true hope - May 08, 2006

how disPOINTING that turn out our CCM address on the internet is fake.....great loss to the fund
_________________
i feel so sorry

true hope - May 02, 2006

well our CCM curently very closed for every partnership, and to tell you the truth is that we having troubles to access anti retroviral therapy because the drugs is out....well once again this is indonesia........me as one of the klien very dissapointed, ins't there any monitoring from the global fund?????how to contribute into the intervention if the CCM w3ould not open to share any access with us???
PLHA community
_________________
i feel so sorry

Workneh Kassie - Apr 26, 2006

The best case scenario for a predictable and sustained replenishment mechanism would be for the Global Fund and its traditional donors (countries, private foundations, corporations etc.) to agree on a medium term agreement for an earmarked annual contribution as countries are doing for the UN and other bodies rather than going for a series of replenishment processes done in 2005. There will still be a gap between needed and pledged funds. In order to fill the gap, the existing mechanism or the above new arrangement may need to be completed by the following strategies. These strategies could look unrealistic at first glance. But they could be exhaustively discussed and tried.

1. Global Fund could start or continue dialoguing with OPEC or individual oil producing and exporting countries for sustained contribution to the Global Fund. This would be a good opportunity for these countries to contribute meaningfully through their organization to the global challenge of combating HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria, which are currently the most killer diseases in the world, particularly in Africa. OPEC should be made member of the Global Fund Board once it has formally confirmed its commitment.
2. Anti- HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria Committees could be established in the rich countries to actively work on fund raising through the organization and implementation of special fund raising events.
3. Through the help of the UN Secretary General and prominent ladies, organize Coalition of First Ladies of rich countries for the fight against HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria for undertaking advocacy and resource mobilization activities in the rich countries and collectively influence governments of rich countries.
4. The World Bank, African Development Bank and similar banks in Asia could be approached if they have any means of reallocating a certain portion of fund from the total debt cancellation or other facilities.
5. Global Fund Board could look into identifying 2-3 effective and prominent Good Will Ambassadors that inform the world the devastating effects of the three diseases and persuade international donors to keep their promises and pledge more funds.
6. The international media in North America, Europe and Asia, which are watched and listened by world leaders and the business community could be approached to could be contribute to the global effort by constantly informing the world about these diseases. E.g. One child dies due to malaria every 20 seconds in Africa etc. etc. To me, these media have not so far sufficiently informed the world about the potential threat that these three diseases pose to the global political, social and economic order.

The Global Fund should sign a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with its new and traditional partners to make the collaboration formal and binding, and for the replenishment to be sustainable and predictable.
Workneh Kassie
Addis Ababa

tim@timwills.com - Apr 25, 2006

Sustainability cannot be guaranteed for any period beyond the limit of pledges. Presumably existing pledges can be securitised (at a discount) and this exercise itself would produce publicity in the financial world which would impact the willingness of donors to honour future (and indeed, past) pledges.

However long term sustainability can unfortunately only be improved with a global awareness of the aims, needs and past results of the Global Fund.

It seems essential to maximise the means of accepting donations (from cash to click-throughs) and include the private, corporate, national and transnational donor programmes.

Perhaps 'monetising' donations from corporates (e.g. giving drug and other material donations a value and publicising them) would encourage institutional philanthropy.

If the Fund cannot be registered as a charity perhaps a separate or satellite organisation can, which in turn donates receipts to the Fund.

However governments, corporates and individuals are more likely to donate if their money is seen to produce the results that are so obviously needed. So continued good work should bring its own reward.

Apr 23, 2006

Message from Ashish Kumar Srivastava, India

Regarding potential focus area for improvement & diversification of resources mobilization efforts, voluntary replenishment mechanism, & innovative financing
mechanism, selective private sector fundraising is important for sustainable & subsidiary financial support.

Diversification of resource mobilization is still required to obtain funds for behavioural change in the community, for access to grants in the most sensitive & potential focus areas of family welfare, prevention of communicable diseases in infant mortality, and achievement of secondary& tertiary level (education).

Connectivity of domiciliary & health centers, integrated program of iron/folic nutritional support with routine health projects/program are also potential areas of improvement. Global Fund should be focused on investigational modalities in systemic inflammatory diseases.

