About Harm Reduction Funding

Guidance from World Health Organization (WHO), United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) suggests that reversing an HIV epidemic requires 60% of all people who inject drugs (PWID) to be reached regularly by a needle syringe program (NSP), and that 40% of all opiate users be enrolled in opioid substitution therapy (OST).

Governments of Central and East Europe and Central Asia (CEECA) provide less than 15% of harm reduction funding needed in the region, which indicates region’s strong dependency on international donors who support both NSP and OST. At the same time, many of the countries in the CEECA region are becoming ineligible to receive donor funding due to increasing GNP per capita level. There are no more countries in CEECA that are classified as low-income – the funding priority for key donors such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.

Epidemics among PWID cannot be reversed without greater and sustained state funding of harm reduction. Investments are needed to improve service quality and coverage level of both NSP and OST. Governments and other domestic sources have responsibility for meeting these investment needs. Their increased and sustained engagement is essential because the Global Fund is swiftly withdrawing from the region to concentrate on supporting low-income countries across the globe.

One of the key priorities of Eurasian Harm Reduction Association (EHRA) is to build capacity of PWID communities in CEECA in budget advocacy – a process enabling civil society organizations and communities to monitor and influence state decisions for the allocation of public funds towards harm reduction programs and better solutions safeguarding people’s health.

Budget advocacy by communities may have the greatest impact on actions of authorities, and in its turn, on the lives of people. With that in mind we believe that:

  • It is crucially important to engage PWID community in planning through estimating the unmet needs for harm reduction services and defining priority items for a policy agenda change and financing;
  • Allow for direct financing of civil society through social contracting or similar mechanisms, to deliver harm reduction and HIV and TB services to PWID, is the most evident way for the governments to sustain services and funding;
  • An important consideration is that cost-effectiveness can best be obtained not by cutting services, but by making them more efficient through their optimization.

Increasing national funding should go hand in hand with reversing harsh prohibition laws and change of enforcement policies that discriminate PWID. Otherwise scale-up in funding would not convert to increased program coverage.

Regional meetings of EHRA members to elect Steering Committee members in Russia and South-Eastern Europe

On 21 May – 4 June, 2018 EHRA conducts online Regional Meetings of it’s members to elect new Steering Committee representatives in the following regions:

  • Russia (Russia);
  • South-Eastern Europe (Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, the Kosovo territory).

All members (individual and organizational), who are from the above-mentioned regions and who are approved by the Steering Committee have a right to vote in the Regional meetings.

If you have any questions, please contact General Secretary of the Regional meetings – Eliza Kurcevič members@harmreductioneurasia.org

 

Russia

 

Alexander Levin

Know your candidate
Motivation Letter

Maxim Malyshev

Know your candidate
Motivation Letter

South-Eastern Europe

Samir Ibisevic

Know your candidate
Motivation Letter

Miso Pejkovic

Know your candidate
Motivation Letter

I do it – IDUIT

Author: Olga Belyaeva, Advocacy Manager, EHRA.

«I was impressed by three unique events recently: seeing the Moon through a telescope, a concert by the rock band Leningrad and our training workshop. Alexander Kudryashev, Minsk. After our meeting was compared to the Moon and the creative and self-sufficient musician Shnur I feel entitled to publish my notes for people who organize meetings for people who use drugs*.

So here’s the task: hold a training workshop based on IDUIT,  which was created by the International Network of People Who Use Drugs with the support of UN agencies. It’s important that we understand and have a clear definition of the role we want to play in the decision-making process and in the implementation of those decisions.  We also need to understand how we can progress from being manipulated by the system to being able to influence decisions, shape state policies and strategies regarding drug policy and programs for people who use psychoactive substances. UN agencies developed guidelines on the proven and scientifically-based interventions that can influence the risks of spreading HIV and Hepatitis C among people who use drugs[1]. The International Network of People Using Drugs (INPUD) developed the IDUIT Practical Guidance that aims to preserve the values of harm reduction and allow community-based implementation of programs during the development, implementation and evaluation of necessary interventions. IDUIT describes how programs for people who use drugs can be carried out from the point of view of meaningful involvement of the communities in decision-making, program implementation and monitoring of their effectiveness. The document answers the following questions: what can we do and what should we do today, given the resources in hand and the circumstances we are in, to stop the spread of HIV and hepatitis C among people who use drugs?

