Tuesday, June 29th, 2010 by KateMitch
Amy Boldosser, a member of Family Care International’s global advocacy team, was in Toronto from Thursday through Sunday, for the G8 and G20 summits. Amy’s coverage of the summits is being posted on Blog 4 Global Health, RH Reality Check, and the MHTF Blog.
Written by Amy Boldosser
(June 29th, 2010) The G8 and G20 Summits wrapped up after a tumultuous weekend. The protesters clashing with police got all the press but there were important developments for maternal and child health, HIV/AIDS and reproductive health as well.
The G8 released the details of its Muskoka Initiative for Maternal and Child Health on Saturday, a five-year, $7.3 billion package for improving maternal, newborn and child health and increasing access to reproductive health. The G8 countries have pledged US $5 billion of new money over the next 5 years and an additional $2.3 billion has been committed by non-G8 member states and foundations including the Netherlands, Norway, New Zealand, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland, the Gates Foundation and the United Nations Foundation. The communiqué notes that the G8 countries “fully expect” to mobilize more than $10 billion between 2010 and 2015 but doesn’t provide details on where that extra money might come from.
The G8 members call this “a comprehensive and integrated approach to accelerate progress towards MDGs 4 and 5 that will significantly reduce the number of maternal, newborn and under five child deaths in developing countries.” The G8 is working with partners to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015 with a particular focus on MDGs 4 (Reduce by two-thirds the under-5 mortality rate by 2015) and MDG 5 (Reduce by three-quarters the maternal mortality ratio by AND achieve, by 2015, universal access to reproductive health). MDG 5 is farthest away from being achieved by 2015 and estimates are that another $20 billion is needed if we hope to reach those targets for reduction in maternal and child mortality and reproductive health access in time. The Muskoka Initiative doesn’t come close to meeting that $20 billion shortfall, but it is a start.
While the funds committed may not have been all we hoped for, there were some pleasant surprises in the communiqué details. The funds will support strengthened country-led national health systems in developing countries and will help them to deliver key interventions along the continuum of care from pre-pregnancy, to pregnancy, to childbirth, to infancy and early childhood. The funds can specifically be used for programs on pre-natal care; attended childbirth; postpartum care; sexual and reproductive health care and services, including voluntary family planning; health education; treatment and prevention of diseases including infectious diseases; prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV; immunizations; basic nutrition and relevant actions in the field of safe drinking water and sanitation. The communiqué for the first time ever commits G8 countries to “promote integration of HIV and sexual and reproductive health, rights and services within the broader context of strengthening health systems.” The mere inclusion of the phrase “sexual and reproductive health and rights” in a G8 communiqué seems like cause for celebration to me!
The G8’s recognition that there’s a need for money for a range of critical, complementary interventions is important as well. As the Partnership for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health points out in its statement on the G8, “hemorrhage is the biggest reason why women die after delivery, but with HIV at the root of 20 percent of maternal deaths globally — and higher in Africa — it is clear that we must take a wider view of health, as women themselves do.” The communiqué also included a commitment to work towards universal access to prevention, treatment, care and support for HIV and AIDS and to continue to support funding the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria. G8 governments also express support for strengthening health information systems and sharing of innovations such as using mobile phones to provide health information and task shifting to make better use of scarce health workers.
Notably missing from the communiqué, not surprisingly, was any mention of abortion. Protestors on the streets of Toronto were seen carrying a banner that read, “Maternal health includes abortion!” but this fact was not recognized anywhere in the Muskoka Initiative. Unsafe abortions account for 13 percent of all maternal deaths worldwide and complications from the 19.7 million unsafe abortions performed annually are a serious public health threat. The communiqué addresses sexual and reproductive health care and services, but fails to recognize that safe abortion, when and where legal, is a critical piece of women’s healthcare access.
As the Summits concluded, new voices were added to the call for continued support for maternal and child health including the crucial voices of youth and developing country governments (with a rock star thrown in for good measure). The delegates to the official international youth summit being held concurrently with the G-8 and G-20 summits issued a statement calling on G8 leaders to “move quickly in creating a long-term maternal and child health plan for developing countries,” and identified lack of specialist training in the developing world surrounding prenatal and newborn care, and access to essential obstetric expertise as causes they would like to see the G8 take up.
Leaders from Algeria, Ethiopia, Malawi (Chair of the African Union), Nigeria, Senegal and South Africa were invited to meet with the G8 in a special afternoon session to discuss maternal and child health, highlighting the important role of developing countries themselves in this process. The communiqué indicates that, “G8 and African leaders recognize that the attainment of the MDGs is a shared responsibility and that strategies based on mutual accountability are essential going forward.”