In Asia UNDP& UN POPULATION FUND (UNFPA) have been providing technical & funding assistance to develop resources. Licence for generic version of drugs (Private- sector distribution) and emergency storage are essential for prevention of pandemics in developing countries.

NOTE- Regarding potential focus area for improvement & influencing factors (communicable diseases) mechanism has been submitted to W.H.O dated 24/06/04.

Ashish Kumar Srivastava

Apr 23, 2006

Message from Jumoke Owoola-Adeojo,

Dear all,
In a nutshell, I think getting closer to both donors and beneficiaries will go a long way. Also, knowing what each person needed, and listening to their own way of going about it.

Thanks,
Jumoke Owoola-Adeojo

Shola16 - Apr 22, 2006

In practice, government bureaucracy can delay and sometime frustrate plans and activities, especially in developing countries. Often, planners and policy makers continually make assumptions about what people at grassroots level think, but few programme implementers have bothered to ask how people themselves feel about programmes which affect their lives.

Establishing the Global Fund (GF)/Local Community Groups. These would encourage partnership among stakeholders, formulating joint plans, and allocating specific tasks to each partner. Organise workshops both to acknowledge the importance of Global Fund, Contributions and to stimulate interest and analysis of achievements within a country.
_________________
To Set A New Tune For the New and Next Millennium

Dr. Saka Mohammed Jimoh - Apr 21, 2006

Having achieved all of these, too numerous to mention- from programme development, implementation and ensuring impact on the populace at large, the Global Fund can now make the impact on the common man in remote communities more lasting. I also believe the Global Fund can make its Public Private Partners more independent by enabling them to source funds by themselves (More institutional capacity).

What about filling the lacuna in what other bilateral organisations are doing in the countries, communities, areas etc ? Let's make Global Fund branding a big ovation.
_________________
Dr. Saka Mohammed Jimoh

dr joseph stephen mambo - Apr 20, 2006

Global Fund strategies on three diseases may be sustained by persuading the pledgers to fulfil their promises and where they are stuck for one reason or the other, to complement their pledges not neccessarly in cash terms but in material support especially drugs for opportunistic infections from their home pharmaceutical companies, or antimalarials; then the GF may find means of dispatching those commodities to the needy areas such as to sub-saharan countries where drugs are scarce, and where populations are also confronted with food shortage, and other maladies such as cholera outbreaks, etc. I believe that, among other things money is only the vehicle of facilitation, but the alternatives are there.

Apr 19, 2006

Thank you Sammi, Charante, Chitimbire, Workneh, Richard, the guest, and all who have e-mailed responses, for your pertinent messages. We are currently discussing the Global Fund’s performance in working with existing and prospective donors to mobilize resources in a sustainable and predictable manner. We are also discussing potential areas of improvement. Regarding the Global Fund’s performance, emerging consensus is that it has been successful in mobilizing tremendous amounts of resources in a relatively short period of time. Mobilizing funds from the private sector has been mentioned severally as an area that would need improvement. Countries should facilitate the Global Fund’s resource mobilization efforts by ensuring effective and efficient utilization and accounting for funds. Donors should consider that inadequate institutional and human resource capacities of recipient countries in early years contribute to the cases of unsatisfactory performance witnessed so far.

Other focal areas for improvement that have been mentioned include: The need for donors to fulfill their pledges; motivating the CCM, and improving the working relationship between private partners and others by focusing on Public Private Partnerships in CCMs, and; employing innovative funding sources as illustrated by Richard, Sammi and Chitimbire, among others.

V.T. S Chitimbire - Apr 19, 2006

Global Fund Financial Sustainability is very critical, based on the fact that most poeple wonder what will happen if Global Fund resources fail to meet its targets. This topic should not be taken lightly as it has a direct impact on peoples' lives, their confidence on the Global Fund and the nations that did pledge to support the Global Fund. However this process is not for governments only but other key players in funding, such as donors, corporate companies, and pharmaceutical companies to invest in the Global Fund as the funds have direct impact on the micro and socio-economic issues of any given nation.

