US embassy cable - 04THEHAGUE2872

UNCLAS THE HAGUE 002872 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
STATE FOR S/GAC/PEARSON AND EUR/UBI/HOLLIDAY 
HHS FOR OGHA/STEIGER 
STATE PASS USAID FOR GH/MILLER 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: KHIV, PREL, TBIO, NL 
SUBJECT: DEMARCHE REQUEST: U.S. GOALS FOR GLOBAL FUND BOARD 
MEETING IN ARUSHA, TANZANIA 
 
REF: SECSTATE 232461 
 
1.  Sensitive but unclassified.  Please protect accordingly. 
 
2.  Econoff delivered reftel talking points to Stuart 
Flavell, Director of the Global Network of Positive People 
Living with HIV/AIDS and Dr. Marijke Wijnroks, Health Advisor 
in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 
 
3.  Flavell flatly opposes postponing round five.  The Global 
Fund is demand driven, he said, and that demand is measured 
by annually soliciting grant proposals. To postpone a round 
would be to violate a commitment central to the Fund.  The 
Fund's future effectiveness depends on its commitment to its 
founding principals (among them annual rounds) and current 
and future principal recipients (PRs) being able to 
anticipate yearly rounds with confidence. 
 
4.  Econoff used talking points on the lack of grant 
reporting and documentation as well as statistics from para 
eight to highlight management problems at the secretariat. 
Flavell conceded that the secretariat has management 
problems, and said that PR performance was also an issue he 
took seriously.  However, he countered that there were 
processes and procedures for managing poorly performing PRs. 
If PRs are not meeting their reporting obligations they 
should not receive their next drawdown.  If fund managers are 
not abiding by these processes, then that should be 
addressed, rather than postponing round five.  To points on 
secretariat overwork Flavell responded he thought the 
 
SIPDIS 
secretariat could cope with a round launched in the second 
 
SIPDIS 
half of 2005.  Financing, he thought, would not be a problem. 
 
 
5.  On the issue of phase two renewal decisions, he said he 
would support the MEFA proposal, but explained that the crush 
of renewal reviews consistently overwhelms his small 
delegation. 
 
6.  GONL Health Advisor Marijka Wijnroks believes that it is 
politically important to launch round five in 2005, unless a 
very strong case against it can be made.  In her eyes, that 
case would hinge on the Fund's financial and budgetary 
criteria.  Wijnroks agreed that the fund's first priority 
should be supporting phase two renewals.  It would be hard to 
justify launching a new round at the expense of projects 
already underway.  She conceded the possibility of a funding 
shortfall was real and if that were the case, she "wouldn't 
want to hurry" launching a fifth round of grants. 
 
7.  To talking points on the lack of adequate documentation 
and reporting of grant progress, Wijnroks responded that she 
had not heard it was an issue.  She had heard some complaints 
of overwork at the secretariat, but was not aware it could be 
causing management problems.  Processes are in place to 
incent PRs to make regularly scheduled reports.  Ironically, 
PRs have complained to her that the Fund's required quarterly 
reporting was burdensome for them. 
 
8.  Wijnroks said she understood the reasoning behind the 
proposed process for phase two renewals. She and her 
constituency have agreed to support it, and she believed it 
would be adopted. 
 
9.  Comment:  Though both stated they were firmly in favor of 
a round five next year, Wijnroks was receptive to financing 
shortfalls as a cause for postponing it.  Both Flavell and 
Wijnroks seemed interested in the more egregious instances of 
lackadaisical grant management.  Wijnroks said she knew 
little more about management problems than what was on the 
Fund's website.  It has not come up in her meetings with the 
Fund's managers.  If there is strong evidence of poor 
management then it should be presented.  Flavel responded 
that he wanted portfolio managers to enforce built in 
incentives for PRs to achieve results and report them. 
Flavell told econoff he suspected there were political 
reasons (he cited perceptions the Global Fund is not 
sufficiently engaging faith-based PRs) for the "lack of USG 
commitment to the Fund."  He said he wanted a clear 
(monetary) commitment from "the administration" that it was 
solidly behind the Global Fund.  End Comment. 
SOBEL