Additional AIDS coordinating mechanisms
The Global Task Team (GTT) report (2005) notes that the broad adoption of the concept of a single national AIDS coordinating authority has strengthened efforts to streamline coordination mechanisms, which should strengthen efforts to improve accountability. However, the introduction of new funding sources has led to the development of additional coordinating mechanisms separate from NACs but required to access the financing (such as the Global Fund’s (GF) Country Coordinating Mechanism (CCM)). According to the UNAIDS 2005 survey, 81 per cent of countries have additional coordinating mechanisms on AIDS, including CCMs for the GF.
Some argue that these mechanisms add complexity and undermine the concept of the NAC as a single coordinating entity. The international community (World Bank, GF, UN) have recognised the need to clarify the links between different coordinating or funding mechanisms and the one coordinating authority. In response to recommendations in the GTT report, the World Bank and the GF commissioned a comparative advantage study which recognised that CCMs have, in some countries, competed with and confused the roles of the NAC. It recommends that both institutions encourage the unification of the NACs (or their equivalents) and CCMs wherever possible.
Some countries are seeking to increase the efficiency of coordination mechanisms by aligning the CCM with existing structures. In Tanzania the CCM and the existing coordination mechanism have been recast to form one Tanzania National Coordinating Mechanism which is responsible for coordinating all resources aimed at scaling up AIDS, TB and malaria.
Some argue that these mechanisms add complexity and undermine the concept of the NAC as a single coordinating entity. The international community (World Bank, GF, UN) have recognised the need to clarify the links between different coordinating or funding mechanisms and the one coordinating authority. In response to recommendations in the GTT report, the World Bank and the GF commissioned a comparative advantage study which recognised that CCMs have, in some countries, competed with and confused the roles of the NAC. It recommends that both institutions encourage the unification of the NACs (or their equivalents) and CCMs wherever possible.
Some countries are seeking to increase the efficiency of coordination mechanisms by aligning the CCM with existing structures. In Tanzania the CCM and the existing coordination mechanism have been recast to form one Tanzania National Coordinating Mechanism which is responsible for coordinating all resources aimed at scaling up AIDS, TB and malaria.
