2. Aidsfonds
• Unrestricted funds from supporters (160.000) and lotteries: €1 –
2 million/year for international projects
• IP funding in past years
• 2012 – ECUO (Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine), increasing
knowledge and capacity CS, € 200k
• 2014 – RfP eliminating intellectual property barriers, middle income
countries, €1.2 million, 9 projects in 19 countries
• 2017 – RfP , selection of low and middle income countries, €1.5 million,
7 projects in 10 countries
3. Rationale to support this work
• Medicine prices key in access to treatment main
organisational goal
• Highly relevant in transitioning middle income countries,
majority of PLHIV
• Long term sustainability: growing number PLHIV on (newer)
lifelong treatment
• Clear gap: only few donors support this type of work
• Potentially high impact: national level policies and/or price
reductions
4. Dutch supporters
• Requires a lot of work from communication and fundraising
department to maintain number of supporters
• Communication on impact: easy to explain and direct results
• Recruiting new supporters: elevator pitch, based on emotions
• Preference for personal stories on direct impact of our projects
5.
6. Dilemma’s…
• Long-term effects, often beyond duration of the project
• Not always HIV-specific
• Tension between fundraising and policy: ‘what is most needed’
vs ‘where can we get most funding for’?
• Action per country/per medicine: ‘waste of time’ if systems don’t
change
• Most HIV drugs in (lower) middle income countries available as
generic: what are the IP barriers?