RESUMEN
Peru has received around $70 million from Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (Global Fund). Recent economic growth resulted in grant ineligibility, enabling greater government funding, yet doubts remain concerning programme continuity. This study examines the transition from Global Fund support to increasing national HIV/AIDS funding in Peru (2004-2012) by analysing actor roles, motivations and effects on policies, identifying recommendations to inform decision-makers on priority areas. A conceptual framework, which informed data collection, was developed. Thirty-five in-depth interviews were conducted from October to December 2011 in Lima, Peru, among key stakeholders involved in HIV/AIDS work. Findings show that Global Fund involvement led to important breakthroughs in the HIV/AIDS response, primarily concerning treatment access, focus on vulnerable populations and development of a coordination body. Nevertheless, reliance on Global Fund financing for prevention activities via non-governmental organisations, compounded by lack of government direction and weak regional governance, diluted power and caused role uncertainty. Strengthening government and regional capacity and fostering accountability mechanisms will facilitate an effective transition to government-led financing. Only then can achievements gained from the Global Fund presence be maintained, providing lessons for countries seeking to sustain programmes following donor exit.
Asunto(s)
Apoyo Financiero , Infecciones por VIH/prevención & control , Formulación de Políticas , Promoción de la Salud , Humanos , Cooperación Internacional , Perú , Investigación CualitativaRESUMEN
Peru has applied to six of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (the Global Fund) rounds for funding, achieving success on four occasions. The process of proposal development has, however, been criticised, especially concerning the use of evidence, relevance/consistency and performance indicators. We aimed to analyse the Peruvian Global Fund proposals according to those dimensions, providing feedback to improve future local efforts and inform global discussions around Global Fund procedures. We analysed the content of four HIV-focused proposals (rounds 2, 5, 6 and 8) regarding epidemic context, needs identification and prioritisation and monitoring and evaluation systems. Peruvian proposals submitted after round 1 were described as resulting from collaborative inputs involving formerly unrepresented sectors, principally 'vulnerable populations'. However, difficulties arose regarding the amount and quality of evidence about the epidemiological context; limited consideration of social determinants of the epidemic; lack of theory-driven interventions, and little synergy across projects and the inclusion of weak monitoring and evaluation systems, with poor indicators and measurement procedures. Prioritising the development of analytical and technical skills to generate Global Fund proposals would enhance the country's capacity to produce and utilise evidence, improve the technical-political interface, strengthen information systems and lead to more informed decision making and accountability.