Co-financing HIV programmes improves overall development results
Policy-makers need to stop taking a 바카라 사이트˜silo바카라 사이트™ approach to budgeting, where one sector바카라 사이트™s gain is another sector바카라 사이트™s loss
Abstract
Policy-makers need to stop taking a 바카라 사이트˜silo바카라 사이트™ approach to budgeting, where one sector바카라 사이트™s gain is another sector바카라 사이트™s loss. An investment such as paying for girls바카라 사이트™ schooling can benefit education and health more broadly.
Drawing on STRIVE researchers바카라 사이트™ , this brief outlines an alternative to single-outcome cost-effectiveness analyses. Conventionally, the costs of programmes are related to their direct HIV outcomes, such as infections averted or 바카라 사이트˜life years바카라 사이트™ saved. By contrast, a co-financing model examines whether the overall social benefits generated by an intervention warrant its costs.
In a paper in AIDS Michelle Remme et al applied the co-financing model to a structural intervention to keep adolescent girls in school in Malawi. They concluded that the programme was cost effective if different sectors both contributed and benefited.
What would this mean for the HIV sector?
- Embedding HIV responses into broader national priorities would further encourage domestic ownership and sustainability.
- HIV programmes should actively seek opportunities to co-finance development efforts that have been shown to produce direct HIV benefits.
This research was supported by the Department for International Development바카라 사이트™s STRIVE Programme which is led by London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM)
Citation
RethinkHIV. (2014) Co-financing HIV programmes improves overall development results. RethinkHIV Policy Brief No 1, 2p
Links