TOOLS FOR GLOBAL FUND ADVOCACY
use our search bar at top or tag system on the right to find what you need
-
Jun 2015 The Global Fund That We Want: Statement from the Communities and Civil Society Consultation on the Global Fund Strategy 2017-2021 and 5th Replenishment +
Publisher: Global Fund Communities Delegation
This position statement was a result of the “Communities and Civil Society Consultation on the Global Fund Strategy 2017 – 2021 and 5th Replenishment” convened by the Communities Delegation on the Board of the Global Fund and co-organised by the Global Fund Advocates Network Asia-Pacific (GFAN AP).
The statement was endorsed by 102 organisations.
-
Jun 2015 Leadersʼ Declaration G7 Summit, 7-8 June 2015 +
Publisher: G7
G7 Leaders’ Declaration that notes support for the Global Fund replenishment.
-
May 2015 Tracking Global Fund HIV/AIDS resources used for sexual and reproductive health service integration: case study from Ethiopia +
Publisher: Mookherji et al., Globalization and Health (2015) 11:21
Objective/Background: The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis & Malaria (GF) strives for high value for money, encouraging countries to integrate synergistic services and systems strengthening to maximize investments. The GF needs to show how, and how much, its grants support more than just HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria. Sexual and Reproductive Health (SRH) has been part of HIV/AIDS grants since 2007. Previous studies showed the GF PBF system does not allow resource tracking for SRH integration within HIV/AIDS grants. We present findings from a resource tracking case study using primary data collected at country level.
Results: All HIV/AIDS grants in Ethiopia support SRH integration activities (12-100%). Using activities within SDAs, expenditures directly supporting SRH integration increased from 25% to 66% for the largest HIV/AIDS grant, and from 21% to 34% for the smaller PMTCT-focused grant. Using SDAs to categorize expenditures underestimated direct investments in SRH integration; activity-based categorization is more accurate.
The important finding is that primary data collection could not resolve the limitations in using GF GPR data for resource tracking. The remedy is to require existing activity-based budgets and expenditure reports as part of PBF reporting requirements, and make them available in the grant portfolio database. The GF should do this quickly, as it is a serious shortfall in the GF guiding principle of transparency.
-
May 2015 Representation and Participation of Key Populations on CCMs in Southern Africa +
Publisher: Aidspan
This short paper explores the extent to which key affected populations are represented within country coordinating mechanisms in Southern Africa. The paper, which includes a series of policy recommendations and observations drawn from extensive qualitative anonymized interviews with stakeholders in six countries (Swaziland, Lesotho, South Africa, Botswana, Zimbabwe, and Zambia) to understand how the CCMs interact with KAP representatives.
-
May 2015 Priorities in discussing the new Global Fund 2017-2021 Strategy +
Publisher: Communities & NGO Delegations to the Global Fund Board
The Global Fund is developing its new Strategy for 2017 – 2021. This provides an opportunity to ensure that the Global Fund stays true to its mission and develops ambitious goals and targets. First and foremost the focus of the strategy should be on accelerating progress in order to end the three diseases by 2030 and the strategic objectives should emanate from this primary goal.
This preliminary position paper summarizes strategic priorities for discussions on the Global Funds new strategy as identified by the Communities Delegation, the Developing and the Developed Countries NGO delegations. This is a living document and will be further refined as we move through the strategy development process.
-
Apr 2015 Summary of Key Civil Society Recommendations Concerning the Development of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria Strategic Plan 2017-2021 +
In April 2015, ICSS and ICASO in collaboration with the Free Space Process hosted a consultation involving regional and key population networks working in HIV, TB, and malaria to begin defining the priorities civil society wanted to see in the new Global Fund strategic plan 2017-2021. The meeting built on work done by other groups including the Open Society Foundations (OSF), Women for the Global Fund (W4GF), and the Eurasian Harm Reduction Network (EHRN). As follow-up to the initial meeting, ICASO and ICSS participated in three partnership forums (Addis May 5-8, Bangkok June 22-25, Buenos Aires September 1-4) to further refine the key “asks”. The rich and diverse comments from the consultations were summarized in a matrix3 and shared with the Communities and NGO delegations to the Global Fund Board for their deliberations in board and committee meetings. The matrix highlights the similarities between regions about priority asks and the way certain themes were strengthened and clarified over the course of the partnership forums and other consultations.
