GENERAL DISCUSSION - QUESTION 2
How can UNAIDS work better as a Joint Programme to support communities, countries and partners to end the AIDS epidemic?
You are encouraged to include your name, age, gender, and location when you participate, for statistical analysis purposes. Anonymous inputs are also welcome.
In my last comment/ contribution I spoke about a community developed, led and owned health development response. I also suggested strategies for investing in institutional strengthening of CSOs: ASOs and the network of people with HIV. Transforming and resposioning the existing stock of CSO, ASOs and network organisations will catalyse the interface between community and health systems.
ReplyDeleteCloser collaboration and more joint programming with communities and partners at country level would be needed
ReplyDeleteThe UNAIDS secretariat and the cosponsoring organizations should send consistent messaging to all actors within the HIV response, not only on biomedical issues, such as HIV testing and access to medicines, but also on the importance of human rights and community engagement. As a UN entity, UNAIDS has the unique opportunity to increase political will of governments and other actors to work (ideally with civil society) on sensitive-but-critical issues. Cross sector collaboration, such as work on access to justice, redress and remedy, as well as collaboration with professional associations on improving patient care and eliminating discrimination in health care, should also be seen as key priorities. Scaling-up opportunities for community engagement (such as joint programming)at country and regional levels is also helpful in working towards the end of the AIDS epidemic.
ReplyDeleteAll 11 cosponsors have their special expertise and capacity to contribute to the ending of AIDS. The primary role of UNAIDS is to coordinate the individual agency efforts and identify areas where there are gaps in response and avoid duplication of effort. This will require adherence to a revised Division of Labour (DOL) that is aligned to the strengths and mandate of each agency. Once the DOL is agreed by all cosponsors, the Secretariat should ensure all agencies have mainstreamed HIV into their programmes. Another way UNAIDS can work better is to strengthen the coordination at country level to ensure that all the key interventions as mentioned in the UNAIDS strategy are being implemented by the different sectors in a country. Cosponsors have their line sectors they are working with and it would be UNAIDS role to support the concerned agency to work with governments and partners to implement the interventions. In a lot of cases, we are seeing UNAIDS as an agency on its own as a cosponsor and not the secretariat!
ReplyDeleteApoyar procesos de empoderamiento y organizacion asi como procesos de incidencia de cara a la sostenibilidad de la respuesta nacional al VIH
ReplyDeleteBetter communication, equal participation of communities, community strengthening and development would be key - this relates to awareness and training - there is already been done a lot but if could even be improved: invite communities to your meetings and finance its participation - invite (or force) Governments to always bring at least 20% of participants from the community at any level to UNAIDS meetings, ask governments to reach out to their community and ask them to report back to you of what they have achieved (could be part of the country reporting).
ReplyDeleteI agree Community participation is tremendous.
DeleteSome practical measures should be also reinforced:
1/male involvement in Reproductive health.In many countries, despite efforts that have been invested couple testing is progressing slowly (and sometimes inexistent)
2/ More comfortable treatment regimen to boost adherence: one tablet a day, a week and why not for longer
The definition of "Success of UNAIDS at country-level" is unclear. Nor is it clear how UNAIDS staff and teams are held accountable at country level for specific results. The current strategy just calls for "effective joint teams" as an indicator for success. UNAIDS Country level staff and teams need to be clear on what they see as their role, pick specific targets, and be held accountable for reaching targets. At country level, some teams and staff work well, but unfortunately this is not the case for many country staff and teams I have encountered. I have much more confidence in the GFATM and PEPFAR for accountability than I do for UNAIDS - since the UNAIDS country team work plan/objectives/targets are never publicly laid out and reported on as we see with PEFPAR and GFATM.