How can we, during the three days of the workshop, share the knowledge and experience of thousands of people who, in some countries, survive despite provocations, killings based on suspicion only and torture, and in others, live safe lives, take part in medical heroin programs and work in cannabis grow shops or drop-in centres?

Here are the three components which the living energy of the meetings stems from:

a person from the community who believes it’s extremely important personally for him, for his family and friends to solve the systemic problem that results in repression against people who use drugs. Such a person attracts people with a purpose who are dedicated to changing the society’s attitude to substances and drug policies. There is a community of OST patients in Belarus called “Your Chance” and a movement of students who have the same goals as we do –  decriminalization of all substances and humane drug policy.

conditions. In the countries of our region where the drug policy is repressive and the rights of people who use drugs are very difficult to reinstate, the venue for the meeting should be free from any monitoring or control systems. It shouldn’t be a hotel with security and video cameras that contribute to increased nervousness and risks. Negotiate with a local drop-in-centre; ask people where they feel safe and comfortable in the city. It will help maintain positive dynamics and energy for change within the group. Also, the money that you’ll pay for the venue and food will go to the harm reduction programs and not to some business’ pocket.

– source of energy to keep moving. For all the living things on earth it’s the sun. For a community movement it’s its values.  An IDUIT coach should have a clear vision of the goal he’s leading the group towards, a coach who doesn’t need words to make us see the future we’re heading for. One’s right to privacy and to deciding whether to use a substance should be protected. Why did doctors in Amsterdam offer an apology to a guy they delivered methadone to while he was out but didn’t wait for him in order to say hello? While in our countries nurses end up behind bars for opening OST sites.  We drew up a layout of our drop-in centre which is cozy and has sustainable financing. It’s the first step towards understanding what we have at the moment and what can be changed. During the discussion, we ascertain and reiterate that it’s impossible to achieve safe and effective risk reduction programs without decriminalisation and science-based regulation of the psychoactive substance market. In Belarus, there is zero tolerance towards substances and people who use drugs. Any amount of substance, starting from 0.00..3 is already too much. “Too much” means 6 to 8 years in prison. The list of illicit substances is drawn up in a way that makes any new synthetic drug formula illegal. When synthetic drugs were legal, – say the participants, – they were used as stimulants: they made things and colours a bit brighter and the high from them made users feel better. Then access and formulas became more complicated. Now we are talking about adolescents of 12 to 14 years of age who consume cocktails the effects or risks of which are impossible to control. And we can’t even talk to them about the risks and ways to reduce them because the system will see it as propaganda of use, especially among minors. Only adults aged over 18 can enroll on harm reduction programs.

 We have to be careful all the time about what exactly we’re discussing due to the risk of being jailed for spreading such knowledge. What is “IDUIT”?  It’s a description of approaches to and examples of creating a world in which people who use drugs are free to be themselves. That’s why we study each chapter of “IDUIT” through hands-on training where key values and foundations of the community-based approach are able to manifest themselves: motivational integrity, clear unambiguous goal, realities of the drug scene and ways to preserve the health and mental strength of people who are forced to be invisible for everyone, especially for the system, to survive.

 Chapter One of IDUIT:  empowering the community. We focused on a real-life situation that OST clients in Belarus are faced with – issues with the right to receive medication for self-administration. At the time of the meeting on March 27-29, a new instruction on OST, which included mechanisms for dispensing the drugs, passed the first stage of agreement by experts and civil society. During stage two, when the law enforcement agencies and other executive authorities were to approve the draft instruction, the chapter on dispensing medication for self-administration was removed.   Sergey Kryzhevich and Sergey Gartsev, leaders of the public organisation of OST patients “Your chance” had been responsible for preparing the documents on the part of the community. Together with the participants of the workshop they chose and invited experts to consult with regarding the next steps. This was the key moment for attracting allies and partners – when people are ready to hear about your motives and tasks, understand the goals and see what can be done right now to support the initiative. As a result, we prepared a letter to the Minister of Health requesting a suspension of the approval of the OST instruction and asking to reinstate the chapter on dispensing medication for self-administration. We collected 47 signatures and took them to the Ministry of Health of the Republic of Belarus. We wrote to the UN agencies and to the Global Fund. We organised meetings and telephone consultations with relevant agencies: UNODC and UNAIDS. With the help of the Chairperson of the Country Coordination Mechanism (CCM) – Deputy Health Minister – a working meeting has been arranged involving all those who developed the Instruction, as well as addiction doctors, representatives of UN agencies, OST patients and drug control representatives. The meeting will take place on April 11 and will aim at agreeing the full and final version of an Instruction that will observe the human right for affordable and quality medical care. We have a week to prepare for the meeting thoroughly. Our task before it is to establish the position of all participants and to hold consultations. During the meeting, we take notes and put the outcomes of the discussions in writing immediately after it wraps up. And, of course, we are working on a plan B. The question of dispensing drugs to take home is a fundamental one: people are tired of having to choose between family and addiction treatment, career and addiction treatment, travel and addiction treatment. This is about understanding what Chapter One of the Guidance means in practical terms: it’s about empowering the community through clarifying goals, motives and clear distribution of tasks within a team. It’s also about the meaningful participation of the community in decision-making.

