80 likes | 192 Vues
This article explores the accountability of Country Coordination Mechanisms (CCMs) to both the Global Fund and the end users of funds. It outlines the core functions of CCMs, including the development of funding proposals, transparent nomination processes, oversight of Principal Recipients (PRs), and engagement in program evaluations. Furthermore, it examines challenges such as the need for diverse constituency representation, management of conflicts of interest, and the limitations faced by non-government entities in voicing concerns. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for ensuring transparent and effective use of global health funding.
E N D
To Whom is the CCM Accountable? An Outsider’s Point of View
CCM is Accountable on 2 levels • To the Global Fund • To the End Users of Funds
Core functions of CCMs • Coordinate development of GF proposals • Ensure transparent nomination of PRs • Oversight of PR performance of program implementation • Engage in periodic reviews of programs and complete midterm requests for continued funding
Global Fund Requirements of CCM • Funding application • CCM PR nomination • Membership representation of PLHIV • Membership of Non Govt. constituencies- Representation and selection process • Management of Conflict of interest • Must submit & follow Oversight plan
Global Fund Accountability • CCM must meet the requirements to be eligible for financing • Funding applications & PUDRs • CCM performance • Performance reporting on CCM Funding • OIG Assessments
End Users • Should contain representatives of various constituencies • Representation from PLHIV, TB, Malaria • NGOs/Community based organizations • Private Sector • Government • Development Partners • Religious/Faith based organizations • Educational Sector
End User Accountability Issues • CCM only meets quarterly, time constraints • Limited chances/willingness of non govt entities (e.g. CSOs) to voice issues, confront Govt/DPs at TNCM meetings • Conflict of Interest as some TNCM members are also GF implementers • Transparency- Info from CCM meetings doesn’t always reach constituents