ReplyDeleteHear, hear
DeleteBy focusing / digging down to specific geographies (as they already are doing) to reach HIV-related information and services to those who most need them. They need to function more closely with communities – i.e. key populations, LGBTI communities, the disabled and people incarcerated and actually give them greater participation and voice in the deliberations. By engaging with governments (local, provincial and national) and challenging them to adopt human rights based approaches and to eliminate coercive or punitive approaches. By letting co-sponsors engage more robustly at the UN joint team on AIDS and providing them space to ensure that they deliver on their areas of comparative advantage. Again, for that, UNAIDS will require to build their own staff capacities in the context of key and marginalised populations, and focus on work at the country and sub-national level.
ReplyDeleteorienter ses maigre ressources vers le développement de mécanisme de partenarait public /privé pour capturer ce que le secteur privé fait comme contribution programmatique (structures de santé privés depuis les cabinet de soins aux hôpitaux/cliniques) et financière (dépenses globale sur le sida) et mécanisme de partenariat formel entre acteurs/structures communautaires et d'ONG local et les structures de la santé. La santé communautaire promu par l'OMS depuis ALma Ata avec les soins de santé primaire n'a pas pu se développer surtout dans les pays d'expression française. L'ONUSIDA devra drainer vers elle une partie des fonds du Fonds mondial, car si aujourdhui le fonds mondial demander de cibler les populations clé et de faire participer au CCM c'est grâce à l'ONUSIDA qui avec les partenaires de la surveillance de l'épidémie on mis en lumière ces populations dont on veut pas entendre parler
ReplyDeleteUNAIDS must take into account the changing political and demographic environment in which it is working. People on the move, be they refugees or economic migrants, now constitute an important part of societies everywhere. Their needs in terms of HIV have been neglected and will go on to present a serious problem for countries unless steps are taken to respond to their situation. Taking up this challenge in a coordinated way is long overdue and UNAIDS leadership could help accelerate this by updating all stakeholders as to the magnitude and nature of the challenge, and identifying and promoting new ways of reaching these populations on the move. Technical support to sending and receiving countries, more intensive training of health and social service staff to deal with the challenge and innovative ways of financing this are all called for and should be given more priority.
ReplyDeleteI would agree that UNAIDS needs to take into account the changing political and demographic environment and HIV in migrant populations as well as those affected by humanitarian emergencies should be prioritized. One part of the UNAIDS strategy which does not directly lend itself to this is the focus on fast track countries. There are many countries which have populations on the move/populations affected by humanitarian emergencies which are not fast track countries (though some countries may host populations from fast track countries). This should be taken into account in planning and prioritization.
DeleteIndia, the adult (15–49 years) HIV Prevalence rate is 0.26% in 2015. As per India’s Technical Report 2015, the total number of people living with HIV (PLHIV) in India is estimated at 21.17 lakhs (17.11 lakhs–26.49 lakhs) in 2015. Children (< 15 years) account for 6.54%, while two fifth (40.5%) of total HIV infections are among females.
ReplyDeleteAs part of NACP-II of NACO, Community Care Centers (CCCs) were setup to provide holistic care for PLHIVs i.e treatment for minor Opportunistic Infections (OIs), nutrition, psychological support and outreach. CCCs functioned as a bridge between ART Center and home care and served as stand-alone short-stay homes for PLHIVs irrespective of their risk status. In March 2013, as it was decided to mainstream with general health system, the CCCs were closed down without proper transition. Due this, PLHIVs among general population are greatly affected as they hesitated to prefer general health setting due to inadequate care, stigma and discrimination.
Even though wider access to ART is there in India, still 1,47,729 Annual AIDS-related Deaths have taken place in the country in 2012-13, whereas, in 2015 an estimated 67.6 thousand people died of AIDS-related causes nationally, [Post of closure of CCCs, deaths have increased among PLHIV-LFUs- as per the observation of some of the Faith Based Organizations(FBOs)].
Hence, it is suggested to start holistic palliative care homes widely in India, with a population based approach, in partnership with NGOs/FBOs, where the end of life can be given to PLHIV along with other needy patients who are suffering cancer, stoke etc.