-
Apr 2015 After Aid: What is next for Tuberculosis and HIV in Europe? +
Publisher: TB Europe Coalition
The report “After Aid: What is next for Tuberculosis and HIV in Europe?” explores the consequences of donor withdrawal from Eastern Europe and Central Asia on the HIV and TB epidemics. External donors such as the Global Fund to fight AIDS, TB and Malaria and USAID have played a crucial role in ensuring access to TB and HIV services in the region. These programmes have primarily targeted vulnerable groups who are often overlooked by their governments. Shifting policies are leading international donors to withdraw support from middle income countries refocusing aid on low-income countries.
This shift in donor resources is likely to deal a catastrophic blow to HIV and TB patients in the region as donor withdrawal is unlikely to be matched by increased domestic investments in the immediate future, leaving potentially large gaps in financing of basic TB and HIV services. There is an urgent need for the Global Fund, the EU institutions, and affected countries to come together to develop sustainability roadmaps to address the decrease in international donor funding to the region. Only a concerted effort from multiple partners at the country level can ensure an effective and sustainable transition to domestic funding. It is critical that this opportunity is seized by political leaders and donors such as affected countries, the EU, and the Global Fund.
-
Apr 2015 Working Together: a community-driven guide to meaningful involvement in national responses to HIV +
Publisher: ICASO
The guide “Working Together: A community-driven guide to meaningful involvement in national responses to HIV” emphasizes national planning and decision-making processes, and brings together the many existing tools, kits and guidelines developed over the years by a wide range of groups and organizations working in the field of HIV and related areas.
Working Together took as inspiration the 2007 Coordinating with Communities guide, but is updated and reworked to include the many changes that have happened to funding patterns, policy priorities and scientific developments over the years, and more recent changes in relation to current frameworks and processes for national action on HIV.
-
Apr 2015 Access to Medicines and the Global Fund +
Publisher: Open Society Foundations
The affordability, availability, and financing of medicines and other health commodities has always been a central issue for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria, its donors, recipient countries, and affected communities. Given the significant amount and proportion of Global Fund grant funding that goes to health commodities procurement, the strategic and operational components of their procurement and price strategies, and the availability of suppliers and access to their products, are key to ensuring availability and affordability of medicines.
Current and proposed policies have created a growing concern that the Global Fund is fundamentally altering its approach to access to medicines. There appears to be a progressive rollback of its previous position of the promotion of generic competition as a key driver for lowering costs to a more opaque, centralized, collaborative approach with both generic producers and originators that risks reducing individual country ownership and threatening the continued supply of low-cost generic production. In addition, given the increasingly global spread of patenting, it is critical to also explore additional ways to challenge (and overcome) the high prices of new medicines.
In light of these concerns, advocates should explore whether and how to expand and connect activities in relation to the Global Fund and access to medicines issues more broadly. To help promote that debate, this paper provides a preliminary identification of five areas that illustrate these concerns, and where the Global Fund’s present or future policies could either enhance or limit the potential to use generic competition, rights-based advocacy, and/or its public purchasing power to lower the price of medicines.
-
Apr 2015 Solidarity Sidelined: Is there a future for human rights–driven development assistance for health at the Global Fund? +
Publisher: Open Society Foundations
This report reflects on the founding values of the Global Fund, where it has made progress and where it has fallen short. It outlines three critical areas that require attention and advocacy:
- realizing the Global Fund’s human rights objectives
- preserving support in middle income countries
- supporting access to medicines for all at the lowest possible price
A period of changing global health governance and a dramatically shifting geography of poverty are part of the context for this briefing paper’s consideration of the impact of changes at the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB, and Malaria, including the Fund’s so-called New Funding Model.
This report is a resource for advocates working to assess the impact of the New Funding Model and to help shape the next five-year strategy.