Friday, April 9, 2010
Resources
STOP TB Partnership: In the light of World TB Day on March 24, STOP TB Partnership launched a new campaign theme, “On the move against tuberculosis -- innovate to accelerate action.” Resources for advocacy include campaigning documents, posters ,T-shirts and blogs. The campaign features commitments of individuals around the world who have found new ways to stop TB and can serve as an inspiration to others. Visit http://www.stoptb.org/events/world_tb_day/2010/ for more.
Announcements/ opportunities
The Global Forum on MSM & HIV (MSMGF): Registration for the MSM pre-conference is now open. The MSM-Pre conference to be held before the 2010 International AIDS Conference in Vienna, Austria. Visit www.msmgf.org/beheard for more information.
Global AIDS Alliance: Open call for Nominations for the CEPA Leadership Council. The Campaign to End Paediatric HIV/AIDS is in the process of establishing a Leadership Council to enable individuals to play a role in advancing its agenda, including serving as spokespersons for the campaign. Country, regional and global stakeholders working on paediatric HIV/AIDS in six countries -- Kenya, Mozambique, Nigeria, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia -- are encouraged to submit nominations of individuals to Georgina Bukenya at gbukenya@globalaidsalliance.org by May 7.
United Nations MDG Summit: Leading up to the MDG Summit in New York on September 20-22, the General Assembly will convene a hearing with representatives of civil society and the private sector from June 14-15. It is now seeking nominations for speakers. The outcomes of these hearings will provide an input to the preparatory process for the Summit and be issued as an assembly document. Deadline for applications is April 16. For more information visit http://www.un-ngls.org/spip.php?page=amdg10&id_article=2263
International Health Partnership (IHP): Launched in 2010, the Civil Society Health Policy Action Fund is open to support health organizations, networks and coalitions in 21 IHP countries over a one-year period. The fund aims to support these networks and coalitions to become more effectively engaged in national health policy processes. The amount of funding available is US$25,000-30,000 from the 21 countries. Deadline for proposals is April 21. Visit www.healthpolicyactionfund.org for more information.
World AIDS Campaign & HIVOS: The MSM and Transgender Youth Regional Consultation Voices of Youth Consultation for South East Asia & Pacific is looking for applications from interested young men who have sex with men and transgendered people aged 16-25 from the region to attend the consultation, scheduled for May 12-14 in Bangkok, Thailand. The objective of this consultation is to provide a platform for them to articulate their concerns and unmet needs in relation to their sexual health, STIs and HIV prevention treatment and support. Deadline for applications is April 11. Go to http://www.worldaidscampaign.org/en/Constituencies/Men-who-have-sex-with-Men/Announcements/Call-for-Applications or contact youthconsultation@gmail.com for more information.
TB TEAM: TB TEAM with the Stop TB Partnership has announced a call for applications for inclusion in the Experts Roster in several technical categories. The pool of qualified ACSM and community experts is a key technical support mechanism for GFATM CCMs interested in developing TB proposals. Inclusion requirements and application form are available. Experts are invited to apply for more than one technical area and the roster will be revisited and reassessed on a yearly basis based on a review of mission assessment feedback. Please contact TB TEAM at tbteam@who.int if you have any queries.
Global AIDS Alliance: Open call for Nominations for the CEPA Leadership Council. The Campaign to End Paediatric HIV/AIDS is in the process of establishing a Leadership Council to enable individuals to play a role in advancing its agenda, including serving as spokespersons for the campaign. Country, regional and global stakeholders working on paediatric HIV/AIDS in six countries -- Kenya, Mozambique, Nigeria, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia -- are encouraged to submit nominations of individuals to Georgina Bukenya at gbukenya@globalaidsalliance.org by May 7.
United Nations MDG Summit: Leading up to the MDG Summit in New York on September 20-22, the General Assembly will convene a hearing with representatives of civil society and the private sector from June 14-15. It is now seeking nominations for speakers. The outcomes of these hearings will provide an input to the preparatory process for the Summit and be issued as an assembly document. Deadline for applications is April 16. For more information visit http://www.un-ngls.org/spip.php?page=amdg10&id_article=2263
International Health Partnership (IHP): Launched in 2010, the Civil Society Health Policy Action Fund is open to support health organizations, networks and coalitions in 21 IHP countries over a one-year period. The fund aims to support these networks and coalitions to become more effectively engaged in national health policy processes. The amount of funding available is US$25,000-30,000 from the 21 countries. Deadline for proposals is April 21. Visit www.healthpolicyactionfund.org for more information.