Secondly, estimates also cite an incidence of 32,628 children infected every year through mother to child transmission, a preventable cause which continues in resource limited countries. Under the National Pediatric HIV/AIDS Initiative, 34,367 Children Living with HIV (CLHIV) are receiving ART (Annual Report of NACO 2012-13). Studies reveals that infections, malnutrition, limited access to basic health care, delayed definitive diagnosis, and lack of access to primary HIV care and ART as primary causes of mortality among HIV infected children in India.
On the other hand, positively, thanks to ART and other related measures, the life of the CLHIV get prolonged. In spite of the hurdles, CLHIV in India have become adolescents now. However, the Institutions along with the extended families which are catering for CLHIVs, especially the orphans, are facing new challenges, such as, settlement of adolescents/youngsters with HIV by providing proper education/vocational training, psycho-social issues (mainly due to stigma and discrimination) and the need of in-depth counselling/Life Skills Education thereof, facilitating their marriage, etc.
Hence it is time for UNAIDS to prioritize the issues of provision of Palliative Care for PLHIV and special attention to the needs of Adolescents with HIV in collaboration with NGOs/FBOs. Because without addressing these issues we cannot reach our goal of ‘Getting to Zero…..’
HIV and palliative care is the role of WHO
DeleteUNAIDS should show more leadership in implementation of harm reducion measures. A closer collaboration with UNODC to address punitive laws and stigma and discrimination of people who use drugs is needed.
ReplyDeleteThe UNAIDS Joint Programme should work closely with civil society and networks of people who use drugs to generate stronger evidence on the benefits of PUD- led responses to HIV, analyse how to incorporate PUD- led HIV responses in AIDS plans and to work on developing and advocating for strengthening the input of communities in designing and evaluating national and donor HIV policies, and programming frameworks.
ReplyDeleteThe Joint Programme should use its role as a broker to guide member states in recognising that people who use drugs play an essential role in AIDS response, from service delivery, to advocacy, to participation in accountability and to mobilising demand for services. The Joint Programme in a unique position to engage member states in identifying and removing legal and regulatory barriers that ensure the meaningful inclusion and quality participation of people who use drugs at all level of planning, as well as national and donor policy and programming frameworks. During advocacy on transition to domestic financing, the need to allocate investments towards community-based and community-led responses should also be pressed for, as per 39th PCB Agenda Item 4: 5.2 a) and b). This would move UNAIDS from a statement of recognition, towards addressing and taking action on this item.
Lastly, UNAIDS needs to make sure that drug user voices are included in their forums and consultations that engage wider civil society. People who use drugs need to be involved, and be represented in these spaces, if UNAIDS is true to its commitment of leaving no one behind, and is to effectively implement of the fast track strategy and reach 90-90-90 targets.
In keeping with the original intentions that UNAIDS be a coordination programme, rather than a UN agency itself, the Joint Programme should work more closely with co-sponsors, civil society and affected populations. Recent moves to fund the Secretariat at the expense of the co-sponsors belies the original spirit of the formation of UNAIDS and must be addressed.
ReplyDeleteUNAIDS also needs to generate stronger evidence on the benefits of PUD-led responses to HIV, and to analyse how to incorporate PUD-led HIV responses into national AIDS plans - advocating for the meaningful input of communities.
The Joint Programme should use its position to guide governments in:
ReplyDelete- recognising that people who use drugs play an essential role in the AIDS response - from service delivery, to advocacy, to evaluations, to mobilising demand for services.
- identifying and removing legal and regulatory barriers to the meaningful participation of people who use drugs.
- allocating domestic investments towards community-based / community-led responses, especially in contexts of transitions from international donors.
Lastly, UNAIDS needs to make sure that drug user voices are included in their forums and consultations that engage wider civil society. People who use drugs need to be involved, and be represented in these spaces, if UNAIDS is true to its commitment of leaving no one behind.
