems attended to in a timely fashion. It is likely also to further strengthen accountability and transparency in public finance management. The vulnerable and marginalized groups should be empowered with vital information. Thus they will be meaningfully participating in decision and budgeting processes including the identification of projects that meet their needs. In addition the project should also support rural livelihoods through agricultural, health, social and income generating activities. This will promote positive change in the delivery of stakeholders services to the community. Channels of communication should be enhanced through feedback meetings and outreach meetings.People should also be part of the decision making process, they always lack interest in getting to know the results. As they are involved, they will become the "eyes and ears of the project"with regard to progress and results within their localities.NGO networks and private sector to partner with governments in the delivery of services is paramount.

Programme fund sustainability is a very important issue for countries to fight HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. However, the most important is how to plan and set up a result based programmes from the beginning taking into consideration all issues and possible risks that may make the programmes only limited actions. Participation based approach gives opportunity to all stakeholders and would definitely help to identify future risks and issues that can face the programme. It is noteworthy to mention that one of the greater problems that face sustainability of programmes and funding is weak national capacities. So GF should support and somehow assist in the fine tunning of programmes in the first stage by hiring international and national consultants (kind of preparatory assistance) that is aware about the national and international context and trend and can orient countries (recipients) to more realistic results and then guarantee that the funds are well delivered. In addition, sharing good practices and lessons’ learned at least once a year per region and cross regions is also a good way to replicate some success stories related to principal recipient role, successful programme, successful coordination process etc...

To, e-FORUM 2008 Received your discussion.Regarding procurement of products by GlobalFund with international standards & easy availability, countries should integrate with development,understanding of allocation,purchasing ,new improved innovation of products. Local industry participation ,correct assessment of need & technology inclusion are essential for GlobalFund's product procurement. ASHISH SRIVASTAVA ex-International Marketing CCM(SEAR-INDIA)81237

In response to your question, we will be answering from our point of view as a manufacturer/supplier of Long-Lasting Factory-Treated Mosquito Nets.

From this point of view we would really like to thank you very much for giving us the opportunity to voice our views as a manufacturer/supplier. We do hope that our contribution will be useful to the Global Fund.

Our particular area of specialization is therefore the prevention of Malaria and the consequent saving of lives in Malaria prone countries such as Zimbabwe, Malawi, Zambia, Mozambique etc.

In order for the Global Fund to have assured on-going and increasing funding from Donors for Country Projects involving the funding and distribution of Long-Lasting Nets it is vital that the Global Fund can show that: 1) funds are used correctly – i.e. that a proportion is not eaten up in unnecessary ‘admin’ etc. in each of the countries by buying nets directly from reputable local manufacturers/suppliers 2) that the funds are used quickly to purchase and promptly distribute nets to prevent meaningless deaths due to bureaucracy etc.  3) that value for money is achieved through the disbursement of the funding i.e. that the Global Fund buys nets which meet all international requirements in each of their Country Projects at the lowest costs thereby maximizing donor funding and preventing a greater % of deaths due to Malaria 4) that the funding and allocation of the funding remains neutral

It is therefore vital that the Global Fund needs to be aware of the fact that funding and prompt distribution can be maximized by the procurement of products that meet international standards which are locally available in each country.

Our personal experience in this arena which could be helpful to the Global Fund being able to improve the continuity of funding and allow ambitious scaling-up is as follows:

1) NGO’s and Govt. Departments involved in the purchase and distribution of nets are not entirely au fait with Global Fund Guidelines

2) There is a lack of current technological information. We are a Zimbabwean and Botswana based manufacturer of factory-treated longer-lasting nets using the active ingredient of deltamethrine (Bayer’s K O Tab 1-2-3) which is comparative to other insecticides which are WHO approved (i.e. they are all at the same level of approval – WHOPES Phase III). There is a certain amount of resistance due to the fact that agencies etc. are misinformed and under the impression that our net (PrevetaNET® factory-treated with K O Tab 1-2-3) is not WHOPES approved. It is therefore important that the Global Fund is possessed of up-to-date information regarding the above and is able to provide this information to the relative NGO’s etc involved as there seems to be a great lack of correct information on the ground.

3) Since our nets meet international standards and are available at a very competitive price (incl. distribution to District Level)  it would be advantageous for the Global Fund to therefore purchase directly from manufacturers/suppliers such as ourselves under the watchful eye of Ministry of Health, Local Fund Agent i.e. Price Waterhouse or reputable auditor/accounting firm who will effect payment on completion of delivery to recipients at District Level direct to the manufacturer/supplier in the respective countries thereby saving donor funding and valuable time/lives.

4) As soon as funding is available immediate purchase of nets should be made so that they can be distributed immediately. This is where the advantage of having a relationship with reputable local manufacturers and suppliers comes in as goods are available immediately at source (no need to import, incur extra costs such as duties etc.). In our case we keep a buffer stock of 1.5million nets at any time in order to be able to respond to urgent orders/ relief efforts because as well as being a commercial company we are dedicated to saving lives.

 5) It is vital to support local industry – especially in the current economic climate. Since we are based in Botswana and Zimbabwe we can supply immediately as opposed to importing the goods which can take weeks and incur extra costs. Companies such as ourselves employ hundreds of people and it would be advantageous to support local companies so as to ensure their growth and continuation. At present we are based, as mentioned in Botswana and Zimbabwe, but with greater support of our product we would be able to expand operations to Zambia, Mozambique and Malawi – thereby in the greater scheme of things improving local industry and providing much-needed employment in these areas. (Our group of companies has been operating successfully in the Southern African Region since 1969 and is one of the biggest textile companies in the region -providing quality products at competitive prices).

