FINANCING & ACCOUNTABILITY - QUESTION 1
How can UNAIDS raise sufficient resources to deliver against its strategy and workplan? How can its unique supporting role to the Global Fund be consistently financed?
You are encouraged to include your name, age, gender, and location when you participate, for statistical analysis purposes. Anonymous inputs are also welcome.
More effective engagement, joint programming with all the major stakeholders beyond the Joint Programme.
ReplyDeletePart of funds received by GFATM under its HIV portfolio should be provided to UNAIDS to help ensure effective delivery at the country level.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThere are three parts to this answer. First, UNAIDS must show that it has value and holds a particular place in the response to HIV. Second, its strategy and work plan has to be realistic, we have to show that UNAIDS is actually achieving what it says it will. Third, advocacy is critical, UNAIDS is operating in an ever-competitive marketplace and it needs to show its operations are still relevant. This means seeing HIV and AIDS in the context of other global challenges.
ReplyDeleteMoving on to the second part of the question, I would argue that the Global Fund needs to speak to UNAIDS's unique supporting role.
Much relates to lack of transparency and insufficient structures: UNAIDS should better cooperate with the GF and learn from the GF structures that secure community participation. The GF has – for example – a network (GFAN/Global Fund Advocacy Network) that helps local/national communities to lobby for the GF. In order to support UNAIDS (and by doing so, broaden the global AIDS response) the community needs similar structures if this support is needed. In order to support community needs to know what the current situation within UNAIDS is - this relates to transparency and openness. It took for us a while to understand that UNASIDS is currently underfunded. The GF has the replenishment structure that helps top raise awareness in a structured way. You might come up with something similar.
ReplyDeleteImprove the joint programming with all major stakeholders including the private sector and better analysis of the needs and how to most effectively address them.
ReplyDelete10% initiative- all funds received by the GFATM under the HIV portfolio should provide 10% to UNAIDS joint programme for the provision of technical assistance at the country level.
The allocation of flexible resources for the Joint Programme is crucial at all levels, while strengthening accountability and reporting on results and impact. The Joint Programme should continue to mobilize resources for the entire joint programme and facilitate the use of those funds according to a coordinated plan, and towards the achievement of the UNAIDS Strategy. As the different agencies of the Joint Programme share many of their major donors and receive funding based on their specific mandates, it is not realistic to expect HIV funding through each Cosponsor’s core funding mechanism that could replace collective UBRAF funds.
ReplyDeleteUNAIDS should encourage a closer relationship with the private sector and invite financial and in-kind contributions designed to enhance UNAIDS work at a country level.
ReplyDeleteUNAIDS should push for more domestic funding and ensure that domestic funding is allocated for the key populations at risk. In specific harm reduction and prison health should get more financial means. the target of bringing down the number of new HIV infections among people who use drugs is not reached by 2015!
ReplyDeleteMore engagement with Global Fund and other donors such as PEPFAR, CHAI. Plus, initiate fundraising campaigns through:
ReplyDelete1/ call up a round-table conference to mobilize resources with a lead country/ chair /constituency hosting the event.
2/ use political institutions to increase domestic funding such as the African Union/ African Development Bank/ ECOWAS/ First Ladies.
3/ be smarter about the choice of AIDS ambassadors. More local public figures who connect with the youth (artists, musicians, actors) need to be involved. They can organize fundraising through concerts or testing campaign so to reduce stigma.
I am not sure what the "unique supporting role" means, but UNAIDS needs to be at the forefront of getting governments to contribute more to the GF. It can start by shaming those largest economies of the world that contribute virtually zero to the fight against AIDS, TB and malaria.
ReplyDeleteJorge Beloqui,
ReplyDeleteBrazil
I do not know how to answer this question. But I want to stress that UNAIDS has to be a strong UN Agency, strongly funded in a way that the sponsors support all the HUman RIghts and Access t o Health platforms which base UNAIDS global impact
A l’exemple de la taxe UNITAID sur le trafic aérien, on pourrait envisager une taxe portuaire qui toucherait le marché de l’import-export au niveau mondial. On pourrait aussi envisager un renforcement global du partenariat avec le secteur privé et grand label notamment Coca cola, Heineken, etc à tous les niveaux (Pays, sous régional, continental). Mais une telle ambition, comme toute autre ambition pour garantir la pérennité des ressources de l’ONUSIDA devrait commencer par la production d’une conférence de capitalisation des interventions de l’ONUSIDA en tant que structure politique qui a permis de catalyser les énergies autour du VIH mais aussi en tant que model de coopération télécopiable à toutes les autres pathologies à envergure mondiale (Ebola, etc.). Cet exercice consistera à l’ONUSIDA de dire concrètement au monde ce qu’elle a fait, ce qu’elle a produit comme effet et ce qu’elle ambitionne de faire. Cela pourrait motiver de potentiels nouveaux donateurs car la communication sur le sida à l’échelle mondiale perd de plus en plus de visibilité.