First there needs to be more joint programmes in the field that are actually jointly implemented by Cosponsors. With some advocacy, UNAIDS can get local politicians, religious/ethnic leaders or public figure involved in the HIV response. Get people talking in schools, worship places, social media on HIV/AIDS. The most difficult zero is to get rid of stigma associated with the infection. People tend to support a cause when they already lost loved ones to the epidemic.
ReplyDeleteUNAIDS should orient its programs (and subsequently, that of its joint partners) in order to prioritize fragile states for training on sexual violence topics in order to prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS for State, Non-state, and civilian actors.
ReplyDeleteIdeally, this would be done using forms of training that are highly visual in nature but avoid casting any particular demographic in an antagonistic lights. This is difficult using analog photos or videos, but can be rather simply done using simulation training and simulated training materials/tools.
jorge Beloqui, Brazil
ReplyDeleteRespect the GIPA Principle, for example, which was set by UNAIDS itself. When UNAIDS set its 90-90-90 targets in 2014, during the Melbourne COnference, it ignored the discrimination and stigma that fuels the epidemics for PWHA and vulnerable populations. Even more, it seemed as if PWHA were as vectors to be controlled for the expansion of infection. Instead of proposing the treatment for the good of PWHA, it was proposed to control the epidemics, and not as a choice to be offered for PWHA (for higher CD4 counts, for example). Only one year later, the START study provided definite evidence of the benefits of early treatment. Had UNAIDS respected the GIPA principle, probably we would have a better perspective on the needs to controle (I do not dare say END) the epidemics. I think UNAIDS` targets (also embraced by WHO) look at controlling the epidemics, and secondarily to the right to treatment, health and dignity of PWHA and vulnerable populations. And also ignores morbidity and mortality targets! These targets seem to operate exclusively with herds, not individuals.
This perspective needs to be changed! Here in Brazil we faced Guidelines for ARV treatment (2013) with similar spirit, unfortunately!
UNAIDS set a public consultation on the Targets AFTER having launched them! Public Consultations should be set BEFORE launching these policies!
UNAIDS does a lot of talking about the need for the involvement of community organisations in the response for it to be effective, citing the % of funding that should be directed towards community organisations (and which currently isn't). But it does not do much to address it. Notwithstanding reduced funding for UNAIDS, there are still plenty of opportunities for directly funding these organisations through the Joint Programme, as well as advocating strongly with governments, other donors, and within the Joint Programme for this to happen.
ReplyDeleteOutside Africa (and even within Africa to some extent) the epidemic is still being driven by the traditional KAPs. We are never going to get to the first '90' unless communities representing those populations are funded to be centrally involved in the response.This is because given the criminalisation and stigma tend to cause people from those communities to not want to engage with government institutions.
UNAIDS could: fund them directly, leverage their influence for others to fund them, persuade governments that it is in their interests to work with them at some level, support them through training and development, ensure that their voices are heard. Nobody else is able to do this.
The Joint Programme, albeit being certainly a best practice in the UN in terms of coordination, could work better in terms of coordination on the ground. It is not rare that at global level and country level to see the Secretariat take the lead on issues that would be better handled and responded to by one or more cosponsors and this is detrimental to image of the joint programme on the ground. At the regional and country levels, acknowledging that certain agencies are not represented in all countries, the Secretariat’s role becomes all the more crucial to ensure that areas often neglected by countries are included in proposals, considerations, national plans, etc. The secretariat would be key to ensure such technical request are referred to relevant cosponsors for remote technical support and guidance and collaboration with in country stakeholders, including other cosponsor and the secretariat. This does not occur sufficiently. Also, with an ever changing and shrinking funding scenario, coordination and prioritization is extremely important and at times difficult among the joint team. The fact that donors have extremely hardly earmarked funding renders the coordination complicated among the joint programme members – areas to work together instead of in silo approaches should be promoted and funded accordingly. The donor community needs to invest more in joint proposals if they want to see better joint work on the ground to support communities and national identified priorities.
