SGC1 : Addressing the Gender dimensions of the epidemic

1. SGC1 : Addressing the Gender dimensions of the epidemic Do the findings and statements in the document resonate with your own experience? Generally agree. Agreed with the statements. The final report needs to be clearer about definitions used Need to separate some issues- gender norms and sexual minorities If not, how do they differ and what evidence can you direct the team to review? Some examples of additional evidence that need to be integrated: Tracking budgets Looking at action over time Looking at examples of joint programming Looking at gender staffing (number, level ) CIDA assessment of secretariat Which of the findings offer scope for practical recommendations that can be implemented? UNAIDS support to translate policy into action, to address evaporation Support planning and budgeting at country level More effective use of guidance Clear UNAIDS guidance on HIV and Gender to support countries and inform the work of joint teams Clarify the role of UNIFEM in the context of UN reform Burning issue on this topic Review past PCB decisions on gender and how these have been implanted Theme lends to concrete recommendation We need to move- time to deliver!

2. SGC 2 Involving and working with Civil Society Yes / findings generally resonate. Evaluation needs to look more on cosponsors as entire UNAIDS family, strategy on CS engagement. Recommendation How Cosponsors and Secretariat should work together & strengthening representation and accountability & strengthening CS role in policy advocacy at country level.

3. SGC3 - PLHIV Participation: very few participants – only from UNAIDS and UNESCO Findings: • More specific details about UNAIDS role required • UNAIDS cannot be solely attributed to increased involvement of PHIV • UNAIDS role has been positive, but job still remain to be done • UNAIDS has to push for the highest level of involvement(not just participation) Recommendations: • Formal representation/seat in UNAIDS Board for PLHIV • Supporting network of PLHIV develop in the agenda for the next decade in light of the changing environment • More core support for advocacy effects of PHLHIV network.

4. SGC.4 HUMAN RIGHTS • Do the findings resonate? YES (but add more on other cosponsor contributions; clarity on case examples) • Need a UNAIDS that is strong on human rights – keep up efforts, expand effort regarding key populations • Need a stronger “alarm system” to address critical, emerging country issues (convene relevant partners; backstop to help manage complex legal environment) • Need harmonisation of hRts messages/positions across the cosponsors (strong EXD and CCO leadership) • Need clear human rights responsibility and skills for all staff, especially country staff – stand up for UN values, stand with people living with and affected by HIV • DoL: need to draw on human rights strengths/partnerships of all co-sponsors (and continue/reinforce work with OHCHR) • Draw on recommendations of other group’s DoL discussion

5. SGC5. Monitoring and evaluation • Clear role for UNAIDS and largely positive evaluation • Need to address the factors responsible for the small ”e” in M&e • Need to identify barriers for further integration and coordination between global/national and UNAIDS/co-sponsors • Identification of gaps has merit but remember to identify outputs and outcomes of past actions

6. SGC6 – Technical Support • Overall agree with conclusions • Progress has been made • Technical support needs to be demand driven and of high quality • Critical role of UNAIDS in planning Recommendations: • Need quality benchmarks for TS • Systematic evaluation important Issue: • Report needs to do a better job of documenting positive findings.