UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 PRETORIA 001175

SIPDIS

INFO
AMCONSUL DURBAN
AMCONSUL CAPE TOWN
AMCONSUL JOHANNESBURG
DEPT OF HHS WASHDC
CDC ATLANTA
USAID WASH DC

SENSIITIVE

STATE FOR S/OFFICE OF GLOBAL AIDS COORDINATOR,
PMAMACOS
STATE PLEASE PASS TO USAID FOR GLOBAL BUREAU APETERSON
HHS/PHS FOR OFFICE OF GLOBAL HEALTH AFFAIRS WSTEIGER

E.O. 12948: N/A
TAGS: KHIV EAID TBIO PREL SF
SUBJECT: LOVELIFE AND GLOBAL FUND

REF: STATE 45041


1. (U) SUMMARY: The loveLife Global Fund grant in
South Africa is approaching its renewal. In response
to Reftel, Embassy Pretoria is providing information
about the loveLife project and about the Country
Coordinating Mechanism in South Africa. END SUMMARY.


2. (U) Reftel requests information about the loveLife
Global Fund grant supporting HIV/AIDS prevention
activities aimed at 12-17 year olds. The loveLife
goals are to address high-risk behavior among young
people by promoting hope and living positively.
Program components include radio, TV, print, and
billboards; 6,000 trained volunteers; a telephone
helpline; 16 youth centers; 260 youth-friendly
clinics; support to 50 non-governmental organizations;
and school programs.

Grant number, Phase 1 & 2 Amounts
--------------


3. (U) A Global Fund Grant of $70,354,000 (SAF-102-
G02-C-00) was awarded to loveLife effective August

2003. A total of $12,000,000 was approved for the
first two years, which has been fully disbursed.
loveLife is currently applying for Phase 2 Grant
Renewal. April 1, 2005 is the date for the 20 month
Phase 2 evaluation.

Overall Comments and Recommendation
--------------


4. (SBU) Post recommends that the loveLife grant be
continued. In light of loveLife's failure to meet
some significant targets, the renewal should be for
one year, with close monitoring of loveLife's program
and further funding contingent upon (a) independent
evaluation of program effectiveness and (b) loveLife
meeting program targets.

Technical Considerations
--------------


5. (U) The fifth quarter loveLife report (August
October 2004) indicates that the grant is meeting some
of its goals and not others. Of concern are three
important targets that are not being met:

Indicator Target (to Oct 04)Results
--------------
Numbers of young120,00061,049
peop

le participating
in "chillroom" programs

Average number of 135,20082,212
clinical services
accessed by young
people (10 19)

Number of young people 168,00071,024
completing loveLifestyle
programs (clinics and franchises)


6. (U) It is important to note that the targets
indicated here were recently revised as agreed upon by
loveLife and Global Fund staff in January 2005.


7. (U) Other targets are being met. For example, the
number of schools implementing loveLifestyle programs
loveLifestyle programs
from August 04 October 04 is reported to be 534,
with a target of 400.


8. (U) loveLife reports that its program activities
have been severely constrained by delayed cash flow
and losses in the dollar-to-rand exchange rate. These
are legitimate concerns that many USG agencies face in
South Africa. After two years, some of the delays
have been worked out for smoother movement of funding
requests from the South African Department of
Treasury, through the Department of Health, back to
Treasury, and finally to the Local Fund Agent (KPMG).
According to loveLife representatives, there are 34
steps between submission of a disbursement request and
the transfer of funds to the principal recipient.
Moving from a quarterly to a six-month reporting
period should help lessen delays.

9. (U) loveLife reports that they are pleased with
their progress despite funding delays and are ready to
move forward, to increase the number of face-to-face
services provided and to fill in geographic gaps.
They report that their funding is better leveraged
today with about one-third from the South Africa
Government, one-third from Global Fund, and one-third
from other donors.