African Union countries have already committed to devoting 15 percent of their budgets to health and we hope that this new working relationship with the G8 will signal willingness to meet and exceed those commitments. At the G20 Summit, leaders of the world’s 20 largest economies also recognized the role that all governments, including developing country governments, must play in supporting maternal and child health initiatives. While it was disappointing that the G20 did not specifically mention the Muskoka Initiative, it did announce that it is forming a Working Group to examine how it can play a greater role in development issues-a step in the right direction.
Not be outdone, Bono, U2 lead singer and co-founder of ONE, issued a statement saying that:
Prime Minister Harper’s plan for the G8 on maternal mortality is not everything that’s needed to tackle the moral affront of millions of mothers dying in childbirth, but it is a start on a job that world leaders need to finish when they gather at the UN in September for a special session on the Millennium Development Goals.
So what can be achieved with the money and the political commitments that we did manage to get from the G8 and G20? The communiqué says that this funding will help developing countries to prevent 1.3 million deaths of children under the age of five, prevent 64,000 maternal deaths, and enable access to modern methods of family planning by an additional 12 million couples.
Along with the G8’s stated new focus on accountability, the funding targets and promises to monitor progress towards achieving reductions in maternal and child mortality and expanded access to reproductive health services will also give advocates specifics that we can hold the G8 accountable for. Finally, as we move towards the September 2010 UN High-Level Plenary Meeting on the MDGs where governments will be asked to make additional renewed commitments to achieve the MDGs by 2015, this focus on maternal and child health is important. The Secretary General of the UN has launched a Joint Action Plan to Improve the Health of Women and Children, and advocates are pressing for the serious financial and political commitments that will be needed to achieve the goals.
The G8 and G20 have helped put maternal and child health on the map at this critical time. But awareness raising and promises are not enough. The protestors on the streets were yelling, “Whose streets? Our streets!” We must take up the call, “Whose lives? Women’s lives!” No woman should have to die giving life. We know what to do to improve maternal and child health. The governments of the G8 and G20 put themselves forward as the richest and most powerful leaders in the world. But that leadership won’t mean anything if they won’t commit to saving women and children’s lives.
Tags: abortion, accountability, Africa, African Union, Algeria, Bono, child death, child health, continuum of care, Ethiopia, family planning, G20, G8, Gates Foundation, Global Fund, Harper, health education, health systems strengthening, health workers, hemorrhage, HIV/AIDS, infant death, innovation, joint action plan, Malawi, maternal and child health, maternal death, maternal health, maternal mortality, MDG4, MDG5, mobile phones, Muskoka Initiative, Netherlands, New Zealand, newborn health, Nigeria, Norway, nutrition, ONE, Partnership for Maternal Newborn and Child Health, prenatal care, protesters, public health, reproductive health, Secretary General of the UN, Senegal, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland, task-shifting, Toronto, U2, United Nations Foundation, universal access, unsafe abortion, youth summit
Posted in Commentary, Meetings, News, Policy, advocacy | No Comments »
Tuesday, June 29th, 2010 by KateMitch
Written by Kate Dilley, Administrative Coordinator at Management Sciences for Health
This post was originally posted on haba na haba, hujaza kibaba–and has been adapted for the MHTF Blog
Photo taken by Kate Dilley in Northern Uganda
One of the most salient admissions I heard during the
Women Deliver 2010 conference in Washington DC (June 7-9) was that the major challenge facing improvements in maternal health is a lack of political will.
Kathleen Sebelius, the US Secretary for Health and Human Services, explained that the problem with reducing maternal mortality is not with the lack of knowledge or interventions, but the political will to put that knowledge to action, the will to make maternal mortality a priority of governments, the will to stand up and say that the lives of women matter, and we MUST do something about it.
I spent three days hearing about
proven interventions – improving human resources for health so that more clinics and facilities will have trained birth attendants and midwives presiding over deliveries, expansion of in-service training to include Emergency Obstetric Care (EmOC) to more professionals and thus more clinics, wider distribution of clean delivery kits, immunization,
kangaroo mother care, exclusive breast feeding, access to safe abortion, family planning, and antenatal care. The steadfast and committed people working in the field of maternal health know what to do, and how to do it. Every day, nearly 1,500 women die giving life, and the global health community knows how to prevent almost 1,300, or 90%, of those deaths. But do they have the power to demand
and receive the funds from their governments to scale-up these interventions—to make them accessible to the most marginalized populations? Do they have the power to make maternal mortality a national (or international) priority? Do they have the power to make their voices heard?
I find it remarkable the way other similar causes have been able to garner immense support—and financial backing.