ReplyDeleteThe lack of Co-Sponsor transparency and accountability is a key weakness of the current operation of the Joint Programme. Resources are allocated to the Co-Sponsors who subsequently provide minimal reporting back to the UNAIDS Board on what they have delivered with their core UNAIDS funding. If UNAIDS wants to maintain funding significant reforms are required to this way of working. Co-Sponsors should seek to increase funding to HIV/AIDS from their own resources rather than relying on the Secretariat to raise resources on their behalf - a practice which amounts to a management decision from the Co-Sponsors to de-prioritise HIV/AIDS within their own funding.
ReplyDeleteIt needs to be clear to donors what they are ‘buying’ whey they invest in UNAIDS. This links to the lack of Co-Sponsor transparency and accountability and weaknesses in the overall results framework. The lack of information about results achieved may have been a reason why some donors, when faced with budget cutbacks, chose to cut funding to UNAIDS.
UNAIDS can also seek to develop better evidence for the impact of their work in-country through amongst other things potentially commissioning evaluations.
Receiving funds from the Global Fund is controversial and questionable idea, it may create even more confusion in the roles UNAIDS and GF we have by now.
ReplyDeleteUNAIDS needs a fundraising plan and not only based on Member States donations, but also based on attracting additional funding - for example through campaigns, that can be conducted on country, regional and global levels.
UNAIDS is well positioned, has special status and attitude as the leader in addressing the epidemic of AIDS and therefore can and must raise additional funds.
Attracting additional funding to UNAIDS will ensure the sustainability of its work, reduce the existing gap between the ambitious plans and available resources (financial capacity), as well as secure more independence and effectiveness.
It needs to be clear to investors (and ultimately taxpayers) what UNAIDS are getting when they invest in UNAIDS.
ReplyDeleteClear, transparent and accountable information from UNAIDS Co-Sponsors. WIthout clear information on what the co-sponsors are doing and the results they are getting, international support for, and investment in, UNAIDS will continue to fall.
Increase evidence on impact of UNAIDS work. The future position of UNAIDS will be dependent on it providing clear evidence of the impact of its work. This means that we must move on from the status quo where Co-Sponsors provide little - if any - information to the Board on what they have achieved with core funding. This is unacceptable in the modern age and unacceptable position of the co-sponsors. This policy of opaqueness by the Co-Sponsors is slowly killing off UNAIDS as investors are rightly concerned about the lack of transparency. It must change.
Improve the joint programming with all major stakeholders including the private sector and better analysis of the needs and how to most effectively address them.
ReplyDeleteIncentivando al sector privado al aporte a la Junta Coordinadora del Programa ONUSIDA, y de igual manera es importante mostrar el testimonio de las personas que se han beneficiado con la ayuda de los copatrocinadores para dar evidencia de la buena utilización de estos recursos.
ReplyDeleteUNAIDS is an important partner for involving all donor resources into the global AIDS response in general and in the regional and country levels in particular.
ReplyDeleteAlso, UNAIDS advocacy role with governments is important aimed at gradual and smooth transition from the external financing of the National AIDS Response to the domestic one.
However, taking into consideration the current programmatic gaps, and of dramatic reduction and prospect of possible interruption in the Global Fund and other donors financing, combined with the growing epidemic, high HIV and TB disease burden, the overall slowing of economic growth, and current financial situation in EECA countries, for the near future there are limited options for complete transition from donor funding to government financing. Considerable decrease or interruption of the donor investments into the AIDS response in the region will put to serious risk the sustainability of prevention and treatment programmes, bring to impossibility of reaching the UN High Level Meeting ambitious treatment targets - 90-90-90 by 2020 and 95-95-95 by 2030 (ending AIDS epidemic) and also significantly affect the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals for ending AIDS epidemic.
