AIDS funding a source of concern

THE Namibian Government needs to invest more in the overall response to HIV-AIDS if current programmes are to be sustained when donors withdraw.

A report on the cost of HIV-AIDS to the State coffers says Namibia relies heavily on external funding, with some programmes “grossly under-funded” because Government was not pumping in enough from its own coffers. In 2005, almost 63 per cent of Namibia’s HIV-AIDS response was funded through external sources and some of the Third Medium Term Plan (MTP 3) programme areas remain heavily externally funded while others were grossly under-funded, the report said.”The fact that the most commitments are made for two years or less poses challenges for long-term planning.Also the committed resources are often tied and cannot easily be made available for programme areas that are under-funded.This requires [Government] to look into more long-term and flexible funding mechanisms,” the report said.The MTP 3 was under implementation for almost four years when the mid-term review was done last June/July and took six months to complete.As a result a revised cost estimation was also done, reflecting various scenarios – low, medium and high.The report found that Namibia will need an annual average of N$1,6 billion or N$1,9 billion for the medium and high scenario, which accounts for 12 per cent and 15 per cent of the Government’s expenditure.It said that to make the HIV-AIDS response sustainable, Government needs to increase and maintain investments in prevention.”As much emphasis has been put on scaling up treatment services and much success has been achieved, the need to invest in prevention is apparent in the data given,” the report said.At the moment, implementation of Namibia’s prevention campaign is done by a wide range of partners.The national co-ordination was described as weak in the report, with a recommendation to address it structurally to reach effectiveness.Although Government, through the Ministry of Finance, makes substantial allocations for HIV-AIDS, the report said, “this is by far not enough”.”At the same time, development partners will need to strategise co-funding for the current rolled-out programmes and more effective and efficient allocation of those resources,” the report said.It proposed “basket funding” as the best practice to date and called on the Namibian Government to look at possibilities to scale that method up.Basket funding is when the funding of all donors is pooled together.According to the report, Government needs to look at capacity building holistically instead of just the Ministry of Health.”An investment in secondary education as well as bursaries for tertiary education outside of the country needs to be prioritised.Many students migrate soon after graduation abroad or to the private sector.Therefore a retention policy needs to be attached to scholarships and bursaries subsidised by both the Government and development partners,” the report said.In 2005, almost 63 per cent of Namibia’s HIV-AIDS response was funded through external sources and some of the Third Medium Term Plan (MTP 3) programme areas remain heavily externally funded while others were grossly under-funded, the report said.”The fact that the most commitments are made for two years or less poses challenges for long-term planning.Also the committed resources are often tied and cannot easily be made available for programme areas that are under-funded.This requires [Government] to look into more long-term and flexible funding mechanisms,” the report said.The MTP 3 was under implementation for almost four years when the mid-term review was done last June/July and took six months to complete.As a result a revised cost estimation was also done, reflecting various scenarios – low, medium and high.The report found that Namibia will need an annual average of N$1,6 billion or N$1,9 billion for the medium and high scenario, which accounts for 12 per cent and 15 per cent of the Government’s expenditure.It said that to make the HIV-AIDS response sustainable, Government needs to increase and maintain investments in prevention.”As much emphasis has been put on scaling up treatment services and much success has been achieved, the need to invest in prevention is apparent in the data given,” the report said.At the moment, implementation of Namibia’s prevention campaign is done by a wide range of partners.The national co-ordination was described as weak in the report, with a recommendation to address it structurally to reach effectiveness.Although Government, through the Ministry of Finance, makes substantial allocations for HIV-AIDS, the report said, “this is by far not enough”.”At the same time, development partners will need to strategise co-funding for the current rolled-out programmes and more effective and efficient allocation of those resources,” the report said.It proposed “basket funding” as the best practice to date and called on the Namibian Government to look at possibilities to scale that method up.Basket funding is when the funding of all donors is pooled together.According to the report, Government needs to look at capacity building holistically instead of just the Ministry of Health.”An investment in secondary education as well as bursaries for tertiary education outside of the country needs to be prioritised.Many students migrate soon after graduation abroad or to the private sector.Therefore a retention policy needs to be attached to scholarships and bursaries subsidised by both the Government and development partners,” the report said.