LiveSTRONG is a striking example. Lance Armstrong and his team have done an extraordinary job of raising awareness, corporate dollars, and determination to find a cure for cancer. TO FIND A CURE. I think it is wonderful that so many organizations’ efforts and resources are being poured into identifying a cure for cancer—but I also wonder, how can it be that we already know how to solve the problem of maternal mortality and morbidity yet hundreds of thousands of women continue to die every year because the global community has refused to prioritize the health of the poorest and most marginalized women in the world?
All of this points to the awful reality that in many parts of the world, the lives of women are seen as less valuable. However, at Women Deliver 2010 and the Annual
Global Health Council meeting the week after, I witnessed unprecedented collaboration and momentum to change that reality from within the field and beyond. As we approach 2015, the make it or break it year for the Millennium Development Goals, our collective voice is loud and clear. Now more than ever, it is time to
make the final push to achieve
MDG-5. I hope that the world’s politicians will be held accountable for
the funds they promised at the G8 and G20 meetings—and that those funds will go towards evidence-based interventions. At Women Deliver and at the Global Health Council meeting, I met many remarkable maternal and child health practitioners. The brains, the brute, and the determination are all there on the practitioner side. What the global health community needs now is for our politicians to stand beside us, to trust in our evidence-based interventions, to let us save over one thousand women’s lives every day.
Be sure to check out Kate Dilley’s blog, haba na haba, hujaza kibaba.
Tags: antenatal care, cancer, clean delivery kits, clinics, corporate dollars, emergency obstetric care (EmOC), evidence-based interventions, exclusive breast feeding, facilities, family planning, Global Health Council, haba na haba hujaza kibaba, human resources, immunization, kangaroo mother care, Kate Dilley, Kate Dilley's blog, Kathleen Sebelius, Lance Armstrong, LiveSTRONG, Management Sciences for Health, maternal and child health, maternal health, maternal morbidity, maternal mortality, MDG5, MHTF Blog, Millennium Development Goals, MSH, Northern Uganda, political will, proven interventions, safe abortion, trained birth attendants. skilled birth attendants, US Secretary for Health and Human Services, Women Deliver, Women Deliver 2010
Posted in Commentary, Meetings, News, Policy | No Comments »
Monday, June 28th, 2010 by KateMitch
Amy Boldosser, a member of Family Care International’s global advocacy team, was in Toronto from Thursday through Sunday, for the G8 and G20 summits. Amy’s coverage of the summits is being posted on Blog 4 Global Health, RH Reality Check, and the MHTF Blog.
Written by Amy Boldosser
(June 26th, 2010) The first day of the G8 Summit answered some of the questions that maternal, newborn and child health advocates had about Canada’s signature G8 initiative, The Muskoka Initiative for maternal and child health. Speculation had been rampant all day following Canadian Prime Minister Harper’s midday announcement that Canada is committing $1.1 billion Canadian dollars in new spending over five years for maternal and child health programs in poor countries, bringing Canada’s total maternal and child health spending to almost $3 billion Canadian. Harper made the announcement in his brief comments before the beginning of the G8’s afternoon session with invited leaders from Africa and the Americas. As the G8 leaders headed in to closed door meetings, advocates were left to wonder whether Canada could pull off the heavy lift of gaining similar concrete, new financial commitments from the G8 member states for saving the lives of women and children.
So did they deliver for the world’s women and children? Well, sort of. When the doors were opened and Prime Minister Harper addressed advocates and press again, he announced that the, “G-8 leaders made a historic commitment to the Muskoka initiative to maternal, newborn and child health. Together, G-8 members have committed US $5 billion over the next 5 years.” In addition, Harper revealed that, “G-8 leadership has also attracted the donations and contributions from other countries and foundations of more than US $2.3 billion for a total of US $7.3 billion. In addition to our G-8 partners, we would also like to thank the Netherlands, Norway, New Zealand, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland, the Gates Foundation and the United Nations Foundation.”
Canadian officials refused to release specifics on what each country pledged. Harper indicated that each of the G8 countries did make a contribution, although he admitted some contributed more than others relative to the size of their economies. He chalked up the differences in pledges to differences in priorities among countries and differences in country financial situations and said that since Canada’s economy is in the strongest financial position, it had made the largest country contribution to this flagship initiative. Press sources provided some rough figures on country commitments:
The US committed $1.346 billion over two years (the US didn’t commit to the requested five years of funding) pending “Congressional appropriations,”
Germany committed more than $500 million over five years,
Japan committed about $500 million over five years,
France committed to about $400 million over five years,
Britain committed $300 million per year over two years (like the US, Britain didn’t commit to five years of funding),
and Italy, to no one’s surprise, apparently pledged the least of all.
