PATH, Seattle, US.
Infectious Diseases Research Collaboration (IDRC), Kampala, UG.
Ann Glob Health. 2020 Nov 5;86(1):140. doi: 10.5334/aogh.2961.
The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria was founded in 2002 as a public-private partnership between governments, the private sector, civil society, and populations affected by the three diseases. A key principle of the Global Fund is country ownership in accessing funding through "engagement of in-country stakeholders, including key and vulnerable populations, communities, and civil society." Research documenting whether diverse stakeholders are actually engaged and on how stakeholder engagement affects processes and outcomes of grant applications is limited.
To examine representation during the 2017 Global Fund application process in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Uganda and the benefits and drawbacks of partnership to the process.
We developed a mixed-methods social network survey to measure network structure and assess perceptions of how working together in partnership with other individuals/organizations affected perceived effectiveness, efficiency, and country ownership of the application process. Surveys were administered from December 2017-May 2018, initially to a set of central actors, followed by any individuals named during the surveys (up to 10) as collaborators. Network analyses were conducted using R.
Collaborators spanning many organizations and expertise areas contributed to the 2017 applications (DRC: 152 nodes, 237 ties; Uganda: 118 nodes, 241 ties). Participation from NGOs and civil society representatives was relatively strong, with most of their ties being to different organization types, Uganda (63%), and DRC (67%), highlighting their collaborative efforts across the network. Overall, the perceived benefits of partnership were high, including very strong ratings for effectiveness in both countries. Perceived drawbacks of partnership were minimal; however, less than half of respondents thought partnership helped reduce transaction costs or financial costs, suggesting an inclusive and participatory process may come with short-term efficiency tradeoffs.
Social network analysis can be useful for identifying who is included and excluded from the process, which can support efforts to ensure stronger, more meaningful engagement in future Global Fund application processes.
全球抗击艾滋病、结核病和疟疾基金成立于 2002 年，是政府、私营部门、民间社会和受这三种疾病影响的人群之间的公私合作伙伴关系。全球基金的一个关键原则是国家自主权，通过“让国内利益攸关方参与，包括关键和弱势群体、社区和民间社会”来获得资金。记录不同利益攸关方是否真正参与以及利益攸关方参与如何影响赠款申请的过程和结果的研究有限。
检查 2017 年全球基金在刚果民主共和国（DRC）和乌干达的申请过程中的代表性，以及伙伴关系对该过程的好处和弊端。
我们开发了一种混合方法的社会网络调查，以衡量网络结构，并评估与其他个人/组织合作对申请过程的有效性、效率和国家所有权的影响。调查于 2017 年 12 月至 2018 年 5 月进行，最初针对一组核心参与者，然后针对调查中提到的任何个人（最多 10 人）作为合作者。使用 R 进行网络分析。
跨越许多组织和专业领域的合作者为 2017 年的申请做出了贡献（DRC：152 个节点，237 个关系；乌干达：118 个节点，241 个关系）。非政府组织和民间社会代表的参与相对较强，他们的大多数关系都是与不同的组织类型，乌干达（63%）和 DRC（67%），突出了他们在网络中的协作努力。总的来说，伙伴关系的好处是很高的，包括在两个国家的有效性都很高的评价。伙伴关系的缺点很少；然而，不到一半的受访者认为伙伴关系有助于降低交易成本或财务成本，这表明一个包容和参与性的过程可能会带来短期的效率权衡。
社会网络分析可用于确定谁被包括和排除在过程之外，这有助于确保在未来的全球基金申请过程中进行更强有力、更有意义的参与。