This is Chapter Two of the Guidance: legal reform, human rights, stigma and discrimination. It’s difficult to talk about the rights of people who use drugs in a country where a patient recovering from an overdose in hospital sees the police next to him and then he is taken from the hospital bed straight to court and to prison for three years. People fear that they might attract attention of drug control services if they’re caught looking up overdose treatment for bath salts on the internet. The war on drugs means eight years in prison which in turn means loss of health, money, illness and suffering in the family – things that are completely disproportionate to the effect and quantity of the drug they consumed and subsequently are being punished for.

It was an inspiration to learn there is a movement of students in Belarus who united to achieve humane and reasonable drug policy. We discussed the practical side of decriminalization in Portugal and the Czech Republic. The leaders of OST patient communities had already visited these countries and were confident that we could achieve a similar level of respect for the rights of people who use drugs. We discussed areas where we can support each other especially in the circumstances where we must think about the safety of the experts who help people who use drugs.

Chapter Three of the Guidance – health and support services from the point of view of the community. We discussed the lifestyle of a teenager who suffers from substance abuse. We heard about the work being done with relatives and friends of drug dependent teenagers in order to reduce risks. We prepared draft memos for people who use bath salts drawing on the practical experience of the participants such as people who consume stimulants and doctors. It’s the most pressing issue in Belarus: users of synthetic stimulants (new psychoactive substances) avoid any contact due to repressions, when going online to look up tips on sleep after taking bath salts could attra

ct troublesome attention from authorities. We’ve come up with a plan to spread information. After watching the film “Bevel Up: Drugs, Users & Outreach Nursing”, shot about ten years ago and showing work of Canadian street nurses, the participants realized how far other countries have progressed towards humane and not discriminating attitude towards drug users compared to our countries.

In order to get closer to people who make or influence decisions, a meeting was organised with the representative of the Global Fund Grant Management Group in Belarus. We invited our colleagues from other groups vulnerable to rights violations to this meeting to form partnerships and communicate with community networks. Anya Nazarova, the leader of an initiative to help HIV-positive women (Belarus), attended it. By the time this blog is published, Anya should already become the head of a registered organization.

Chapter Four of IDUIT described community-led harm reduction service delivery approaches. The Global Fund grant for 2019-2021 is set to continue unchanged, but there is an opportunity for pilot projects. Building on their priorities, the workshop participants decided to prepare an application to the Community, Rights and Gender (CRG) Technical Assistance Program to justify the adjustments that should be made to some of the harm reduction programs so that they meet the needs of people who use synthetic substances. We also discussed the creation and funding of community-based and community-led drop-in centres. The money for our services is trapped within the system of repression and war on drugs. We need resources to prepare the rationale and proposals for change. We decided that the application for technical assistance under the Community, Rights and Gender program will help with the rationale.

When we arrived at Chapter Five – Program Management, hiring people who use drugs – employment-related questions arose. The meeting participants told us that harm reduction organizations require employees to give a written statement saying that they are aware that it’s forbidden to work while under the influence of drugs or alcohol. The case of Sergey Kryzhevich shows that even the Supreme Court can’t issue a just ruling – he was unable to get his driver’s license back or cancel the fine of 1000 euros even though the evidence suggesting that he had been intoxicated was obtained with violations of some key procedures. In the Republic of Belarus, it’s illegal to be in the workplace in the above-mentioned state.  And we, the workshop participants and the employee of the Global Fund grants management team, were asking ourselves why harm reduction programs require their staff to sign such statements when they hire them for the very reason they use substances and therefore are able to help others reduce risks; what can those statements protect the employer from, and what risk do the outreach workers take when they sign them? The issue of the labour rights of people who use drugs has been up for an open discussion. This is the basic principle of the IDUIT Guidelines: to recognize human rights and freedoms, and if that’s not achievable today, to help by all means to achieve the ultimate goal: to exercise the human right to privacy, to respectful, affordable and safe social and medical assistance based on real needs of people who use drugs.