Canada’s leadership in putting maternal and child health on the agenda was generally praised by advocacy groups, and Canada’s $1.1 billion pledge, the largest among G8 members although still short of what advocates had been asking for, was regarded as a “respectable” amount. Reaction to the total Muskoka Initiative pledge, however, was one of disappointment that G-8 leaders had failed to heed calls to double their collective aid on maternal and child health to $4 billion a year, for a total of $20 billion over five years. According to Save the Children, that investment could have saved an additional 1 million children a year and more than 200,000mothers a year.
So now we know what money is on the table but some very important questions remain if we are truly to make progress in reducing the numbers of maternal deaths (more than 350,000 women die every year in pregnancy and childbirth) and newborn and child deaths (more than 8 million children die before their fifth birthday every year).
How will these funds be distributed and used? There is a global consensus on the package of high quality, low cost interventions that are needed to prevent maternal, newborn and child deaths including comprehensive family planning programs; skilled care before, during and after pregnancy and childbirth, including emergency obstetric care, for mothers and newborns; safe abortion, when and where legal; and improved child nutrition and prevention and treatment of major childhood diseases. But some governments, including Canada, have given into political pressures to announce that this money won’t be used to fund provision of safe abortions or potentially even family planning. Advocates will be watching to see how the G8 spends its money and to hold governments accountable for meeting these commitments. As the G20 Summit starts today, we are also hopeful that G20 governments will take up the G8 commitment to maternal and child health. South Korea, host of the next G20, and some other G20 governments are pushing for a bigger role on development and we are hopeful that the pledges made to the Muskoka Initiative by non G8 member countries may hint at a broader commitment of non G8 countries to save the lives of women and children.
Tags: advocacy, Africa, Blog 4 Global Health, Britain, Canada, Canadian Prime Minister, child death, child health, Family Care International, FCI, France, G20, G20 summit, G8, G8 summit, Gates Founation, Germany, global consensus, Harper, Italy, Japan, maternal death, maternal health, Muskoka Initiative, Netherlands, New Zealand, newborn death, Norway, RH Reality Check, Save the Children, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland, the Americas, United Nations, US
Posted in Commentary, Meetings, News, Policy, advocacy | No Comments »
Monday, June 28th, 2010 by KateMitch
Amy Boldosser, a member of Family Care International’s global advocacy team, was in Toronto from Thursday through Sunday, for the G8 and G20 summits. Amy’s coverage of the summits is being posted on Blog 4 Global Health, RH Reality Check, and the MHTF Blog.
Written by Amy Boldosser
(June 25, 2010) Canada, the host country for both summits, has declared that maternal and child health will be a central focus of the G8 agenda. FCI and our advocacy partners from around the world are working to ensure that this is far more than a symbolic step — that the G8’s discussion leads to concrete financial commitments, and that governments are held accountable for delivering on these commitments and saving women’s and children’s lives.
Civil society organizations from across Canada and six continents today invited an additional 1,744,128 people to the G8 and G20 negotiating tables. More than a dozen civil society networks brought petitions signed by almost 2 million individuals from around the world conveying the message to global leaders that it’s time for action. The various petitions call on the leaders to make meaningful commitments on the Maternal and Child Health initiative, to honor the pledge to help developing countries adapt to climate change, to agree on a concrete plan to sustain HIV/AIDS treatment programs and deliver on promises for universal education.
In addition to the petitions, a statement released by students’ organizations around the world, including the Canadian Federation of Students, representing over 150 million students called for a commitment to education and public services. The White Ribbon Alliance for Safe Motherhood (http://www.whiteribbonalliance.org/G8/index.cfm) delivered a letter to G8 leaders signed by 14 million health workers, urging G8 leaders to double official development assistance (ODA) for maternal, newborn and child health to fill the 3.5 million gap of health workers in countries where women often give birth alone or without professional help.
All of the petitions were presented to Canadian Prime Minister Harper’s office, although in the interest of saving trees the groups did not print out what would have amounted to 72,000 sheets of paper filling 18 boxes but rather presented the petitions on CD.
Dorothy Ngoma, Executive Director of the National Organization of Nurses and Midwives of Malawi, said that it is immoral that 350,000 or more women are dying each year during pregnancy and childbirth. The question, Ngoma said, is “why have the world leaders in the G8 failed to protect women’s lives?” She continued, “Who is going to protect these women? World leaders promised to cut maternal deaths by 75% by 2015 but we don’t seem to be making much progress.”
