I second the idea of Mr. clearconscience. It is a proven fact that the quality is guarantteed only in case of perfect market and fair competition. Suppose this or that country failed to receive fund for a program in the last round. The reason could be incompetency of the Applicant or PR. Then nobody knows how many of competent organizations are there in that country who are able to have great achievements, how many of competent enough organization were selected as SR and impatiently waited to receive the fund and serve the communities.

 

I recommend:

 

1. As Mr. Cleaconscience recommended, a wide range of organizations should have access to the fund on individual basis.

 

2. Global Fund should budget enough time and professional staff to monitor the CCMs and the projects in the field. Although the number of recipients and project are too much, but considering the importance of the health problem and huge amounts of donations pledged, it will be wise if significant resources (money and experts) be in disposal of monitoring and supportive supervision.  Stop in-hurry visits!

 

3. As the aim is fighting against the disease; strong technical support system should be established to help the countries/organization that do not have satisfactory achievements. If we just withdraw the funding form the failed ones, then the disease and suffering of the people will be still there and deteriorate the health situation further. The technical support must identiry the challenges in time and recommend proper solutions based on experience in the successfull contexts.

 

4. Develop a mechanism of Responsibility/Accountability between CCM and Global Fund!

 

 

On the issue of the Illiteracy Spectrum: If you permit me, I would like to add, that if our people aren’t educated on priorities and how their gifts/skills/funds and efforts can be channeled and maximized, this will be a wasted opportunity and we will not see results compared to the heartfelt effort. It is important that people understand the priorities so that we can work on the root cause in unison, instead of applying bandaids.

 

In the same vein, I would like to say that if the illiteracy spectrum that I referred to isn’t addressed, MDG # 6 will not be achieved. I can say that with a high degree of confidence and will not tone down this statement. This is a matter of do or die. Illiteracy, Functional Illiteracy and lack of functional literacy skills and competencies in varying degrees are all heavily loaded constructs and major contributors that fuel HIV/AIDS new infections & TB infections, transmission, lack of condom use, lack of adherence to drug regimens leading to drug resistance and is also responsible for people not being able to make critical decisions about their health -- how far this has deteriorated to the point where they have developed opportunistic diseases that are irreversable; however, some are actually preventable.

 

The illiteracy spectrum is also responsible for people ignoring sleeping under pyrethrine dipped bednets or selling the bednets and their medications for money to live on. This also explains why people buy fake drugs from Quacks and can't differentiate the real drugs from the fake ones because they can't read. This also explains why they seek the advice of witch doctors and traditional healers even though they are critically ill. Traditional peoples hold an a-scientific worldview that is spirit - originated. When you deal with matters of cause and effect (which are part and parcel of a Western scientific worldview) - for example: If you don't use protection by condomn you can become infected with STD's etc...this doesnt link up with their a-scientific worldview with other words their is incongruency...hence so many people don't use condoms...and the new infections go up.

 

I have educated the e-forum facilitators on this matter extensively and can't go extensively into that because I am in pain. I would like to request that there is a need for the GF to go into a health literacy e-forum since this has never been covered extensively and is most critical in solving the headaches of TB, HIV/AIDS and Malaria. We cannot continue putting the cart before the horse and use bandaids to fix programmes that are not delivering. Fenna E. Bacchus

I want to ask who are the prinicpal receipient of the global funds grants. What i mean, is that who are entitled to receive global fund grants.It wants to appear that the funds only goes to international NGO who are already very rich organisations. When we talk of effective coordination in order to achive the expected goal, we should have in mind that if the principal receipient scenario are not well defined any machanism put in place WILL NOT WORK.

The major obstacles lies in the COUNTRY LEVEL.Global fund has done its task to ensure that the fund goes to the appropriate receipient institutions with the confidence that the fund will be managed for the project according to the terms of the contract. No matter any mechanism that could be employed in the country level or at the global fund level itself will not work effectively if the principal recipient of the funds scenario is not OVERHAULED. The community foundations ,ngos ,associations has no access to the global funds grants; even if they send their projects well define are not respected at the country level. The grants are only provided to friendly organisations who has the habits to receiving it. Then how would changes happens. It thus reflects as a family fund.

My opinion is that, community foundations, minorities groups organisations, nations ngos etc. should benefit directly from the global funds grant for malaria, TB, HIV/AIDS. It would be better to set up a NATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION COORDINATION TEAM in the country level, who will work to ensure that projects are executed accordingly.The will monitor the country CCM, receipients and impacts.

Read the introduction to this topic

 

How can the oversight and coordination of Global Fund supported programs be improved?