World AIDS Campaign & HIVOS: The MSM and Transgender Youth Regional Consultation Voices of Youth Consultation for South East Asia & Pacific is looking for applications from interested young men who have sex with men and transgendered people aged 16-25 from the region to attend the consultation, scheduled for May 12-14 in Bangkok, Thailand. The objective of this consultation is to provide a platform for them to articulate their concerns and unmet needs in relation to their sexual health, STIs and HIV prevention treatment and support. Deadline for applications is April 11. Go to http://www.worldaidscampaign.org/en/Constituencies/Men-who-have-sex-with-Men/Announcements/Call-for-Applications or contact youthconsultation@gmail.com for more information.
TB TEAM: TB TEAM with the Stop TB Partnership has announced a call for applications for inclusion in the Experts Roster in several technical categories. The pool of qualified ACSM and community experts is a key technical support mechanism for GFATM CCMs interested in developing TB proposals. Inclusion requirements and application form are available. Experts are invited to apply for more than one technical area and the roster will be revisited and reassessed on a yearly basis based on a review of mission assessment feedback. Please contact TB TEAM at tbteam@who.int if you have any queries.
The HIV Young Leaders Fund
The HIV Young Leaders Fund seeks grant proposals from organizations working to address the needs of young people affected by HIV in their communities, including young people living with HIV. Only youth-led organizations or youth-led projects are eligible for funding. Key activities supported by the fund are local, national, regional or international HIV advocacy; local peer-based HIV services; and community mobilization. There are two application tracts: one for Core Funding and one for Project Funding. Deadline for applications is May 1.
Download: Request for proposals , Grant application , Grant application guide .
In addition, the HIV Young Leaders Fund also announced a call for applications for its regional Community Review Panels (CRPs), a peer review system set up at regional level, comprising young leaders between the ages of 15-30 with experience working at the community level with young people affected by HIV, who review grant applications and recommend proposals for funding. CRP membership is voluntary. English proficiency is mandatory.
Download: Call for applications, CRP member application and CRP Declaration of Interest Form
Contact Caitlin Chandler at HIVYoungLeadersFund@gmail.com for any other questions you might have.
EU-India FTA negotiation
The Delhi Network of Positive People (DNP+) expressed its concern to Honorary Shri Anand Sharma, Minister of Commerce, and industry regarding the consequences of ongoing negotiations between India and the European Union for a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) on Indian generic industry. According to the text of the EU-India FTA negotiation, the EU has demanded for data exclusivity, patent term extensions and border measures that would impact access to generic drugs. Therefore, DNP+ urged the minister to cease all FTA negotiations until there is a public consultation with health groups and the public or with approval from parliament and state legislatures.
DNP+ also issued an open statement to the EU Trade Commissioner as a reminder that their attempt to pressure India to adopt TRIPS-plus provisions will highlight its indifference to the loss of lives in developing countries in Africa, Latin America and even in India.
Related media articles:
a) Pharmabiz.com: Public interest groups ask government to open EU-Indian negotiation on FTA to Parliamentary scrutiny & public debate
b) Television on CNBC: FTA protest
c) The Guardian blog: Protect the drug giants patents – and harm the health of the poor?
d) Reuters Article by MSF: EU/India trade pact could limit cheap drugs
Groups warn of funding threats to HIV treatment access
On the eve of a high-level meeting in London on March 9 chaired by the UK’s Minister of State, Gareth Thomas, on universal access, Aids Rights Alliance of South Africa (ARASA) and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) held a press conference in Cape Town, South Africa, to highlight the threats entailed in the international funding climate. They reiterated the urgent need to ensure that universal access targets are met and warned that scaling back HIV funding would prove catastrophic to individuals and communities. Please contact Paula Akugizibwe to follow up.
The Global Fund related discussions
Discussions were initiated as Gorik Ooms shared a Lancet article that looks into Global Fund performance and its contribution to strengthening the response to HIV, tuberculosis and malaria and whether it should expand its mandate to include MDG 4 and 5 and become the Global Fund for Health-related MDGs. In the discussions, activists agreed that cost-effective competition between global health priorities, such as comparing the cost of treatment for PLHIV with treatment for other diseases, should not be used as an argument to downsize or flat-fund the Global fund, and that instead, the focus should be on mobilizing additional funding through new mechanisms.
Global priorities, which focus on the obscene waste of resources on the military, wars, bail-out speculators and inequities in the tax systems must be discussed as a new way to mobilize resources for health (Svend Robinson, Mohga Kamal-Yanni, Rick Rowder).
