4.1.2.1. Effectiveness
Considerable progress can be noted regarding the response of the CFAs to the HIV/AIDS epidemic since 2001. HIV/AIDS related jobs have been created, organisational structures (HIV/AIDS working groups/teams, focal points) have been put in place, funding for HIV/AIDS related programmes has been provided, resource materials developed, trainings organised, networks and partnerships established, pilot projects started, and public awareness campaigns conducted, all of which have increased particularly since 2003.
Response to the HIV/AIDS pandemic is mainly concentrated in the Southern - and Eastern African region with increasing efforts in the other continents (except Hivos, who has also HIV/AIDS related programmes in Latin America and Asia, already since the nineties).
The different focus of the CFA’s HIV/AIDS policy papers has been confirmed by the portfolio of counterparts, an overview of HIV/AIDS related counterparts that has been elaborated for the four countries visited (South Africa, Malawi, Zimbabwe, India). Following main differences could be identified:
-
Hivos focus on HIV/AIDS specific organisations and its strong involvement in lobby and advocacy programmes.
-
Hivos and Novib prioritise support to prevention and awareness programmes, with Novib focussing on gender based violence and the rights of women; and Hivos on sexual rights issues and specific target groups such as men having sex with men.
-
Cordaid and ICCO working with many faith based organisations that are involved in the whole prevention to care continuum. Cordaid in particular has invested in treatment programmes and has supported some experiments to that end. Cordaid and ICCO also challenge the position of the church regarding their prevention approach focussing solely on abstinence and faithfulness as well as their position regarding the rights of people living with HIV/AIDS.
-
Plan, as a child rights organisation, focuses on the support of orphans and vulnerable children, their families and communities. Plan supports programmes that cover the whole prevention to care continuum.
These differences between the CFA also have been noticed during field visits. Good practices have been found for every CFA. Some examples:
-
ALP (Hivos), an important advocacy and lobby actor in South Africa
-
NISAA (Novib), an organisation dealing with gender based violence and HIV/AIDS in South Africa
-
SACBC and St. Joseph care centre (Cordaid), that have developed good pilot projects regarding the set up of ARV sites by civil society organisations in South Africa
-
Eucumenical advocacy alliance (ICCO), challenging the position of the church and strengthening the capacities of faith based organisations in the fight against HIV/AIDS
-
Samuha/Samraksha (Plan), a “leading” HIV/AIDS specific organisation in India that formulated a comprehensive approach targeting OVC’s and the whole community they are living in.
Mainstreaming processes are difficult (this is further elaborated in evaluation question 2 and 4) and the ambitious targets (set by Novib, ICCO and Cordaid in their policy papers) were not always realistic.
The question is to what extent HIV/AIDS competence12 has been built up? Here we see mixed results:
-
Acknowledgment of the reality of HIV/AIDS is present at the different CFAs but is concentrated on a limited number of staff, mainly staff responsible for programmes in (Southern) Africa and focal points. While all programme officers should be HIV/AIDS competent (as stated in policy papers of Cordaid, Novib and ICCO), this seems not being reached yet. This is different for HIVOS because of their thematic approach.
-
Capacity to respond to the HIV/AIDS epidemic has increased due to trainings, workshops, policy development and elaboration of tools, but many members of staff are lacking practical tools and capacities to become engaged in a genuine dialogue on HIV/AIDS with their counterparts (see also EQ 2).
-
Considering the vulnerability to HIV/AIDS of the CFAs and susceptibility of staff, some efforts have been taken recently, especially by Cordaid, ICCO and Novib. The process of internal mainstreaming and HIV/AIDS workplace policies is ongoing, with mixed results, even at the level of the field offices.
Some explicative factors for these mixed results:
-
Members of staff of the CFAs are mainly generalists, hence the question is whether specialisation is not needed in such a difficult sector as HIV/AIDS.
-
The HIV/AIDS policy papers lack implementation principles and are therefore not operational enough to guide programme officers. Generalist staff need more practical tools, support and an intensive training programme that should be obligatory.
-
Cross linking HIV/AIDS with other themes is not easy for staff. All CFAs have elaborated position papers regarding the link between several themes they are working on and HIV/AIDS. Some CFAs (HIVOS, ICCO and NOVIB) have started additional research on the link between several sectors exploring how specific themes could be linked to HIV/AIDS and mutual enhancement could be achieved (e.g. Hivos on HIV/AIDS and micro credits, ICCO on HIV/AIDS and education and Novib on HIV/AIDS and livelihood).
-
The recent development projects of the MFO’s within SAN!,: Managing HIV/AIDS at the workplace, the OVC project group and in future the gender project group, are enhancing the HIV/AIDS implementation process by elaborating operational guidelines, based on research.
Dostları ilə paylaş: |