All of the speakers at the event highlighted the broader issue of accountability. Ngoma mentioned the promises made by the G8 at the Gleneagles Summit in 2005 which included G8 governments committing to an increase in overall Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) by around $50 billion a year by 2010 as well as an increase in ODA for Africa by $25 billion by 2010. While aid has increased since 2005, there is still a shortfall of $18 billion to meet these commitments. The G8 itself has recognized the need for greater accountability for its commitments. At the G8 Summit in L’Aquila, the leaders committed to “strengthen our accountability with respect to G8 individual and collective commitments with regard to development and development-related goals.” The Muskoka Accountability Report released by the G8 prior to the Summit this week noted that some governments are meeting some commitments some of the time but that “countries are $10 billion behind the five-year, $50 billion commitment they made at their 2005 Summit in Scotland.”
As we wait for first news reports on commitments from the G8 Summit currently underway, civil society is keeping the focus on these very large commitments which have already been made but not met. We don’t need more promises from the G8 today, we need action on existing commitments to reduce poverty and specific concrete financial commitments to The Muskoka Initiative for maternal and child health that will actually be delivered upon. We’re adding our voices to those 1,744,128 concerned citizens, and many others around the world who are watching today, in calling for change.
Tags: 2005 Summit, advocacy, Amy Boldosser, Blog 4 Global Health, Canada, Canadian Federation of Students, Canadian Prime Minister, civil society, Dorothy Ngoma, Family Care International, FCI, funding, G20, G20 summit, G8, G8 summit, global advocacy team, global leaders, Harper, HIV/AIDS, L'Aquila, maternal and child health, Maternal and Child Health Initiative, maternal health, MHTF Blog, Muskoka Accountability Report, Muskoka Initiative, National Organization of Nurses and Midwives of Malawi, ODA, Overseas Development Assistance, petitions, RH Reality Check, Toronto, White Ribbon Alliance for Safe Motherhood
Posted in Commentary, Meetings, News, Policy, advocacy | No Comments »
Thursday, June 24th, 2010 by KateMitch
The Maternal Health Task Force at EngenderHealth is looking for a Knowledge Management Assistant. If you have a background in public health, gender studies, or a related field, are skilled at using web-based communications tools, and are passionate about improving global maternal health–take a look at this job at the Maternal Health Task Force at EngenderHealth in New York City!
Job Summary:
“The Knowledge Management (KM) unit of the Maternal Health Task Force (MHTF) requires a highly motivated KM Assistant to help coordinate and implement the MHTF KM strategy and tactics. The KM Assistant will work closely with the KM Specialist in making its online knowledge portal robust, relevant, engaging, and user-friendly. The KM Assistant will proactively identify ways to engage current members and expand our audience. This position provides a unique opportunity for those who are interested in how technology can help advance MDG5 goals.”
For more information about the job and to apply, click here.
Tags: EngenderHealth, gender studies, job opening, job opportunity, KMS, knowledge management, Knowledge Management Assistant, maternal health, Maternal Health Task Force, MDG5, MHTF, public health, web-based communications
Posted in Announcements, Opportunities | No Comments »
Thursday, June 24th, 2010 by KateMitch
A message from Family Care International:
Family Care International will be at the G8 and G20 Summits in Canada this week, and you can follow our live updates on Facebook and Twitter!
Amy Boldosser, a member of FCI’s global advocacy team, will be in Toronto from Thursday through Sunday, making FCI one of the few international health NGOs that will be on the scene for these historic meetings. FCI, along with our colleagues from the Global Health Council, will also be blogging the summits at the Blog 4 Global Health; Amy will be posting on RH Reality Check too.
Canada, the host country for both summits, has declared that maternal and child health will be a central focus of the G8 agenda. FCI and our advocacy partners from around the world are working to ensure that this is far more than a symbolic step — that the G8’s discussion leads to concrete financial commitments, and that governments are held accountable for delivering on these commitments and saving women’s and children’s lives.
- To lend your voice, sign the ONE Campaign’s petition asking that the G8 commit to training an additional 3.5 million healthcare workers by 2015.
Tags: advocacy, Amy Boldosser, Ann Starrs, Blog 4 Global Health, Call to Action for the G8, Canada, child health, Facebook, Family Care International, FCI, FCI's global advocacy team, G20, G8, G8 and G20 Summits, Global Health Council, international health, maternal and child health, maternal health, Momentum mandates and money: achieving health MDGs, newborn health, ONE Campaign, Partnership for Maternal Newborn and Child Health, RH Reality Check, The Lancet, Toronto, Twitter
Posted in Announcements, Meetings, News, advocacy | No Comments »
Wednesday, June 23rd, 2010 by KateMitch
Written by Tim Thomas, Advisor to the Maternal Health Task Force
Our friends at the Global Health program at the Council on Foreign Relations recently distributed a report of what they’ve learned about the new-ish US Global Health Initiative with a bias toward girls and women, which both President Obama and Secretary-of-State Clinton have touted as a keystone of their administration’s foreign policy.
