Also available in: Español

Source: corresponsalesclave.org

By: Lídice López Tocón

Representatives of the Country Coordinating Mechanisms, officials from cooperation agencies, civil society organizations, and communities got together in Lima to discuss some issues related to the Global Fund. One of their main concerns was the need for Technical Assistance to improve community-based organizations and increase community engagement in Global Fund processes.

Latin America and the Caribbean Platform Community Engagement (LAC Platform), promoted by Vía Libre with the financial support of the Global Fund, was the host of the meeting held on October 27 and 28 to encourage learning and the exchange of experiences at the regional level.

Sessions on the first morning focused on presenting the new context in which the Global Fund’s actions will be developed. Some of the topics discussed during the reunion were: the New Strategy; the results of the Replenishment Conference; and the Technical Assistance opportunities that enhance community engagement in the Global Fund’s processes.

Among the positive highlights of this context, Rene Bangert from the Community Engagement Strategic Initiative, and Javier Hourcade Bellocq from Corresponsales Clave –and a Community representative on the Global Fund Board–, observed that all documents placed communities at the center of the response. This approach should translate into more significant resources and an increased promotion of actions that contribute to improving the quality of life of key populations and their engagement in policy design and implementation.

Likewise, the Technical Assistance opportunities provided by the Community Engagement Strategic Initiative also focus on people who were not usually included in the grant design or implementation processes. Said opportunities will contribute to increasing their participation in a broad dialogue for the identification of their needs and the definition of actions aimed at satisfying those needs.

The Safety and Security of people and organizations implementing grants in the field was another topic addressed during the Forum. Based on the experience that took place in Guatemala under the leadership of Rosa Gonzalez, participants described and discussed several issues that put counselors and peer educators at risk. In addition, participants pointed out some areas of opportunity: the equipment required for testing makes organizations susceptible to theft and attacks; the care and replacement of phones and electronic devices imposed by employers force individuals to protect these items, even if it puts their physical integrity at risk; and workers are exposed to sexual abuse in spaces where they carry out fieldwork, just to mention a few examples.

During the discussion, participants presented several other cases of attacks or robberies in their countries, which demonstrated a generalized situation for the Region. In response to this evidence, Javier Hourcade Bellocq, in his role as a member of the Global Fund Board, offered to submit a letter to the Secretariat so that activities to ensure the Safety and Security of implementers would be considered as a central part of the grants. He also encouraged attendees at the meeting to include these activities in their proposals.

Strategic Budgeting and the Performance-Based Funding Model

Over the years, the pressure to show and achieve the most value for money has placed an undue burden on implementing organizations. Recently, the Global Fund has been using a Performance-Based Funding Model in its negotiations. However, this model was poorly received at the meeting because most of the people involved come from civil society organizations whose grant activities often fail to achieve the goals they set out to accomplish.

Sigried Holler and María Fernanda Ávila, representatives from Instiglio, have been working hand in hand with the Global Fund and some Principal Recipients to implement this model in Latin America. Firstly, they pointed out that such a work model emphasizes the achievement of results that implementers can control. They also explained that this model offers organizations a partial payment in advance. Once they achieve the results established in a joint negotiation, they receive the final payment.

However, advocates at the meeting criticized such a commercial approach toward the services offered by the organizations. They pointed out that providing health services is different from selling cell phones, for instance. They also questioned the increased vulnerability to which this model places key populations without access to employment benefits or health insurance.

Although the model is active in some countries, there was an almost generalized rejection of it from civil society organizations.

From a different, yet related line of work, other participants shared issues related to strategic costing. Joan Tallada shed some light on where to concentrate investment to achieve more significant and better results in this area. For example, he pointed out that although the diagnosis of gay men has reached a 90% level in the care cascade, linkages and retention are only around 40%. Therefore, investing in this second area of the cascade would better than insisting on reaching the remaining 10%, and would be less expensive as well. Nevertheless, this approach also raised some criticism since the fundamental premise of the response is “Leave no one behind.”

The meeting was very enriching. In addition to learning more about the technical assistance opportunities offered by the Global Fund, the participants took home with them new alternatives for budgeting their actions as well as some new ideas that will help them negotiate with donors.