In-Country Impressions of Grant Performance
--------------


10. (U) loveLife is the largest youth-focused
intervention aimed at HIV prevention in South Africa.
The integration between media and support services is
strong, utilizing a network approach with schools at
the hub, moving out to clinics, youth centers, and
media.


11. (U) There have been concerns expressed about
loveLife by agencies and non-governmental
organizations working in HIV/AIDS prevention. The
concerns routinely revolve around two areas:
objective monitoring and evaluation of program
activities and financial systems. Some question the
effectiveness of the interventions; others believe
that the cost per service unit is high. Additional
independent evaluation of loveLife activities could
address some of these concerns. There have also been
recommendations that loveLife should strengthen its
financial accounting systems to delineate clearly
between various funding sources (i.e., Kaiser, Global
Fund, National Department of Health, and Anglo
American Corporation a local private sector funding
and program partner).

Degree of Coordination with Other Partners
--------------


12. (U) loveLife collaborates with the South African
Government and a number of South African NGOs.
loveLife is collaborating in with the Western Cape
Provincial Government in order to provide services
that complement the Western Cape Global Fund award.
Post has kept informed of loveLife activities, but
loveLife's activities are independent of Post's HIV
and AIDS programming.

Political or Other Considerations
--------------


13. (U) loveLife has the support of the South Africa
Government, receiving funds from the Departments of
Social Development, Health, and Sports and Recreation.
Despite a tempestuous relationship, the Minister of
Health has been an advocate for loveLife programs.
LoveLife's Phase Two application has been reviewed and
approved by the County Coordinating Mechanism (CCM).
The Department of Treasury has worked consistently
with loveLife to facilitate the movement of funds.


14. (SBU) The Department of Health and the CCM have
been barriers to loveLife's success. The DOH has
struggled to move the reports and funds smoothly
through the system, although loveLife has reported
improvement in this area. The CCM could provide
additional support to loveLife and other Global Fund
recipients and additional leadership and coordination
of Global Fund activities.

Embassy Point of Contact
--------------


15. (U) Embassy point of contact for Global Fund
questions is Gray Handley, Health Attachi. Mary
Wettrich, Deputy Director, Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention/South Africa responds to regular
requests from HHS for information on Global Fund
activities.

Country Coordinating Mechanism
--------------


16. (U) Reftel also requests information concerning
the CCM. The South African National AIDS Council
(SANAC) was established in January 2001 as a multi-
sectoral body including 16 South African government
ministries and 16 civil society representatives,
chaired by the Deputy President. Its mandate is
expressed in 11 objectives - with the main objective
being to "advise government on HIV and AIDS and STD
policy and related matters." Other important
objectives relate to coordination, guidance, resource
mobilization, and monitoring.


17. (U) Despite its broad mandate, SANAC's role in
providing guidance and coordination on HIV and AIDS
issues in South Africa has been limited. In practice,
the National Department of Health and the Minister of
Health dominate most aspects of HIV and AIDS
programming, with other key Ministries operating their
programs with considerable independence. SANAC holds
infrequent meetings that are often not attended by all
members and are reportedly not always productive.
SANAC has not been able to provide oversight on
important issues, such as monitoring and evaluation of
HIV and AIDS programs.


18. (U) SANAC has been criticized recently in the
South African Press for the failure to spend funds
designated for its activities through the National
AIDS Trust. Parliament has questioned the Deputy
President about SANAC, and opposition MPs claim that
SANAC is never heard from and never seen, and its
actions are wholly inadequate.


19. (U) Post appreciates the opportunity to contribute
to the review of Global Fund awards. Post
communicates often and effectively with Fund officials
and grant recipients keeping a close watch on all
Fund activities in South Africa. There is very little
interaction with the CCM, another reflection of its
inaccessibility and the lack of transparency with
which it is managed. Post would welcome any
additional questions and will strive to keep
Department informed as Fund activities further develop
in South Africa.

FRAZER