The governance and structure of the GHI has been a topic of conversation and concern for those of us working in global health, and this excerpt from the June 18th CFR Global Health Update provides some welcome clarity:
“Don Shriber of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) said the governance of the Global Health Initiative has (finally) been hammered out in a form that ultimately lets the buck stop with Jack Lew, Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources. Beneath Lew will be an Overarching Strategic Council, composed of USAID, the State Department, the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), HHS, the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) and the Treasury Department. It will meet monthly to assess the global health efforts. Answering to that Council will be the trifecta of leadership over the GHI: Rajiv Shah (head of USAID), Thomas Frieden (Director of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention), and Ambassador Eric Goosby (head of PEPFAR/U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator).
“Eight countries will serve as learning laboratories for innovation and new policy initiatives by the Obama administration’s Global Health Initiative. The countries…are: Bangladesh, Malawi, Rwanda, Nepal, Guatemala, Ethiopia, Kenya and Mali.
They constitute the ‘GHI-Plus’ countries, which will get the closest, and presumably best-funded, attention from the new trifecta of the Executive Branch’s $63 billion, six-year Global Health Initiative. Overall, the GHI is unfolding on various scales in a total of 81 countries. Amie Batson, of USAID, said the GHI-Plus countries were selected based on in-country enthusiasm, democracy-building, potential for cross-sector integration of innovative programs and the presence of other donor partners – chiefly, the International Health Partnership (Norway and the United Kingdom, primarily), the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, and the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation (GAVI) program.”
The distribution of funding in the GHI among health sectors remains a bit of a mystery. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation’s analysis of the President’s FY 2011 Budget Request to Congress, PEPFAR and Malaria account for 81% or $51billion, and “Other Global Health Priorities” account for 19% or $12 billion. MNCH and nutrition are slated for 9% and family planning/reproductive health are down for 6%. But there are down-stream funding mechanisms that may confuse this allocation. As the Global Fund, GAVI and other multilateral donors that will receive much of the GHI funding increasingly exhort about the value of multi-sectoral, integrated approaches within their vertical funding structures, the question lingers of whether or not the GHI will restrict any of its contributions to maternal, sexual, and reproductive health and how/if those restrictions will be accounted for in the GHI budget.
Stay tuned as more on the GHI unfolds….we’ll keep you posted.
Tags: Ambassador Eric Goosby, Bangladesh, Barack Obama, CDC, CFR, Council on Foreign Relations, Don Shriber, Ethiopia, family planning, GAVI, GHI, Global Fund, global health, Global Health Initiative, Global Health program, Guatemala, HHS, Hillary Clinton, International Health Partnership, Jack Lew, Kaiser Family Foundation, Kenya, Malawi, Mali, maternal health, Millennium Challenge Corporation, multi-sectoral approach, Nepal, Norway, nutrition, Obama Administration, PEPFAR, President Obama, President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, Rajiv Shah, reproductive health, Rwanda, Secretary Clinton, Secretary of State, sexual health, State Department, Thomas Frieden, Treasury Department, United Kingdom, US Global Health Initiative, USAID
Posted in Commentary, News, Policy | No Comments »
Wednesday, June 23rd, 2010 by KateMitch
“What are the problems you face? How can these be solved?”
If you provide care for pregnant women, this is your opportunity to make your voice heard.
Global Voices for Maternal Health is a major new project from the University of Oxford that will bring maternal healthcare providers centre-stage in international efforts to reduce maternal deaths.
For the first time ever on this scale, over 10,000 midwives, nurses and doctors around the world will get a direct voice about the problems they face in delivering lifesaving maternal healthcare via our online survey and discussion forum.
Visit www.globalvoices.org.uk today to take part and help shape the future of maternal healthcare in your country and beyond.
We know how precious your time is so as a reward for taking part all participants will get:
- A Certificate of Participation from the University of Oxford and the opportunity to have your name included in the list of contributors accompanying future publications.
- An instant summary of the most up-to-date results of the surveys you’ve taken.
- Access to an online resources page.
- The opportunity to take part in the search for solutions, and discuss the problems you face with other healthcare providers and leading international experts in the Forum.
And winning ideas in the discussion forum will receive cash prizes of between $50 and $100!
Visit www.globalvoices.org.uk now to have your say and become part of Global Voices for Maternal Health.
Please also share this post with any friends and colleagues who might be interested in taking part.
If you have any questions or want more information, please email us at global.voices@obs-gyn.ox.ac.uk.
This ground-breaking project has the support of FIGO, International Confederation of Midwives and the Maternal Health Task Force at EngenderHealth.
