Feb 15, 2006

Summary of Online Discussions and Lead Contributors for Week Four / Feb.5-12

Theme: The Global Fund’s Strategic Positioning; Week’s sub-question: What do you think should be the appropriate role for the Global Fund in the future? In particular, what do you think are new or different roles that the Fund is in a unique position to play especially well in the future (for example, because of its principles, its design, or its skills)?

Lead contributors:

Luc Comhaire (Belgium) , Benjamin Udodigbo (Nigeria), Krisi (NY, USA) , Barry Coleman (UK/US) , Ndegwa (Kenya), Rose Joshi (Nepal), Manoj Tashniwal (India), Tom Mboya Okeyo (Kenya), D.K Mohanty (India) , Sammi Fredenburg (WA, USA), Ada (Ghana), Timothy Mbugua (Canada), Christina (FL, USA), Saka Mohammed Jimoh (Nigeria), Marcella Montero (Phillipines), Jerry (Brazil) , Heath Wilder (USA), G. Gray (Malaysia), Shahid Mallick (Bangladesh) , Tarig Dafallah (Sudan), Tshering Lama (Nepal, UK), William Parr (New Caledonia, Pacific), Mohammed Hossain (Canada), Sudhakar Malpe (India), S. Carls (USA), Spectranine, (Francophone Countries) : Adel Zeddam, Celestine Ele, Mohamed Ould Bneijara, Aissatou Diallo Bah, Haja Razafindrafito (Central and Eastern Europe), Helen Tyrell, (Estonia), Gennady Roshchupkin, Credinta, Gregory (Russia), (Latin America) : Jorge Matute,


From the Spanish forum

The views on the Spanish forum focussed on prevention and education. There are currently HIV/AIDS prevention projects that work with high risk groups in Latin America. But the problem has spread, extending to the rest of the population, and it is important for the Global Fund to take a more active role in promoting preventive education in all sectors of the population, not just in groups at risk, with the aim of containing the epidemic.

From the English forum

1.) The GF's most important role in the future, which it has uniquely played well, is to provide a measure of transparency and accountability to the development process.

2.) Focus on Information, EDUCATION and Communication: this will be key and must be two-pronged: (1) A planned effort to educate those in affected areas (for prevention & treatment of AIDS, malaria, stigma, etc.) (2) Educating citizens of industrialized countries (for increased engagement and fund-raising) and others largely ignorant of its activities e.g. Sudan.

3.) GF should stir funds towards support for the group of SSA’s that have reached the ‘Third Phase’ of the HIV/AIDS pandemic, in line with MDGs. GF and partners should continue advocacy role, esp. on ARVs; a huge number of PLWA still cannot access drugs.

4.) Strengthen, support and institutionalize CCM mechanisms so that they are not just a 'Global Fund' CCM; to oversee implementation and M&E. GF and partners should continue advocacy role, esp. on ARVs; there is still a huge number of PLWA who cannot access drugs.

5.) Scaling up medical manufacturing capacity, streamlining bureaucratic bottlenecks and increasing technical capacity to provide support to interventions at all levels must go hand in hand with mobilizing financial resources, to maximize the results for those most in need.

6.) The sustainability of the Global Fund’s future role in TB will depend on its capacity to strengthen the existing TB control programmes, by focusing on programme, in addition to disease-related objectives.

7.) GF should improve and expand its core business of raising funds e.g. by engaging the private sector more and encouraging governments to fulfill their obligations to the fund. Increase resources as long as there is no cure for HIV/AIDS, and avoid outbreak in Asia.

8.) The Fund has the potential to influence and oblidge pharmaceutical companies to reign in the exorbitant costs of medication. While it currently acts as the advocate and guardian of the cause, it must ultimately negotiate for the required resources, especially medicine and nutrition.
9.) The Fund’s unique strategy should be geared towards long-term solutions, i.e. via research, vaccinations, biological/ecological controls (e.g. of mosquitoes), and related issues e.g. poverty.

10.) The Fund is well-placed to act as a unifying factor between NGOs and other partners, to coordinate and collaborate through resources, e.g. funding, information, etc. It may also evolve to address new and relevant illnesses and issues that cause vulnerability, which arise over time.

11.) The Fund should look closely at the sustainable development process, including through the Public Health and Climate Changes that affect it, e.g. flooding in Mozambique and Malawi, waterborne illnesses causing Malaria, dengue and lack of resistance by the population, which contribute to tuberculosis, which is in-turn draining funds from local Ministry of Health budgets.

12.) The appropriate role in the future should be geared towards pain management by focusing on hospice-type treatment, due to the high number of the dying.

13.) The GF should transmute from an ad-hoc arrangement to a permanent one; something in the mould of a UN organ. It must commit its resources to the monitoring of its disbursements to ensure accountability on the part of both the donor and recipient.

14.) The Global Fund needs to consider national scale-ups. It could consider covering additional regions. It should focus on long-term sustenance of funding; shun politics, and donor country bias. Involvement should be focused on implementation rather than fund mobilization. It can also intensify activities related to advocacy, and exert pressure on the targeted countries for proper implementation of adequate measures to fight these diseases.

15.) Comprehensive budgeting: The Fund’s budgeting process should be elaborately planned to connect policymaking with the situation on the ground, e.g. to consider including annual running costs within the budget for vehicles to be used for service and product delivery.

16.) The fund should emerge from a bureaucratic system and build the capacities of some committed and ethical people to play its future roles.

17.) Prevention in a stigmatizing society (Nepal) and in a large country (India):

a. To counter the negative effects of stigma on prevention activities, the Fund could finance young people directly and encourage a spirit of volunteerism among young peer educators in AIDS prevention.

b. In India, the Global Fund should reach the grassroots faster by connecting and engaging the civil society networks working under the MoH, to mitigate the high maternal & infant mortality rate that is occasioned by TB and Malaria.

To contribute to this week’s discussions, please click here: http://forum.theglobalfund.org/en/viewtopic.php?t=46