Re: Important India CCM Announcement: No Round 9 Application

[Guest guest]

Dear Forum,

/message/9566

It is a shame that CCM India has decided not to have any new proposals for GFATM

Round 9 as put up on their website.

But, why should the people and the country suffer because of the laxity and bad

work by the three disease control programme managing units under the MOHFW

because of which the round 8 country proposal got rejected by the GFATM?.

The meaning of getting the country proposal under Category 3 is that it was a

bad proposal with serious shortcomings and major technical or structural flaws.

And the CCM India has decided it will resubmit the proposal and there will be no

new call for proposal for round 9.

Were they not very cocky when they submitted the proposal that despite serious

and evidence based challenges asked of them even when the proposal was being

formulated that it was not good, they continued to do so.

Now they are making the people and the country suffer because of a fault of

their own making! What kind of justice and equality of opportunity is that?

What kind of accountability and transparency is there in the GFATM affairs in

India?

In my view, this is an utter fraud, to call the least. This is sheer and blatant

bluff they are playing on the civil society.

I would like to ask five questions in this regard.

 

1. Why should they (the three disease control units under the MOHFW) be not held

accountable for doing a shoddy job?

Why should responsibility not be fixed who was responsible for the shoddy job

which resulted in the failure? The rejection of the Round 8 proposal means that

the country has lost the funding opportunity (over US$ 300 Million) as well time

delay (atleast one year) in securing funds for critical interventions. Who is

responsible for that?  

 

2. Why should it (the CCM and the three disease control units) be allowed to

resubmit the same proposal with changes, there is no guarantee that the

" revised " proposal will be acceptable and found suitable for funding. If for

some reason the revised Round 9 proposal is also rejected by the GFATM (which is

very much possible), who will be responsible?  

 

3. Why should the civil society and the private sector organisations not be

allowed to participate in the revision and make it open to all?

Why should they be denied the opportunity to come up with a new and better

proposal? There were over 250 proposals out of which this proposals were

selected, so have the screening committee and the TRP gone wrong, or they made a

mistake? or were they deliberatly and schemingly keeping some people out and

others in?

 

4. Civil society has been take for a ride to work on new thrust, priority areas

and focus areas for R9?

Several workshops and meeting have been held recently, sponsored by NACO/SACS in

the regions to discuss the new areas proposed for R9?

Was that an eye wash?    

 

5. Why should not the consultants/agency who were hired to write the R8 country

proposal be penalised for the job not done properly?

Why should not the agency that engaged and paid the consultants be asked to

return the fees they were paid for the job? Why should UNAIDS not be penalised

who facilitated the formulation of the R8 country proposal?        

We should demand a public hearing of the failure story and ask for explanations

from people who have let us down?

 

I think civil society, private sector partners, the CCM India members (who still

maintain some sense and sensibility and independence), media and other vigilant

partners should now atleast please stand up and call foul?

 

In solidariy, hope and belief that god sees the truth but waits...

It is not over yet.    

Thanks  

Dr Sanjeev Kumar,

New Delhi India

e-mail: <sanjeevbcc@...>

[Guest guest]

Dear List members,

/message/9566

Irrespective of whether we achieve of fail in any round, I think it is time to

have a Public Hearing on GFATM funds in India and its efficacy to fight the

three diseases.

I feel civil society needs to take lead on this and invite government, private

sector and civil society currently receiving GFATM funds to present their status

/ impact reports, and have a discussion on that in a transparent manner.

Warm Regards,

Rajiv

Rajiv Dua

e-mail: <rajivdua@...>