4:20   4th of April 2018

The training workshop was organized on the initiative of the UNODC Regional Office for Eastern Europe, prepared and conducted by the Belorussian public organisation “Your Chance” and the Eurasian Harm Reduction Association.

[1] http://www.who.int/hiv/pub/idu/targets_universal_access/en/, the 2012 version. Geneva, WHO, 2013.  Consolidated guidelines on HIV prevention, diagnosis, treatment and care for key populations–2016 update. Geneva, WHO, 2016.

Global Fund grant to Belarus in 2015 was conditional on the government developing a social contracting mechanism

Author: Ivan Varentsov

A social contracting mechanism which would allow the government to contract with NGOs to deliver prevention programs to key affected populations in Belarus is “under construction.” It is a slow process and there are still some uncertainties about how well it will function.

Background

A mechanism allowing the government to co-finance social services and projects being implemented by NGOs has existed in the Republic of Belarus for a number of years and has been regulated under the Social Services Law. However, under this law, it is not possible to financially support the provision of NGO-based HIV prevention services among key affected populations.

An analysis carried out by Belorussian NGO “ACT” in 2016 (on file with the author) identified the following barriers to government financing of NGO-based HIV prevention activities imposed by the Social Services Law:

  • subsidies are provided only for salaries;
  • subsidies for social projects are provided only where the government commits to paying 50% of the costs (or less); the NGO commits to paying at least 50% of the costs; and the NGO possesses funds to cover its share;
  • subsidies were available only for services to be provided to “citizens in difficult life situations”; people who inject drugs (PWID), sex workers and men who have sex with men (MSM) are not considered to fit this definition under the legislation;
  • the Social Services Law does not cover health care; there is no legislation covering social contracting for health care and, therefore, HIV prevention services;
  • “outreach worker” is not among the types of jobs listed in the Belorussian official job classifier, so it is not possible to include salaries for them within social contracting under the Social Services Law; and
  • under the Social Services Law, services can be provided only upon the written consent of the recipient of the services, so services cannot be accessed anonymously, which effectively makes it impossible to provide services to key affected populations.
 In November 2015, a grant agreement in the amount of $12,309,479 to support the HIV response was signed between the Global Fund and the Republic of Belarus for the period 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2018. According to the Grant Confirmation document (on file with the author) signed between the Global Fund and the Government of Belarus, among other matters, the parties agreed that in order to support prevention services for key populations before 30 September 2016 the Government of Belarus has to ensure the development of a social contracting or other relevant financial mechanism allowing NGOs to receive governmental funding for these purposes.

It is important to mention here that under the new funding model introduced by the Global Fund in 2013, before the grant confirmation (previously called the grant agreement) is signed, a Framework Agreement outlining all of the terms and conditions of the grant has to be signed between the Global Fund and the relevant government. The grant confirmation becomes an integral part of the Framework Agreement.

“Introduction of the social contracting mechanism for HIV prevention into legislation became possible mainly due to the fact that the Framework Agreement signed between the Global Fund and the Belorussian Government in October 2015 has the status of law in the Republic of Belarus. The grant agreement which was signed by the Global Fund and the principal recipient on behalf of the Ministry of Health is an integral part of the Framework Agreement. Therefore, the obligation to establish the relevant social contracting mechanism was confirmed by the Belorussian government legislatively,” explained Elena Fisenko, Head of the HIV division of the Global Fund Grants Management Department in the Republican Theoretical and Practical Centre for Medical Technologies, Informatization, Management and Economics of Healthcare of the Republic of Belarus.

This obligation on the part of the government resulted in the inclusion in early 2016 of a number of HIV-related activities, including those focused on key affected populations (KAPS), into Sub-Program 5 (“HIV prevention”) of the Governmental Program “Health of Nation and Demographic Security of the Republic of Belarus” for 2016–2020 –– implying that the provision of governmental subsidies to NGOs for implementation of the activities would start in 2017. Necessary funds were budgeted for these purposes, but this was done before the legislation to allow for social contracting was actually being developed.

