IAC 2004: Questioning the Global Fund’s effectiveness
HDN Key Correspondents Team
****************************

Today's Quote
"The world must really rapidly expand access to the treatment that is so desperately needed."
Dr Richard Feacham, Executive Director of the Global Fund for HIV/AIDS, TB and Malaria
***

Participants in the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Partnership Forum, held on 7 and 8 July ahead of the XV International AIDS Conference, were all agreed on the relevance of the forum as a means of informing and advising the Fund’s board.

If they had not been, the presence of two existing advisory bodies – the Technical Review Panel and Secretariat – may have meant the initiation of protracted processes, including amending the Fund’s constitution, to scrap the Forum entirely.

What participants did not agree on, however, was whether the Partnership Forum was cost-effective in capturing the most valuable and representative voices. A participant who wised to remain anonymous wondered if the Forum could not have elicited equally relevant ideas with fewer than 400 participants, considering that at least five regional consultations and the “Partners eForum” electronic discussion (moderated by Health and Development Networks, HDN), had both canvassed a wide range public opinion already.

“It does not matter if the Fund financed the participation of the delegates to the conference or not,” this participant said. “What is important is that 400 of the world’s highly trained and critical human resources were drawn from the frontlines to come to the Forum, leaving critical country work unattended for at least two days, when half that number could have done the job. Is this an effective use of resources?”

On the other hand, regardless of the arrangements, some saw the value in making the most of the consultation: “We have a window of opportunity. I assure you this window will not remain open for long for us to persuade the Fund Mechanism to think impact, and do this in a constructive way,” HDN director Dr Tim France said.

During the discussion sessions, no part of the Fund was spared criticism. One manager from an international media organisation questioned what the Fund Secretariat staff were doing at the Cambodia consultative meeting, since close to three pages of the meeting’s final report were filled with issues referred to the Fund board, directors, managers and legal department. “Obviously, someone did not do their homework before running the consultative meeting,” she said.

Even as Professor Richard Feachem, Fund executive director, announces ambitious future rounds of funding, he may have to do more to convince stakeholders that he is thinking “impact and efficiency”. Before he issues another job advertisement to replenish the resignation-hit Secretariat, Professor Feachem may have to squeeze more from his current staff. In the meantime, UNAIDS and the WHO may breath a sigh of relief, for now the Global Fund is providing a good distraction. For how long remains to be seen.


HDN Key Correspondents Team
Email: correspondents@hdnet.org