Approximately one-third of all the funds received to date [see table below] by the Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Maleria were sourced from the US Administration, which has the only
permanent seat on the Fund's Board and oversees and approves/disapproves all grant applications. Moreover, the funds are held in an account at the US-controlled World Bank. Incidentally, the only private sector donations to the fund announced to date have been the $150m provided by the Bill Gates Foundation, contributions from Product Red not yet being known.
Furthermore, there is a grey area concerning the actual status of Product Red contributions: the amounts collected on purchases are not actually charitable donations, but
franchise fees paid by participating companies, AMEX, Apple etc, to the owners [a consortium that includes Bono/Schriver's DATA organisation] of the Product Red brand for its use in promoting their products.
Evidence of withdrawal of grant-aid based on faith-based ideology:
Extract from
The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria: Progress Report and Issues for Congress, April, 2006
South Africa. In December 2005, the Global Fund Board voted not to continue funding an existing grant for HIV prevention activities in South Africa. The Board decided that the grant, implemented by an NGO named loveLife, had failed to sufficiently address weaknesses in its implementation. Press accounts quote a Global Fund representative explaining that it had become difficult to measure how the loveLife prevention campaign was contributing to the reduction of HIV/AIDS among young people in South Africa. Additionally, the representative reportedly stated that the Board had repeatedly requested that loveLife revise its proposals and address concerns regarding performance, financial and accounting procedures, and the need for an effective governance structure. A Global Fund spokesman was quoted as saying that “loveLife is extremely costly, there are programs that have been very effective, which cost a fraction of what loveLife costs. It would be irresponsible of the Global Fund to spend almost $40 million without seeing results.” LoveLife officials were reportedly surprised that the Global Fund ultimately decided to discontinue funding the grant, particularly since there were some reported differences of opinion regarding the matter between the Fund’s Technical Review Panel, Secretariat, and the Board.
Additionally, loveLife officials reportedly argued that the decision was politically motivated and influenced by U.S. emphasis on abstinence in HIV prevention efforts. One press account quoted a loveLife official as saying, “Obviously the strength of conservative ideologies is spilling over into the field of HIV and HIV prevention and it has direct impact on programs like loveLife.” According to a loveLife press release, the decision to discontinue funding the program will substantially curtail South Africa’s efforts to prevent HIV infections among young people, because the Global Fund’s grant supported one third of the program’s budget.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6. Total Global Fund Contributions and Pledges(billions)
-------------------------Paid to Date---% Paid to Date----Pledges-----% Pledges to Date
United States------------$1.43--------- 29.07%------------ $2.29--------- 26.87%
European Union---------$2.47----------50.21%-------------$4.49----------52.63%
Other Countries---------$0.86----------17.56%-------------$1.59----------18.70%
Private Sector-----------$0.15-----------3.16%------------- $0.15-----------1.80%
Total--------------------- $4.91-------- 100.00%-------------$8.52--------100.00%
Source: Global Fund, Pledges and Contributions, March 13, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------