GF sincere efforts in funding the projects which help eradicate HIV/AIDS, MALARIA AND TUBERCULOSIS are commendable. But its permeation at the grass roots level certainly require the involvement of the governmental machinery and by joining hands with NGOs and INGOs. Its a global issue so it has to be handled globally. But its effectiveness can be doubled if sensitization, motivation and mobilization is encouraged in the community. Though we need a lot of resources to start something from the bottom yet it is a necessary to take some solid steps. We can only be destined to be successful in our motives if we thoroughly present our services without being self-centered. Thank You,

as per the situation of india funding better predictability of sustainable funding i would like to depend upon the gravity of the proposal work. organization having the better experience in the implementation of funding and manging the work these qaulity of work should consider for the release of fund. for scaling up the program potentiality sustainable has major role . global fund haaving the major role to scale up the program .

To, e-Forum 2008 Received your discussion. Regarding scale up program,scaled up program should based on social,religion,environmental,economical bio-behaviour factors of society,community & country. Understanding of above factors are essential for longer-term planning.Structures &process of multi& bilateral organization should understand & consider national criteria of health infrastructure & services,assessment of prevention, treatment coverage,&care.Above structures could help in capacity building in providing health infrastructure,innovation,quality, effectiveness,& complete coverage. ASHISH SRIVASTAVA ex-International Marketing CCM(SEAR-INDIA)81237

Dear Ashish, Thank you for your expression of views on GlobalFund and a country level sustainable funding to combat the evils of diseases. You have mentioned all corners for country level health programme and role of funding to scaleup the plan. Thank you for your value discussion. Asima Chakraborty General Secretary TOPER, Kolkata, India toper@gmail.com

Global Fund has taken an important initiative to built up a relation among the organizations working for protection and prevention of HIV/AIDS, TB, Malaria. The voice of the people has come to this forum and observed every participant has expressed their value opinion. From the views of the members it is clear that there are other way to work with the community. The system of work of the Governments is not enough to protect people from the pandemic. The Governments have their own allocation on health in the Budget. There are a huge amount of expenditure at the pipeline and a little to the infected persons. The Global Fund has been rising fund efficiently and distributing according to their decision. Social organizations, non-governmental organization and other medical institutions is engaged in awareness, community development, training, motivation and medical care. Then The Global Fund may also Allocate fund directly or by country Fund Consultants to facilitate the grass-root people from infection. · Simplify the process of grant application and conditions where new and small initiatives can be encouraged. · CCM may be appointed to the governments and private agency. · Encourage to the organizations working with low cost of establishment. · Raise more fund from the stakeholders.. · Accountability and monitoring · Appoint Country level Fund Management to prevent corruption.Thanks. From Che John Yah CRIDP Ndamukong Steet P.O.Box. 879 Mankon, Bamenda N.W.P. Cameroon Call (237) 77 64 94 03 / (237) 99 30 67 77 http://cridp.tripod.com

I am takeing the advanage in this open frorum. To me this sorts of discussion is just waste of time as I see many of the time things has been stteled under the table. I see some one said they need to see track record what does it is that the only the large organization will work and teher is no scope to grow any one just like under teh big TREE will no more small TREE. However, for Predictablity of resource what need to do in country prespectiev like Bangladesh. Need open discussion with grassroots new people and organizations as well as not with so called single face civil society representive. It could be grassrots governmnet people, Schoold teachers, relegious leadres women and children. Ofcourse not with governmnet or NGO high officilas they just menupulate the information. So you can predict the resource need for waht and also can prirotise the issue which one really need here or there.

My ideas are more or less consistence with that of the rule of law in a country and democratic elected government with fair and free election as well the right policy mix of the country would play a role to effectively result oriented G Fund but also one can consider the following 1.Try to build the right channell mainly a triad way governments,civil societies and beneficiaries but one has to be careful because most African country have their own stooges in terms of the two. 2. Irrespective of the problem fund should not have to be allocated with governments which have more than one percent military budget of their GDP,in this case but the funds have to be channelled through non-governmental organization who have the same program as GF and my be better to contract out some sevices to civil societies with strict supervision- 3.Refinement of countries annual plan of action must be detailly scrutnized as well the evaluation has to be done without the interference of the host governments because i have a lot of experience of doctored evidences i.e programs done by government funds are reported as they are achieved by /donor/aid/borrowed/ or the GF and the foreign currency stashed some where.

When the Global fund sends out calls for country proposals, they should look at the track record of applicants in terms of managing resources. Some organisations selected as sub-recipients have very poor track records of managing funds provided by other donor countries or organisations at country level and it is appaling to see them selected as sub-reciepients. There should be a thorough screening process with consultation with relevant stakeholders such as civil society, the private sector and all organisations representing and working with PLHAs at country level. The CCM should consult the intended benficiaries on what they think the focus of the proposal should be unlike them deciding what they think the country needs. A case in point would be the CCM has put in an application focusing on prevention when the wider PLHAs consulted feel that the proposal should have focused more on treatment as we are not sure what the implications of the elections in the USA will have on PEFAR funding to third world countries.