Click here for the official press release.
Click here to view the list of target countries by region.
Tags: crowd-sourcing, crowdsourcing, doctors, FIGO, Global Voices, Global Voices for Maternal Health, health care providers, International Confederation of Midwives, maternal death, maternal health, Maternal Health Task Force, midwives, nurses, pregnant women, problem-solving, target countries, University of Oxford
Posted in Announcements, Opportunities | No Comments »
Tuesday, June 22nd, 2010 by KateMitch
The controversial research reporting unexpected gains in maternal health, published April 12 in the Lancet, has triggered rigorous debate about the measurement tools used to count maternal deaths globally and at a country level. The paper, Maternal mortality for 181 countries, 1980-2008: a systematic analysis of progress towards Millennium Development Goal 5, was written by Chris Murray and his team of researchers at the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. Some global health leaders are celebrating the global progress toward MDG5 indicated by the research. Some are expressing cautious optimism. Others are challenging the paper’s methodology, asking whether it really signals big gains in the struggle against global maternal mortality or just flawed means of estimating how many women are dying.
On June 5th, the Lancet published a reply from Chris Murray in which he addresses some of the concerns voiced by his fellow global health researchers regarding the methodology of the study.
For more on this topic, take a look at a recent post, New Maternal Mortality Estimates Published in the Lancet: What’s the Buzz?, on our new MedScape Blog, GlobalMama.
Tags: analysis, Chris Murray, Christopher Murray, country level, criticism, estimation, Hogan, IHME, Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, Lancet, Margaret C Hogan, maternal death, maternal health, maternal mortality, MDG5, measurement, measurement tools, methodology, Millennium Development Goal 5, MMR estimates, new estimates, new MMR estimates, skepticism, The Lancet
Posted in Commentary, Evidence | No Comments »
G8 and G20 Roundup: Promises, Protestors, and Promoting Maternal and Child Health
Tuesday, June 29th, 2010 by KateMitchAmy Boldosser, a member of Family Care International’s global advocacy team, was in Toronto from Thursday through Sunday, for the G8 and G20 summits. Amy’s coverage of the summits is being posted on Blog 4 Global Health, RH Reality Check, and the MHTF Blog.
Written by Amy Boldosser
(June 29th, 2010) The G8 and G20 Summits wrapped up after a tumultuous weekend. The protesters clashing with police got all the press but there were important developments for maternal and child health, HIV/AIDS and reproductive health as well.
The G8 released the details of its Muskoka Initiative for Maternal and Child Health on Saturday, a five-year, $7.3 billion package for improving maternal, newborn and child health and increasing access to reproductive health. The G8 countries have pledged US $5 billion of new money over the next 5 years and an additional $2.3 billion has been committed by non-G8 member states and foundations including the Netherlands, Norway, New Zealand, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland, the Gates Foundation and the United Nations Foundation. The communiqué notes that the G8 countries “fully expect” to mobilize more than $10 billion between 2010 and 2015 but doesn’t provide details on where that extra money might come from.
The G8 members call this “a comprehensive and integrated approach to accelerate progress towards MDGs 4 and 5 that will significantly reduce the number of maternal, newborn and under five child deaths in developing countries.” The G8 is working with partners to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015 with a particular focus on MDGs 4 (Reduce by two-thirds the under-5 mortality rate by 2015) and MDG 5 (Reduce by three-quarters the maternal mortality ratio by AND achieve, by 2015, universal access to reproductive health). MDG 5 is farthest away from being achieved by 2015 and estimates are that another $20 billion is needed if we hope to reach those targets for reduction in maternal and child mortality and reproductive health access in time. The Muskoka Initiative doesn’t come close to meeting that $20 billion shortfall, but it is a start.
While the funds committed may not have been all we hoped for, there were some pleasant surprises in the communiqué details. The funds will support strengthened country-led national health systems in developing countries and will help them to deliver key interventions along the continuum of care from pre-pregnancy, to pregnancy, to childbirth, to infancy and early childhood. The funds can specifically be used for programs on pre-natal care; attended childbirth; postpartum care; sexual and reproductive health care and services, including voluntary family planning; health education; treatment and prevention of diseases including infectious diseases; prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV; immunizations; basic nutrition and relevant actions in the field of safe drinking water and sanitation. The communiqué for the first time ever commits G8 countries to “promote integration of HIV and sexual and reproductive health, rights and services within the broader context of strengthening health systems.” The mere inclusion of the phrase “sexual and reproductive health and rights” in a G8 communiqué seems like cause for celebration to me!