Protracted process of the mechanism introduction

To ensure the development and introduction of the proper social contracting mechanism in the health care sphere allowing NGOs to receive governmental funding for HIV prevention activities among KAPs, the process of changing the relevant legislation (The Law on Prevention of Socially Communicable Diseases and HIVwas initiated in 2016. It took more than a year to adopt the necessary amendments and pass the new version of the law –– the process was completed only in July 2017. Moreover, an additional six months were needed to prepare and enact all necessary subordinate legislation once the law comes into effect on 19 January 2018.

Initially, this mechanism was expected to start working by the end of 2016, but this never happened.

“Changes in legislation happen very slowly. It is really fast that in two years we managed to have legislation changed and prepare all regulations and procedures for approval of the social contracting mechanism in health care. It could have been done in 2016 only if relevant changes in legislation had been launched in 2014–2015,” said Valery Zhurakovski, an expert in the NGO “ACT,” a local organization advocating for introduction of the social contracting mechanism in health care, and particularly in the sphere of HIV prevention since 2010.

Consequences of the delay for HIV prevention programs

The government’s Program for HIV Prevention 2016–2020 included a plan to start funding NGOs to deliver services through a social contracting mechanism starting in 2017. It was expected that the Global Fund would remain the main donor of these programs in 2016, and that its share of the funding would then start to decline, finally ending by 2019 –– whereas government funding through the social contracting mechanism would start increasing in 2017, and would continue to grow, thus ensuring a smooth transition from the Global Fund’s support of HIV prevention programs among key affected populations to full government funding by 2020 (see table). But this didn’t happen in reality.

Table: Planned budget of the Governmental Program of HIV Prevention for 2016–2020

Objectives of the program: Reduction of HIV transmission among populations with high risk of infection (injection drug users and their sexual partners; male and female sex workers; MSM; prisoners; adolescence practicing high risk behaviors.
Ordering party Sources of funding Amount of funding (Belarus rubles)
Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Global Fund 81,300,200 35,925,200 27,713,400 19,661,600 0 0
Oblast government, Minsk government Local budgets 162,641,400 548,300 17,087,400 33.612,800 53,804,900 57,598,000

 

Because the social contracting mechanism was not yet developed, the funds being planned for 2017 under the Governmental Program on HIV Prevention for 2016–2020 for support of NGO-based HIV prevention activities were spent on other needs that the regional governments deemed important.

Nevertheless, a government financial contribution to prevention services for key populations in 2017 was partly ensured through supporting the work of 10 HIV prevention units based in government healthcare facilities that provided anonymous counselling to people who use drugs. This partially reduced the additional financial burden on the Global Fund grant in 2017 caused by the necessity to ensure the provision of a decent level of prevention services in the absence of government funding through the social contracting mechanism.

“As it is clear that in 2018 prevention services will again not be fully covered by government funding through the social contracting mechanism, the Ministry of Health decided to considerably increase its purchase of ARVs from the governmental budget in 2018. Thus, funds initially budgeted for that purpose within the Global Fund grant could be reprogrammed to support prevention services among affected populations,” Fisenko said.

Social contracting mechanism

According to the government’s draft “Regulations on the conditions and procedures of social contracting in the area of socially communicable diseases and HIV prevention” (on file with the author), social contracting will be implemented by providing NGOs with “subsidies” from local budgets for services and (or) projects aimed at preventing socially communicable diseases and HIV. (In Belarus, all official documents use the term “subsidies” to describe the funding available through social contracting.) Subsidies for the implementation of projects will be granted under condition of partial co-financing by the NGOs, likely at the level of 20%. The subsidies may cover a wide range of expenses, including: NGO employees’ salaries; administrative expenses (i.e. rent, stationery, bank expenses, office equipment maintenance); project activities; and the purchase of items to be distributed (such as syringes, needles, sterile napkins, motivation packs, lubricants, condoms and information materials).

Social contracting will be implemented on the local (oblast) level. The contracting will be managed by the oblasts, particularly the health care committees which will be responsible for announcing tenders. Funds will be provided via the relevant government programs –– in the case of HIV prevention, the Governmental Program on HIV Prevention for 2016–2020. For each tender, the process will produce a winning bid (or bids) from among the NGOs that participated, after which the oblast will arrange for contracts to be signed and the subsidies to be provided.

