110 likes | 371 Views
Funding Local NGOs In the Response to HIV/AIDS Under PEPFAR. Pact Community REACH. Pact’s HIV/AIDS Global Grants Program. Awarded in 2001 by USAID to rapidly make available HIV/AIDS funding to INGO & local NGOs – for care & support, prevention & VCT
E N D
Funding Local NGOs In the Response to HIV/AIDS Under PEPFAR Pact Community REACH
Pact’s HIV/AIDS Global Grants Program • Awarded in 2001 by USAID to rapidly make available HIV/AIDS funding to INGO & local NGOs – for care & support, prevention & VCT • Community REACH consists of a global grants program (22 countries) & country & regional level HIV/AIDS grants programs in • South Africa - Cambodia • Botswana, Lesotho, Swaziland - Brazil • Vietnam • Greater Mekong Region
Global Outreach 7 global grants solicitations - 550 applications 2001 – 2003 – Pre-PEPFAR – Intl & local – 22 rapid scale up & intensive countries • Community HBC & support • Youth VCT – Linkages & Referrals • Reducing Stigma & Discrimination • Support to OVC 2004 – 2005 – PEPFAR – Local NGOs only • Positive Prevention, Care & Support for PLWHA – Focus Countries • Support to HBC Volunteers- Non-Focus Countries • Community Engagement in ARV Treatment – Non-Focus Countries
Why Grant to Local NGOs? • Accountability and Commitment • Passion & involvement • Transparency • Respect & trust of participants • Culturally appropriate • Provide missing link between communities and formal treatment services • Cost Effective • Embedded in local economy • Inspire volunteerism • Greater chance of sustainability
Grantee Results Prior to PEPFAR 2001-2004 • $8 million in subgrant funds to 80 organizations in 22 countries (11 PEPFAR Focus Countries)--55 local new USG partners (Average grant size $200,00 for two-three year programs) • Reached over 520,000 individuals w/ prevention messages & services through 40 outlets • Provided care & support to 75,000 PLWHA & OVC through 28 programs • Provided VCT services to over 27,000—primarily youth at 20 service points • Trained nearly 10,000 HCWs & support staff
Transitioning to PEPFARChallenges & Successes Challenges • Of 20 grant programs in 11 Focus Countries – Only 25% picked up by the COP process • 2004 Non-focus grantees roadblock to additional $ • Procurement process of funds slow • FY05 Grant Program Shifted to Non-Focus Countries: Malawi, Zimbabwe, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, Nepal, Dominican Republic, Honduras, Russia, Ukraine Successes/Adaptations • PCI- Bwafwano – Zambia, HAPCSO Ethiopia • Adapted global grant lessons learned in engaging local NGOs/FBOs/CBOs to country-level programs • OGAC revised M&E Structure – M&E workbook
PEPFAR Focus Country & Regional ProgramsSouth Africa, February 2004 Program • APS Process for INGO & local NGOs – large grants program avg. size $2.5 million for Pepfar activities Challenges • South Africa NGO Country Portfolio transitioned from single agency (s) to inter-agency management • Rigorous competition • PEPFAR M&E reporting requirements—lack of understanding Successes • Rapid funding of NGOs under PEPFAR • Broad Outreach to NGO community
Botswana, Lesotho & Swaziland – January 2005 Program • HIV/AIDS grants program to regional & local NGOs/CBOs/FBOs—avg. size $100,00 (1-3 years) for Prevention & Care • Grants – 32 Botswana, 22 Lesotho,15 Swaziland Challenges • Overwhelming response from CBOs- • Capacities of local CBOs/FBOs varies– capacity building & TA key Successes • Utilized lessons learned from South Africa APS process • Articulated PEPFAR goals from solicitation process
Vietnam January 2005 Program • Rapidly Fund & Start-up Program–One-year grants – Average grant size $300,000 to Intl and Local NGOs • Activities funded range of Pepfar activities Challenges • NGOS not familiar w/ PEPFAR goals & reporting • Treatment issues & multi-year commitment & sustainability – Central procurement & ability to sustain drugs • Procurement – Funds projected for April 2005 still not available September 2005 Successes • Able to forward fund from central mechanism • Two Treatment programs started
Implementation Issues • Procurement delays versus rapid implementation & start-up • COP process of identifying partners & local NGOS • Budgets remain fixed on preliminary plans & decided annually • Central procurement mechanisms for ARV drugs with separate NGOs & government agencies implementing programs • Treatment costs versus continuum of care