The G8’s recognition that there’s a need for money for a range of critical, complementary interventions is important as well. As the Partnership for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health points out in its statement on the G8, “hemorrhage is the biggest reason why women die after delivery, but with HIV at the root of 20 percent of maternal deaths globally — and higher in Africa — it is clear that we must take a wider view of health, as women themselves do.” The communiqué also included a commitment to work towards universal access to prevention, treatment, care and support for HIV and AIDS and to continue to support funding the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria. G8 governments also express support for strengthening health information systems and sharing of innovations such as using mobile phones to provide health information and task shifting to make better use of scarce health workers.
Notably missing from the communiqué, not surprisingly, was any mention of abortion. Protestors on the streets of Toronto were seen carrying a banner that read, “Maternal health includes abortion!” but this fact was not recognized anywhere in the Muskoka Initiative. Unsafe abortions account for 13 percent of all maternal deaths worldwide and complications from the 19.7 million unsafe abortions performed annually are a serious public health threat. The communiqué addresses sexual and reproductive health care and services, but fails to recognize that safe abortion, when and where legal, is a critical piece of women’s healthcare access.
As the Summits concluded, new voices were added to the call for continued support for maternal and child health including the crucial voices of youth and developing country governments (with a rock star thrown in for good measure). The delegates to the official international youth summit being held concurrently with the G-8 and G-20 summits issued a statement calling on G8 leaders to “move quickly in creating a long-term maternal and child health plan for developing countries,” and identified lack of specialist training in the developing world surrounding prenatal and newborn care, and access to essential obstetric expertise as causes they would like to see the G8 take up.
Leaders from Algeria, Ethiopia, Malawi (Chair of the African Union), Nigeria, Senegal and South Africa were invited to meet with the G8 in a special afternoon session to discuss maternal and child health, highlighting the important role of developing countries themselves in this process. The communiqué indicates that, “G8 and African leaders recognize that the attainment of the MDGs is a shared responsibility and that strategies based on mutual accountability are essential going forward.”
African Union countries have already committed to devoting 15 percent of their budgets to health and we hope that this new working relationship with the G8 will signal willingness to meet and exceed those commitments. At the G20 Summit, leaders of the world’s 20 largest economies also recognized the role that all governments, including developing country governments, must play in supporting maternal and child health initiatives. While it was disappointing that the G20 did not specifically mention the Muskoka Initiative, it did announce that it is forming a Working Group to examine how it can play a greater role in development issues-a step in the right direction.
Not be outdone, Bono, U2 lead singer and co-founder of ONE, issued a statement saying that:
So what can be achieved with the money and the political commitments that we did manage to get from the G8 and G20? The communiqué says that this funding will help developing countries to prevent 1.3 million deaths of children under the age of five, prevent 64,000 maternal deaths, and enable access to modern methods of family planning by an additional 12 million couples.
Along with the G8’s stated new focus on accountability, the funding targets and promises to monitor progress towards achieving reductions in maternal and child mortality and expanded access to reproductive health services will also give advocates specifics that we can hold the G8 accountable for. Finally, as we move towards the September 2010 UN High-Level Plenary Meeting on the MDGs where governments will be asked to make additional renewed commitments to achieve the MDGs by 2015, this focus on maternal and child health is important. The Secretary General of the UN has launched a Joint Action Plan to Improve the Health of Women and Children, and advocates are pressing for the serious financial and political commitments that will be needed to achieve the goals.
The G8 and G20 have helped put maternal and child health on the map at this critical time. But awareness raising and promises are not enough. The protestors on the streets were yelling, “Whose streets? Our streets!” We must take up the call, “Whose lives? Women’s lives!” No woman should have to die giving life. We know what to do to improve maternal and child health. The governments of the G8 and G20 put themselves forward as the richest and most powerful leaders in the world. But that leadership won’t mean anything if they won’t commit to saving women and children’s lives.
[Translate]
Tags: abortion, accountability, Africa, African Union, Algeria, Bono, child death, child health, continuum of care, Ethiopia, family planning, G20, G8, Gates Foundation, Global Fund, Harper, health education, health systems strengthening, health workers, hemorrhage, HIV/AIDS, infant death, innovation, joint action plan, Malawi, maternal and child health, maternal death, maternal health, maternal mortality, MDG4, MDG5, mobile phones, Muskoka Initiative, Netherlands, New Zealand, newborn health, Nigeria, Norway, nutrition, ONE, Partnership for Maternal Newborn and Child Health, prenatal care, protesters, public health, reproductive health, Secretary General of the UN, Senegal, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland, task-shifting, Toronto, U2, United Nations Foundation, universal access, unsafe abortion, youth summit
Posted in Commentary, Meetings, News, Policy, advocacy | No Comments »