It is expected that contracts with the implementers could be for a period of up to five years, depending on the framework and timelines of the government programs. However, Fisenko told Aidspan that funding will most likely be provided one year at a time.

The draft regulations do not mention specific target groups. ACT’s Valery Zhurakovski explained: “The epidemiology can vary from oblast to oblast and thus it will be up to each oblast to determine what the target groups are for the funding.”

According to the draft criteria for evaluating the tender proposals (on file with the author), among the factors to be considered are (a) the work experience of the organization in the area of socially communicable diseases and HIV prevention; and (b) experience working with the representatives of the target groups –– i.e. the intended recipients of the service.

Potential obstacles for the introduction of the social contracting mechanism

Experts outlined some of the problems that may be encountered when introducing the social contracting mechanism. One potential problem is related to decision to implement the mechanism at the oblast level rather than the republican (i.e. central government) level. “In local budgets, funds are allocated first to certain obligatory budget lines,” explained Irina Statkevich, CCM member, and Head of the local NGO “Positive Movement.” “Social contracting is not one of those lines. Thus, in the event of a budget deficit, funding within the local budget would be spent first on the priority areas, and the activities to be supported within the social contracting mechanism can appear to have no financing at all if there are not enough funds left over.”

Another possible problem is that the majority of the local bureaucrats have no previous experience with social contracting, especially in the area of HIV prevention for key affected populations. And the idea to allocate funds to support the work among such groups as PWID, MSM and sex workers may seem as a quite a revolutionary idea for most of them.

“I am not sure about authorities’ readiness to name in tendering specifications the target groups in a way we do,” Zhurakovski said. “There was no precedent up to now to have them in official documents.”

Zhurakovski added: “Also, in some places, local authorities consider the grown-up working population to be the target group for HIV prevention programs. In such cases, workplace interventions to prevent HIV may become the priority for them. That’s why some local bureaucrats may decide to allocate part of funds planned within the government program for these purposes.”

According to Elena Fisenko, an additional problem is that the budget for 2018 has already been set, based on laws and regulations already in effect. The amendments to the law introducing social contracting in prevention of socially communicable diseases and HIV are effective only as of January 2018. Thus, no oblast government has budgeted funding for social contracting for 2018. “In practice, it will mean that approximately in February or March 2018, oblast governments will have to change their already approved budgets which, in any case, can be done only on a quarterly basis. And the best-case scenario is that money for social contracting will appear in local budgets starting from the second quarter of 2018,” said Fisenko.

The role of civil society

The importance of the role of civil society representatives in the introduction of the social contracting mechanism for socially communicable diseases and HIV prevention in Belarus deserves to be mentioned separately. On the one hand, experts who contributed to this article highlighted the transparency of the process of developing the social contracting mechanism by the authorities, as well as the possibility for NGO representatives to participate in this process. On the other hand, for a number of years, civil society representatives were actively advocating for adoption of this law and also for keeping to the principles of NGOs work in providing prevention services to key affected populations within the framework of this mechanism. The NGO “ACT” merits a special mention as it has been leading the advocacy work on social contracting in HIV prevention for many years and had vast experience in dealing with the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection in the context of social contracting implementation under the Law on Social Services. For this reason, the representatives of ACT took an active part in development of all key documentation on social contracting in Belarus, including the development of relevant legislation, bylaws, drafts of resolutions of the Council of Ministers, and so on.

It should also be mentioned that advocacy activities of ACT with respect to a social contracting mechanism have been financed for a number of years from Global Fund grants. This can serve as a good example for how the Global Fund could successfully contribute in middle-income countries to the transition from donors’ support of HIV prevention services for key affected populations to national funding.

“Our work is focused not only on the social contracting. We are also advocating for the creation of the enabling environment for the work of NGOs in the country in general, including exploring other options for attracting funding –– such as foreign grants or donations, charity and also changes in the approach for the taxation in this sphere,” Zhurakovski said. “We are in active on-going communication with the relevant department regarding the possibility of changing the procedure for NGOs for registration of foreign grants or donations in Belarus by lowering the threshold. We work closely with the Ministry of Finance, the revenue authority and Parliament regarding changes in the approach to taxation of local fundraising. We understand that a social contracting mechanism is not able to solve all the problems and cover all needs. Organizations will nevertheless need other resources and it is necessary to make it easier for them to get the access to the resources needed as well as to facilitate this process.”

Original publication on aidspan.org