ABSTRACT The Office of the Inspector General says that the HIV grant to the Caribbean Community Secretariat is a good model of how a regional grant can benefit small island states.
The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) found much to admire in its diagnostic review of a Round 9 HIV grant to the Caribbean Community Secretariat (CARICOM). The OIG said that it had observed many good management and programme practices in the implementation of the grant, and that the grant was a good model of how a regional grant should work in small island states.
A diagnostic review is less detailed than an audit. The objective of the CARICOM diagnostic review was to identify and share good practices, identify key risks to which the grant programme was exposed, and make recommendations for risk mitigation where weaknesses and gaps were found.
The activities of the grant were administered by its seven sub-recipients (SRs). The total grant budget for Phase 1 was $11.2 million of which $9.5 million had been disbursed at the time of the review, which was done in July 2012.
The programme implemented under the grant had two main thrusts: (a) strengthening health systems and supporting the delivery of antiretroviral therapy in six countries of the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS); and (b) preventing HIV infection among marginalised groups of people and promoting the realisation of their human rights in all 16 countries included in the programme. The programme was managed in coordination with other international donor-funded programmes in the region and was complementary to programmes supported through Global Fund country grants for HIV in Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Jamaica, Guyana, Suriname and Belize.
The OIG said that the programme demonstrated the rationale for multi-country Global Fund support in two ways:
The OIG said that it spotted many examples of good management and programme practices by the SRs and sub-SRs visited during the diagnostic review. The following were among the examples cited by the OIG in its report:
At the same time, the OIG identified a number of risk related to programme design. Despite the fact the activities delivered by SRs and sub-SRs were consistently of high quality, they did not fit into an “overall shared program logic,” the OIG said; each SR was a silo. The reasons for this, it said, were two-fold: (a) the geographic, social, linguistic and political realities of the Caribbean; and (b) the difficulty of applying the “Global Fund model” to a regional grant.
The OIG said that this is best illustrated by the performance framework of the grant which assessed performance on the basis of services delivered (i.e. outputs), while the sphere of influence of most grant activities was at the level of changes in the environment in which these services were delivered and changes in the expertise and capacity to deliver them. These changes were not easily captured in the Global Fund performance monitoring instruments and processes, the OIG said.
The OIG also said that linkages among SRs were weak, which made it hard to share good practices.
The OIG said there is a risk that implementing Global Fund programmes will take some NGOs away from their main spheres of work. The programmes for prevention and support among vulnerable populations, which represented by far the largest budgetary component of the grant, were implemented by two regional networks: COIN and the Caribbean Regional Network of People Living with HIV/AIDS (CRN+). However, the OIG said, the mandate of a regional organisation is not typically to reach people with prevention and care services.
The report on the diagnostic review in CARICOM is available on the Global Fund website here.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!