There is need for massive campaigns by the Global Fund to involve both private and public partners using CEOs and Celebraties to mobilize these resources. On the other hand the Global Fund Secretariat and countries should also strengthen and build strong systems to support this process through clear governance structures and accountability to build the confidence of partners to invest in the Global Fund. "The Wealth of any nation is based on the Health of its people" It is therefore everyone's obligation to ensure Global Fund Financial Sustainability. There are willing people out there with enough resources to support this worthy cause as long as their confidence is won. On the issue of directing all donor funding through one source, this will mean developing massive management systems for the Global Fund. Donors and other corporate companies should be left to willingly invest in the global fund based on what they believe their role is in this whole process.
_________________
WORKING WITH A FBO NON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION. OUR WORK FOCUSES HEALTH PARTICULARLY IN THE RURAL AREAS AND ON IMPROVING THE HEALTH STATUS OF RURAL PEOPLE THROUGH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND CAPACITY BUILDING WORKING WITH CHURCHES AND MISSION HOSPITALS.

Sammi Fredenburg - Apr 18, 2006

Carrr - Apr 18, 2006

The Global Fund should explore the availability of other funding sources -especially with the private sector. Every year the European Plastics Council sponsors a website. For each click on the website, the council agrees to donate a certain amount of money to the charity Water Aid which uses the funds to support water and sanitation projects in various countries. It might be possible to get some big private sector companies (oil companies, pharmaceutical companies, food companies, etc) to sponsor a similar site for the global fund, i.e., each click gets them some publicity and they contribute to a worthy cause. Each year that the European Plastics Council site has been set up they reach their funding goal early. Perhaps this site could be set up for several months a year or during the course of the entire year with different sponsors able to contribute funds as they wish. Perhaps different sponsors could sponsor a certain time period?

Another option could be to approach the public to ask for direct contributions similar to what happened with the Tsunami response or how UNICEF asks for donations. This would require some advertising and possibly also a dedicated website.

If the Global fund can become registered as a charity it might be able to draw some donations through employer based programs that allow employees to donate to specific charities with matching funds from the employer.

These funds would not replace donor support but could compliment them.
_________________
Mr. Richard M. Carr
RBM Partnership Secretariat (RPS)
Technical Officer, Country Support Development (CSD)
Room L 253, hosted by WHO, Geneva
Tel: +41 22 791 3518
Fax: +41 22 791 4824/1587
e-mail: carrr@who.int
web: http://rbm.who.int/partnership

Workneh Kassie - Apr 18, 2006

The Global Fund has been an institutional arrangement whose creation was supported by the Heads of State and Government at their Special Summit in Abuja in April 2001, the leaders of G8 countries in their Summit in Okinawa, Japan, July 2000 and UNGASS June 2001, for mobilizing and granting sustained resources to countries hit hard by HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. However, the prospective donors have not fully met their promises for a sustained financial resource contribution, which the donors themselves very well know the reasons. According to the Fund’s report in 2005, the estimated global needs in 2007 for tracking the three diseases was US$19.4 billion of which US$14.9 was to be provided by international donors. Nevertheless, the donors’ response was 45% for malaria, 66% for TB and 20% for HIV/AIDS (GFO, Issue 40)
The Global Fund has been also under difficult conditions in mobilizing resources from the international donors, as performance has been unsatisfactory in many recipient countries. For example, the Fund reported in 2005 that 27% of grantees considered for phase 2-renewal had an "inadequate" performance rating (GFO/40). Such performance results are to make the work of the Global Fund less successful in mobilizing adequate and sustained resources from prospective donors. Therefore, countries benefiting from the Global Fund must help the Fund in the effective and efficient utilization and accounting of the grant fund, which they secured. The International donors must also understand the institutional and human resource capacity of recipient countries for the unsatisfactory performance in the early years of their programmes.
Workneh Kassie
Addis Ababa

Guest - Apr 18, 2006

Measurement of the Global Fund's success is subjective depending on the perspective. Enormous amounts have been mobilised in a relatively short period of time (so much so that I suspect fatigue with the major donors). Relative to the need no one would dispute that the success (in resource mobilization?) has been less than optimal. I think the area with the greatest shortcoming has been the private sector.