Some activists criticised the existence of the Global Fund and its narrow mandate, citing that it deteriorates independent health systems and management capacities of countries in low resource settings (Mukosha et al) and divides civil society into two groups with conflicting ideologies: ones that does not think the Global Fund is the right tool to achieve comprehensive health care for all and one that supports its current mandate. Others disagreed and reiterated that there is no supporting argument that the investment in health system strengthening is better than disease-specific funding (Prof. Brook Baker et al). There are several arguments that confirm that the resources provided by the Global Fund have improved health outcomes not only on the three specific diseases, but on health systems overall. However, there is concern that the concept of health system strengthening through the existing CCMs of the Global Fund is too top-down and barely reaches vulnerable margins of society (Meg Davis).
In terms of expanding the GF mandate, some are pessimistic, mentioning there wont be significant additional resources and this will end up “hurting AIDS & TB programmes” and, furthermore, ART may be “downgraded as a priority by many decisionmakers in this new global health architecture”. Therefore, the discussions on mandate expansion need to be held in the current political and operational realities, as some donors are scaling down the funding and saying that it is “hopeless that replenishment targets are corresponding to mere maintenance of the current programmes of the Global Fund”. Some donors will even use shrinking resources to pay for non-Aids, -TB and -malaria programmes (Khalil Elouardighi, Gregg Gonsalves, Gorik Ooms) using cost-effectiveness arguments to decide and compare global health priorities.
Gregg Gonsalves raised important and practical questions:
a) What should we be doing if the Global Fund expands its mandate and donors provide little or no additional resources?
b) How should resources be allocated if new funding is forthcoming, but is less than needed to completely support old and new mandates?
c) What are the specific national and international political strategies in terms of resource mobilization vis-à-vis the Global Fund for MDGs?
d) How strong is our advocacy movement at the moment? What do we need to do to strengthen our own work to ensure greater funding for health?
These questions are yet to receive answers and the discussions remain open.
Resources:
The Global Fund Secretariat: The Global Fund 2010: Innovation and impact
Lancet: The Global Fund: replenishment and redefinition in 2010
The Global Fund Observer: Latest issue of the Global Fund Observer is now available
OSI blog on the Global Fund: The Global Fund for Health? If Donors Pay Up
Global priorities, which focus on the obscene waste of resources on the military, wars, bail-out speculators and inequities in the tax systems must be discussed as a new way to mobilize resources for health (Svend Robinson, Mohga Kamal-Yanni, Rick Rowder).
Some activists criticised the existence of the Global Fund and its narrow mandate, citing that it deteriorates independent health systems and management capacities of countries in low resource settings (Mukosha et al) and divides civil society into two groups with conflicting ideologies: ones that does not think the Global Fund is the right tool to achieve comprehensive health care for all and one that supports its current mandate. Others disagreed and reiterated that there is no supporting argument that the investment in health system strengthening is better than disease-specific funding (Prof. Brook Baker et al). There are several arguments that confirm that the resources provided by the Global Fund have improved health outcomes not only on the three specific diseases, but on health systems overall. However, there is concern that the concept of health system strengthening through the existing CCMs of the Global Fund is too top-down and barely reaches vulnerable margins of society (Meg Davis).
In terms of expanding the GF mandate, some are pessimistic, mentioning there wont be significant additional resources and this will end up “hurting AIDS & TB programmes” and, furthermore, ART may be “downgraded as a priority by many decisionmakers in this new global health architecture”. Therefore, the discussions on mandate expansion need to be held in the current political and operational realities, as some donors are scaling down the funding and saying that it is “hopeless that replenishment targets are corresponding to mere maintenance of the current programmes of the Global Fund”. Some donors will even use shrinking resources to pay for non-Aids, -TB and -malaria programmes (Khalil Elouardighi, Gregg Gonsalves, Gorik Ooms) using cost-effectiveness arguments to decide and compare global health priorities.
Gregg Gonsalves raised important and practical questions:
a) What should we be doing if the Global Fund expands its mandate and donors provide little or no additional resources?
b) How should resources be allocated if new funding is forthcoming, but is less than needed to completely support old and new mandates?
c) What are the specific national and international political strategies in terms of resource mobilization vis-à-vis the Global Fund for MDGs?
d) How strong is our advocacy movement at the moment? What do we need to do to strengthen our own work to ensure greater funding for health?
These questions are yet to receive answers and the discussions remain open.
Resources:
The Global Fund Secretariat: The Global Fund 2010: Innovation and impact
Lancet: The Global Fund: replenishment and redefinition in 2010
The Global Fund Observer: Latest issue of the Global Fund Observer is now available
OSI blog on the Global Fund: The Global Fund for Health? If Donors Pay Up
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)