Mbn hiv/aids evaluation final report Team of consultants

Counterpart	Main issues
Some relevant outputs + overview of violation of HR that have been cited
Southern Africa 9 out of 14	ALP (HIVOS) AFSA (ICCO) Positive Muslims (NOVIB) SACBC (CORDAID) Yoneco (HIVOS) WASN (HIVOS) SAFAIDS (HIVOS - ICCO) FACT (ICCO – Plan) NAPHAM (Plan)	- non discrimination, access to treatment and care - better regulation on HBC volunteers - challenging myths and perceptions around HIV/AIDS within Muslim community - social justice: access to treatment and children’s issues - human rights, gender violence - women’s rights around HIV/AIDS issues: ex. inheritance practice, availability of female condoms, access to ARVs - gender and human rights - rights and needs of PLWHA - rights of PLWHA	- cases of violation of rights of PLWHA brought to court + media coverage on these cases - active involvement in TAC that had an influence on the treatment roll-out programme of the government - discussions with regional department of health that lead to recognition of the need of standardisation of HBC trainings and salaries - no info (visited in phase 1) - no info (visited in phase 1) - case of violation of HR brought to court (rape case) - cases of violation of the rights of PLWHA are covered by media and addressed to the Head of State - Not much of a result so far - no info (visited in phase 1) - no info (visited in phase 1)
India 1 out of 3	SIAAP (HIVOS)	sexuality, gender and human rights: building a supportive legal and social environment	- some cases of violation of HR: ex. release of 600 HIV+women in detention - SIAAP counselling protocol recognised by NACO, trained counsellors paid by SACS

Remark: only counterparts that explicitly include an advocacy and lobby strategy and goals in their programmes are presented in this table.
The counterparts did not particularly state in their annual reports what the impact of their advocacy and lobbying had been. Little evidence is available. But, through interviews of the evaluators with the National AIDS Committee in Malawi, the Zimbabwe AIDS Network in Zimbabwe and some government officials in South Africa, the evaluators got some evidence to say that some of the CFA’s counterparts are acknowledged as being leaders in their field and important advocates for the rights of PLWHA, especially WASN, ALP and SIAAP. WASN and ALP have elaborated a well-thought-out advocacy and lobby strategy: targeted lobbying based on concrete evidence (cases and documented experiences) executed by well capacitated people. The majority of counterparts play an important role at a local level without going to scale. This can be explained by the limited HR capacity of these counterparts, the lack of lobby capacities, and missed opportunities to link their experiences and practices to national and international networks. At neither a local nor a national level have PLWHA been directly involved in advocacy and lobby activities (except as case), activities that are mostly executed by the staff of the counterparts (exception seen with the LL diocese which enabled their HIV+ beneficiaries to participate in a national NAPHAM and NAC meeting to voice their needs).
Some limited results are noticeable on a national level: in Malawi, South Africa and India, efforts of civil society did accelerate the government roll-out treatment programmes. However the number of PLWHA in need of ARV in no way resembles the actual number of PLWHA accessing ARV in the countries visited. In all the countries awareness around issues like stigmatisation, discrimination and other violations of human rights has been brought to the attention through cases brought to court and articles in the written press and media.
Most of the efforts and outputs of the counterparts visited can be seen at a local level:

• 
  awareness activities on the rights of PLWHA targeted to their constituencies (through support groups, school programmes, community mobilisation campaigns)
  
• 
  advocacy activities targeted at religious leaders and village leaders to develop HIV/AIDS activities
  
• 
  individual cases of the violation of rights of PLWHA have brought to court (but limited)