developing countries ngo delegation in the global fund board

Developing countries NGODelegation in the Global Fund

Board

Developing countries NGO

Delegation’s Mission Statement

• The Developing Country NGO Delegation represents the diverse NGO / CBO response from the global south when it comes to AIDS, TB and Malaria on the GFATM Board.

Developing countries NGOGoals

• Represent the perspectives of Developing Country NGO’s on the GFATM Board in a strategic and consultative manner.

• Inform and positively influence the governance processes of the Global Fund to better integrate non-governmental and community based efforts to fight AIDS, TB and Malaria into national and international responses.

Developing countries NGOComposition:

• 4 regions: LAC, EECA, Africa, Asia

• 26 members now

• 3 members in leadership

• Board member, Alternate Board member, Communication focal point

• 4 regional focal points

• Representatives to committees – PIC, PSC, Ethics, FAC, others

Developing countries NGO

EECA representatives in Developing NGO Delegation

• Anastasia Solovyeva, Russia

• Elena Grigorieva, Belarus

• Alena Peryshkina, Russia

• Hanna Shevchenko, Ukraine

• Albert Pancic, Bosnia

• Karlo Boras, Serbia

• Hristian Jankuloski, Macedonia

Main challenges for EECA reps in Developing NGO

• Language barrier • Huge amount of documents coming from

Secretariat• Finances – need in self-finance• Time – need in spending much time • Travelling, many meetings, long Board meetings• Many things happening around at the same time• Need to work and volunteer in the delegation at

the same time


• Lack of representation from the region in The Board, not many opportunities to delegate something to each other

• Not sufficient response from the region – people are not aware and don’t understand the importance of their participation

• Many people don’t believe that can influence on policies or change something

• Many people are not ready to tell the truth about corruption or other things happening during grant implementation


• More African oriented discussions and trends

• Donor fatigue and wish to leave EECA problems, other regions are more easy and clear

• No coordinated common regional campaign for resources (Keep it global), no strong message and demand

Developing NGO Delegation

• Supported Keep it global campaign


Last initiatives: 23d Board session

CCM Guidelines We feel strongly that an efficient, transparent, and accountable CCM can

ensure that life-saving AIDS, TB, and Malaria resources get into the hands of the people who need them most.

As we move forward, we still believe that an urgent problem within the CCM structure has to do with eliminating conflicts of interest at the national level. It is simply not realistic to expect one entity to write an application, sign the grant, implement the project, and then oversee and evaluate their own efforts!

We strongly recommend that additional mechanisms be established to monitor and assess the adoption of these new guidelines as we move forward.



Eligibility criteria

The need for two channels of funding within Round 10 demonstrates that we need to be flexible and adapt to changing country conditions.

Eligibility criteria must always be subject to a periodic review based on the impact of the three disease epidemics, world economic indicators, and our experience in implementing Global Fund grants.

We are committed to changing the Global Fund’s eligibility guidelines, despite recognizing that this will mean moving away from our demand-driven model; but the changes proposed by the donor constituencies go too far and ask too much—especially when the changes undermine a highly consultative, well-run, deliberative process.



Round 11

We support the Decision Point GF/B23/DP17 concerning the approval of Exceptional Extension Funding related to the timing of the approval of Round 11.

We are concerned about the continuity of the delivery of services and avoiding any potential gaps in life-saving services.

We believe that the launch of future rounds should follow the “normal schedule” as much as possible to allow countries to properly plan for their programs.

Developing NGO DelegationLast initiatives: 23d Board session

5-year strategy: 2012-2016 The Partnerhsip Forum needs to be used effectively as a platform for engaging

stakeholders from various sectors in providing feedback on the process of strategy development.

To be more specific: the incorporation of the Objective to Promote Human Rights and Equitable Access; the focus on reducing HIV prevalence among young people in the new strategy.

We also support the following specific goals:– When it comes to the AIDS targets, we want to see access to ART made available to a minimum of

five million people; and to reduce HIV prevalence in young people by 70%; – Regarding TB targets, we think that the targets should not only look at mortality among people with

HIV; – For malaria, we want to see specific targets clearly defined in the document; – And finally, for maternal, newborn and child health in HIV endemic countries, we suggest that the

goal should be to reduce AIDS-related maternal mortality by 70%.

Finally, in order for this strategy to be useful, it needs to be fully implemented and evaluated; and we expect to see the development of a clear implementation plan, a detailed communicatons plan, and a comprehensive M&E plan.



Comprehensive Reform Working Group Friendly Amendment :

1. The Board acknowledges that the entire Global Fund needs to move forward thoughtfully with the implementation of the overall comprehensive reform agenda and we specifically ask that the Secretariat and incoming Chair and Vice-Chair of the Board accept responsibility for ensuring the implementation of the operational and governance reforms approved in the Report of the Comprehensive Working Group (CRWG Report).

Additionally, the board asks the Secretariat to develop a detailed implementation plan and put in place a senior-level team to guide and oversee the implementation process as outlined in the comprehensive reform plan.



Office of Inspector General First, we would like to see more about the plan for integrating the work of the high-

level panel and the OIG. These two bodies need to work together and not at cross-purposes.

Second, despite legitimate concerns about how the OIG conducts his audits and investigations, we must fight against any erosion of the independence of his office. Of course, the OIG must accept the responsibility that comes with that independence and hold himself and his staff to exceptionally high standards of professionalism.

IG communications: we understand the difficulties that face the OIG when audits and investigations are occurring, but we ask that once these proceedings are complete, that the OIG’s findings are communicated as soon as possible. We also expect that the OIG will respect due process in determining when and how to release information in public venues.


Thank you! Contact us any time!

Elena Grigorieva, Belarus, [email protected]

Anastasia Solovyeva, Russia, EECA,

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

developing countries ngo delegation in the global fund board

Documents

developing countries

developing countries

time slide

global fund board slide

demand slide

macedonia slide

global campaign slide

gfatm board