ReplyDeleteWith 90% of new HIV infections occurring in the fast track countries UNAIDS should continue to focus its efforts here. It should be clear what UNAIDS is and is not seeking to achieve in country. Such a process would strengthen accountability and make it clearer to UNAIDS staff what they are seeking to deliver. Working together across the Joint Programme clear criteria should be developed for allocating resources to Co-Sponsors with funding linked to delivery of the strategy/achievement of results – this links back to the point about accountability.
ReplyDeleteMost important is in our opinion is to have in place clear, transparent and understandable plan of separate and joint work for Secretariat and Co-sponsors in AIDS area. The plan should describe very clearly roles, activities and results, that can be archived by co-sponsors UNAIDS Secretariat.
ReplyDeleteJust to stress what one of the commentators has said: UNAIDs appears as an agency on its own rather than coordinating and ensuring implementation of its strategy by co-sponsors. This has been a result of some unnecessary competition that we sometimes see between UNAIDs and its co-sponsor (UNAIDs and UNDP for instance on HIV, gender equality and human rights issues). There would be also an improvement if a mechanism for holding inter agencies accountable on their respective mandates according to the internal division of labour. The issues of young key populations, HIV and disability rights, HIV and aging have not received sufficient attention despite being highlighted as areas that might be left behind.
ReplyDeleteThere needs to be clarity on "who" and the "what" needs to work when we talk about working as a joint programme. UNAIDS is a secretariat who's main function is to coordinate yet somehow the UNAIDS office has become synonomous with the joint UN AIDS programme. The co-sponsors - the various UN agencies - that are part of UNAIDS, should be doing the bulk of the programming, as per their mandate and area of focus - UNODC supporting PWID and HIV, WHO on guidance, UNICEF on children and adolescents, UNFPA on young people etc. This means funding, programming, leadership should be from these agencies, at country level, regionally and globally with UNAIDS secretariat in a supporting role. The Secretariat has played a wonderful role in advocacy at all levels, but needs to strengthen it's capacity to coordinate, bring partners and governments together and provide the space and platform for UN agencies and partners to "do" the work. UNAIDS country offices are slowly becoming stand-ins for agencies, and mission creep is creating duplication rather than clarity.
ReplyDeleteAgreed, the whole focus of the SDGs is aimed at mainstreaming and integration - if the secretariat moves away from its role in co-ordination and bringing partners together towards implementation we essentially have an agency which is setting up vertical AIDS programmes/policies - I don't believe this is what we want to see. Each agency has a mandate in a certain area, e.g. UNODC (PWID), UN Women (Gender equality), UNHCR (Humanitarian settings), WFP (food and nutrition support) etc etc and what we need to see is HIV being integrated fully into these existing programmes. In this sense, programmes can be much more holistic and meet the various needs of populations on the ground. This is especially critical when funding is going down. UNAIDS is good at advocacy and co-ordination, and there is no need to duplicate implementation efforts.
DeleteA great question. I think there are two very simple answers.
ReplyDelete1. Focus resources on fast-track countries so that we can really get things moving.
2. Make it a condition for finance from the Secretariat and donors that implementing partners, especially the Co-Sponsors, provide clear, transparent and timely data on what they spend the resources on and what results they get. This information should be given quarterly and published on the UNAIDS website.
UNAIDS can work better through closer collaboration and joint programming with communities and partners at country level.
ReplyDeleteUNAIDS can improve as a joint programme to support communities and partners at country level through closer collaboration and stronger involvement of these stakeholders in the joint programming efforts.
ReplyDeleteUNAIDS can strengthen its relevance and presence in HICs/donor countries (such as Canada) to create heightened awareness and engagement of communities on the ground, and further strengthen relationships with donor governments to ensure the global AIDS response is fully-funded.
ReplyDeleteI disagree and feel that UNAIDS should focus its scarce resources on fast track countries. Such engagement in HICs would have a high opportunity cost.
DeleteThe priority for UNAIDS should be on need which they, themselves, have defined as the fast-track countries.
DeleteI think that new strategy of UNAIDS should focus on 3 areas:
ReplyDelete1. Promoting and supporting initiatives aimed to price reduction of essential medicines and goods, including tests, such as pooled procurement mechanisms, patent oppositions, advocacy for easing intellectual property requirements which hamper access to affordable innovative medicines and methods.
2. Promotion of the right to health as it is explained by OHCHR: capacity building of civil society in advocating and protecting right to health. Although, different documents of OHCHR state that social rights are equal to all others, traditionally, social rights are not in the focus of national and international stakeholders, who mainly focus and advocate for political and civil rights. There is strong need for capacity building of CSO in understanding and advocating right to health.
3. Enhancing inter-sectoral cooperation on regional and national levels.
1. UNAIDS claims that there are 18.2 million people on treatment.
ReplyDeleteSince 2014, the UNAIDS treatment estimate has increased by 4.6 million people while funding from donor governments has declined by $1 billion and overall global AIDS funding is flat. How do the numbers keep growing while the funding is down? Also, where is the massive scale-up in procurement, human resources and testing the would be needed to identify and link this many more people to care?
2. UNAIDS should consider doing an independent audit by a third party on a sample of treatment data from different countries to ascertain that the total number of people on treatment is not inflated.
3. Overstating the number of people on treatment around the world is detrimental because it understates the amount of resources that is still needed to fight AIDS. It creates a sense of progress toward the 90-90-90 goals even though there are still huge gaps on the ground like ARV stockouts, test kit and condom shortages and discriminatory policies that haven’t been addressed.
4. More needs to be done to fund the Global Fund. Japan is the third largest economy in the world — it donated $800 million to the Global Fund during the Fifth Replenishment. China is the world’s second largest economy — it donated $18 million. The community and the Global Fund need to reach out to donors like China and other who didn’t doanate or donated very little, and encourage them to give more.
5. Countries that are designated as Middle Income by the World Bank face serious challenges with access to foreign assistance such as Global Fund funding and have to pay substantially higher prices for essential medicines, including antiretrovirals and TB drugs. This impacts many countries with concentrated epidemics, especially in the Latin America/Caribbean region and Eastern Europe and Central Asia. The lower income threshold for being considered a Middle Income Country is only $2.86 per day per person, so as countries rise even just slightly above absolute poverty they are being rationed out from them pool of countries eligible for assistance, even though they still have a great need for help. MSF, AHF and a handful of other organizations have been advocating on this point with the World Bank and other institutions, but this issue needs to be taken up by the community in a much bigger way, otherwise very soon all but a handful of least developed countries will be eligible for any kind of HIV/AIDS assistance.
6. Above all, we need strong, impassioned leadership and advocacy from UNAIDS. UNAIDS needs to lead the way in advocating for more resources to fight AIDS around the world and to keep the epidemic at the top of the global development agenda. There needs to be a re-newed sense of urgency about AIDS, 1.1 million deaths and 2.1 million new infections per year is unacceptable. To remain relevant, UNAIDS needs to take a bold position and be willing to openly criticize governments that are not doing their part.
В первую очередь, необходимо сфокусироваться на усовершенствовании профилактических программ и их подробном анализе.
ReplyDeleteБыло бы важно работать в области повышения потенциала национальных партнёров по вопросам лабораторных исследований, клинических аспектов, психосоциального консультирования, проведение эпидемиологических и научных исследований.
ЮНЭЙДС должна быть программой продвигающей инновационные подходы в профилактических программах.
ReplyDeleteМинимизировать бюрократические издержки. В современном мире, организации нужно очень быстро реагировать на внешние обстоятельства и факторы. Бюрократия убивает организацию изнутри. Все процедуры должны быть минимизированы, а уровень принятия решений и ответственности делегирован страновым офисам.
UNAIDS' unique co-sponorship system gives it the potential to play a powerful convening role at the national and global level of UN agencies and other stakeholders. Instead, far too often inter-agency competition continues to have primacy over collaboration, especially at the national level, and some UCDs' ability or willingness to overcome such divisiveness is inadequate or inconsistent. Outreach and inclusion of other partners, including civil society, is also weak in some countries. The HIV response would be far more effective if UNAIDS had a stronger mandate to play this convening role, or if there was greater accountability for UCDs' success in carrying out this role.
ReplyDeleteIn addition, UNAIDS is very good at creating new initiatives that powerfully communicate priority areas of action and associated messages. Yet communication between the Secretariat and the field on such initiatives can be slow, unclear, or inconsistent. In such cases the potentially high impact of such initiatives is greatly diminished.
How can UNAIDS work better as a Joint Programme to support communities, countries and partners to end the AIDS epidemic?
ReplyDeleteAlthough UNAIDS appears to be “a victim of its own success” UNAIDS raison d’etre remain still to work closely as a joint programme and streamline a multi sectoral approach. The level of commitment and engagement of all co-sponsors remain key to achieving such objectives. UNAIDS need to engage with new partners to broaden expertise for the delivery as one. The presence of lawyers and judicial advocate has been a good tool in some areas meanwhile the inclusion of new member’s i.e. OHCHR, IOM as co-sponsors as well as ICRC and IFRC in the board will be important although full recognition of the budgetary constraints that might impact the UBRAF common basket is warranted.
In view of the present financial scarcity, UNAIDS need an innovative partnership with major regional institutions such as African Development Bank, OCDE, Islamic Bank etc.… among others who have programmes targeting common areas. This can be an entry point to leverage resources.
The next priority at the country, regional and global level should take into account the evolving context globally. A total of 19 out of the 35 Fast-Track countries are considered among the top 56 most fragile states in the world. The joint programmes work should focus those countries to deliver in some programmatic areas in order to better assist the communities living under vulnerable conditions... Among those communities left behind in the prioritisation, i.e. uniformed services, law enforcements agents, immigration officers, migrants and displaced population etc.…..
Мы группа молодых людей и активистов в сфере ВИЧ/СПИД из Узбекистана открыли эту страничку с целью того, чтобы Вы поддержали нас и присоединились к нашей кампании #Don’t close UNAIDS Country Office in Uzbekistan. В ближайшее время со стороны Штаб-квартиры ЮНЕЙДС планируется закрытие офиса в Узбекистане, и чтобы донести до руководства ЮНЕЙДС, что офис в Узбекистане не должен быть закрыт и нужно продолжить его работу мы решили открыть эту страницу. Напишите ключевые послания для руководства ЮНЕЙДС и разместите свое фото с посланием на данной страничке, тем самым Вы поддержите нас в нашей идее! Спасибо Вам за поддержку!
ReplyDeleteWe are- group of young people and HIV- activists from Uzbekistan open this page with the intention of you support us and join our campaign #Don't close the UNAIDS Country Office in Uzbekistan. We decided to open this page because In the near future UNAIDS Headquarters planned closure of the UNAIDS Country Office in Uzbekistan and we want to convey to the Executive Leaders of the UNAIDS should not be closе UNAIDS Country Office in Uzbekistan and need to continued its work. Write key messages to UNAIDS Executive Leaders and place your photo with messages on this page, thus you will support us in our Campaign! Thank You for your support!
https://www.facebook.com/Dont-close-UNAIDS-Country-Office-in-Uzbekistan-1630956803878974/
UNAIDS should further develop its potential to serve as an implementing partner for some innovative HIV programs. UNAIDS now successfully plays this role in several countries in Eastern Europe & Central Asia, and complements inputs from the Global Fund and other health and development partners, but this role should be greater expanded where there are technical and programmatic needs. This builds on UNAIDS unique mandate and strong relationship with all partners, without getting into the potentially compromising role of delivering direct HIV services.
ReplyDelete• UNAIDS could increase technical support for the areas like key populations. In a number of emerging key populations epidemics (e.g. drug use in East and West Africa) a lack of local expertise is observed and additional resource needed to provide technical support to the response. More cross-regional exchange could be supported to share experiences in EECA and East Africa, for example;
ReplyDelete• With increased emphasis on the 90-90-90 strategy, we believe it is key for UNAIDS to continue its support for prevention programs for key populations in concentrated epidemic settings.
Мы группа молодых людей и активистов в сфере ВИЧ/СПИД из Узбекистана открыли эту страничку с целью того, чтобы Вы поддержали нас и присоединились к нашей кампании #Don’t close UNAIDS Country Office in Uzbekistan. В ближайшее время со стороны Штаб-квартиры ЮНЕЙДС планируется закрытие офиса в Узбекистане, и чтобы донести до руководства ЮНЕЙДС, что офис в Узбекистане не должен быть закрыт и нужно продолжить его работу мы решили открыть эту страницу. Напишите ключевые послания для руководства ЮНЕЙДС и разместите свое фото с посланием на данной страничке, тем самым Вы поддержите нас в нашей идее! Спасибо Вам за поддержку!
ReplyDeleteWe are- group of young people and HIV- activists from Uzbekistan open this page with the intention of you support us and join our campaign #Don't close the UNAIDS Country Office in Uzbekistan. We decided to open this page because In the near future UNAIDS Headquarters planned closure of the UNAIDS Country Office in Uzbekistan and we want to convey to the Executive Leaders of the UNAIDS should not be closе UNAIDS Country Office in Uzbekistan and need to continued its work. Write key messages to UNAIDS Executive Leaders and place your photo with messages on this page, thus you will support us in our Campaign! Thank You for your support!
https://www.facebook.com/Dont-close-UNAIDS-Country-Office-in-Uzbekistan-1630956803878974/
•Continue to support and collaborate with civil society at the country, regional and global levels (especially youth organisations, women's organisations, and networks of key populations);
ReplyDelete•Provide better and more strategic advocacy and communications approaches, based on a human rights approach and ensure that the rights of people living with HIV are protected and respected;
•Focus on mainstreaming the HIV/AIDS agenda at the national level throughout several ministries, including the Ministry of Finance;
•Involve and ensure the meaningful participation of youth and adolescents in the work of the organization;
•Ensure greater linkages to sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR), including ‘Comprehensive Sexuality Education’;
•Establish stronger and more effective resource mobilization strategies, including with the private sector at the country level; and
•Maximize opportunities for greater collaboration with global and regional civil society organizations to support UNAIDS strategy.
Алла Яцко, Молдова - ЮНЭЙДС должен оставаться значимым ресурсом в каждой стране из проблемных регионов и продвигать на ряду с лучшими практиками и стратегиями противодействия ВИЧ, вовлечение и учет вклада общественных организаций и ключевых сообществ на разных этапах внедрения ответа. Часто привлечение сообщества носит формальный характер, особено в конфликтных регионов этот вопрос особено важен.
ReplyDeleteЮНЭЙДС может и должен способствовать обеспечению синергии между разичными инициативами регионального или даже международного уровне, в контексте в котором все чаще внедряются инициативы воздействия на национальный или локальный уровень через региональные сети.
ReplyDelete• UNAIDS needs to ensure that the policy positions, resource guidance and guidelines they develop at the center are effectively rolled-out to regional and country level and that their implementation is monitored and evaluated.
ReplyDelete• The UNAIDS Strategy lacks visionary boldness. It continues to compartmentalize men who have sex with men, sex workers, people who inject drugs, and transgender people, leaving the false impression that these populations are only important in some places, some of the time, and in relation to only certain types of interventions.
• UNAIDS failure at the High Level Meeting - i.e. their weak leadership, lack of vocal support for inclusion of key populations and generally their poor defense of civil society and lack of support provided to country missions in NYC– so we are now left with a poor realisation of how HIV is happening in the world.
• Unequal level of UNAIDS commitment and engagement with communities at country level
• Naming UNDP as a lead for HIV work ? Reasons for that will be : better positioned raising money and framing HIV into a development framework ; Better of engaging multiple skaholders