Transparency in the fight against HIV/AIDSBack to Overview
The 2014 ATI assesses the transparency of four organisations that have a specific focus on the health sector, including programmes to combat HIV/AIDS. The findings overall are positive, with all of the organisations placing in the fair performance category or above.
Individual performance varies; GAVI ranked 4th, the Global Fund ranked 10th, Gates 23rd, and the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS relief (PEPFAR) ranked 30th. Despite their lower scores, both the Gates Foundation and PEPFAR are amongst the biggest improvers in the Index, both having begun publication to the IATI standard in 2014.
All the organisations have demonstrated a commitment to improving their transparency, making more information available on their activities in comparable formats:
- All are currently publishing to the IATI standard. GAVI, Global Fund and Gates have committed to publishing at least 70% of the fields assessed in IATI in their implementation schedules. They have also published transparency policies that make disclosure of information the rule rather than the exception.
- The organisations consistently publish basic activity information including project titles, dates, status and descriptions. Classification information is also frequently published, including flow and aid type, sector and sub-national location information. PEPFAR and GAVI are among only seven organisations (of 68) publishing the budget identifier, which aims to help align information on development flows with recipient country budget classifications.
However, there still remains work to be done. Some vital information on HIV/AIDS programmes is still not being published:
- The Global Fund publishes limited forward-looking information on the budgets allocated for activities in recipient countries and PEPFAR documents are redacted in places meaning that financial commitments and objectives are not consistently available for all activities.
- The Gates Foundation does not publish performance information (results, conditions and impact appraisals) on its projects consistently. GAVI and PEPFAR also perform poorly in this area.
These gaps in information still need to be addressed in order to achieve greater coordination and efficiency of programmes working to combat HIV/AIDS.