UNAIDS should impact in a more active and consistent way on the donors’ policies in the EECA region, on fundraising and should work in close cooperation with governments for maintaining the attained results and reaching the set ambitious goals targets.
Improve the joint programming with all major stakeholders including the GFATM, PEPFAR and private sector including better analysis of the needs and how to most effectively address them. More work needs to be done at country level to increase domestic funding channelled to ensure the evidence response is provided according the epidemiological evidence and needs.
ReplyDeleteUne redirection d’une partie des fonds alloué par le GFATM au pays vers ONUSIDA peut garantir une meilleure efficience des ressources surtout dans les domaines de S& E et de la programmation stratégique ou ONUSIDA à une expertise avérée et peut produire de la valeur ajoutée.
ReplyDeleteJoint Programme should continue. However it will be important for Cosponsors to raise the funds for HIV on their own. It should not be UNAIDS Secretariat who is raising money for Cosponsors. Most of the Cosponsors are very good at raising money for their core budgets.
ReplyDeleteDomestic funding is crucial. Prioritize both Fast Track countries as well as countries viewed as leaders in their respective regions. Improve balance between levels of funding that go to Secretariat and cosponsors (not all of which are funds and have access to easily mobilized flexible funds). Improve joint reporting that goes to donors that goes beyond treatment issues.
ReplyDeleteCountries should be supported to budget for the AIDS response from domestic resources. With the impressive fall in costs for ARVs, ARVs could be budgeted as part of drugs and health commodities, be pooled in medical budget lines and disbursed as part of ministries of health budgets. Some form of transitioning to domestic financing of the AIDS response has to happen for domestic resources to be generated towards the AIDS response. International resources could play more a strategic role to make the bulk of the domestic investment work best in prevention HIV infections, linking people to treatment and achieving viral suppression.
ReplyDeleteUNAIDS should stop providing financial support for the cosponsors and use its limited resources to implement its own activities. The Global Fund will never be able to successfully implement its programmes at country level without the support of UNAIDS staff and support. This can be paid through a new funding partnership whereby at least 5% of all Global Fund donations for HIV should be given to UNAIDS to support its overall advoacy and technical support specific to Global Fund grants in countries and regions.
ReplyDeleteВо первых страновые офисы ЮНЭЙДС должны обладать достаточными средствами для своей деятельность, в этом случае они смогут и более успешно подключиться к продвижению вопросов которые навсегда являются приоритетными для государства, как например финнасовая поддержка программ снижения вреда для ПИН, или профилактические программы для РКС или МСМ. Для эффективной работы офис также должен иметь достаточный человеческий ресурс.
ReplyDeleteUNAIDS and the Global Fund are complementary organizations that need to remain autonomous to meet their functions. To be effective, the Global Fund needs the community mobilization, technical assistance, human rights expertise, best practices guidelines, and political expertise of UNAIDS. However, UNAIDS cannot become a subcontractor of the GF to do this. It is precisely UNAIDS' autonomy and legitimacy as a multilateral UN Member State led institution that makes it the key partner that it is to the GF and in the broader HIV response. The problem we face is that, although UNAIDS plays this critical role on the ground in the GF response, UN Member States have not been willing to recognize or adequately fund UNAIDS work (with significant individual exceptions of course). If it seems necessary for this work to now be funded from the Global Fund resources, then a funding partnership such as the one suggested by Alena might work. However, it will be necessary that UNAIDS have full autonomy to use these funds within the UBRAF and have no subcontractor type of relationship with the GF.
ReplyDeleteI am in full agreement with the All Ukrainian Network that other funding sources are greatly needed. While funding UNAIDS is the responsibility of UN Member States, having other funding streams can provide the flexibility UNAIDS needs to act, particularly in crisis situations.
• UNAIDS needs to be accountable for the delivery of technical support provided to communities and realized with the support of Global Fund : be able to deliver results and to document successes
ReplyDelete• UNAIDS needs to be able to raise innovative funding (taxes, private companies, others)
1. Clear split of activities and responsibilities between UNAIDS and Co-sponsor agencies;
ReplyDelete2. Closer coordination with TGF, especially for the similar type of work in a same regions and countries, and this will save resources for both;
3. Better coordination with other stakeholders.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete