- Last Updated on Wednesday, 14 March 2012 15:26
- Published on Tuesday, 13 March 2012 21:01
- Hits: 3683
1. Finalization of the MOU: The delay in the appointment of the Director to the PANCAP Coordinating Unit and Secretary General to Caricom contributed to delay in the signature of the MOU. The MOU was eventually finalized in the month of December 2011, as a result: the following were affected:
- Finance allocation for PANCAP focal point travel to pilot countries.
- Roles and responsibilities between PANCAP and EPOS management team were unclear.
2. Five countries were selected as pilot: Antigua, Saint Maarten, Trinidad & Tobago, Guyana and Suriname. The project administration team is presently considering removing Guyana as a pilot country. This consideration to eliminate Guyana is premised on Guyana’s inability to deliver the required major country outputs and the Ministry of Health objection to participate in the activities of component one and two.
3. Selection of Country Focal Points: Focal points and Technical Working Groups were developed for all pilot countries during the first quarter of 2011.
4. Development of Country Work Plans and Monitoring Plans: Individual country work plans were developed in consultation with the team leader, the PANCAP focal point and the country focal point and TWG group. A biannual monitoring and evaluation plan was developed for each country. However as a result of the late start of the consultancies the countries only reported once for the year 2011.
5. Inception Workshop held in December 2010: the report of was distributed in April 2011, due to the delay in the presentation of the Rapporteur notes.
6. Country Support: The project team visited the piloted countries a least twice in 2011 to provide support in the coordination of activities, development of work plans, organisation of project progress reports, selection of national consultants.
7. Project Advocacy and Presentation: Through strategic focused there is an established ownership for the project within the piloted countries and among partners. The project was presented:
- By Pancap at the 21st Meeting of the Council for Human & Social Development (COHSOD) held 15-16 April, 2011 in Georgetown.
- To the Prime Minister of Sint Maarten
- At 2011 HIV conference via round table discussion,
- To the GIZ regional team in Guyana and Santo Domingo
- A Project logo was developed.
- A banner, several Power Point and a project briefs were developed.
- However the resignation of the Network System Administrator delayed the development of the web page and the e brochure for the project.
8. Partnerships and Commitment: There were a number of partnerships and commitments that endorse their commitment to the project.
• The International Organisation for Migration (IOM) took the commitment to provide technical assistance for studies, Policy drafting, training & share IEC material.
• The International Labour Organisation (ILO) will actively share information and data on their project about the informal sector.
• COIN are sharing their best practices and tools, of their mappings protocols, approaches on hard to reach population, regional referral systems, language training of health care providers, etc.
• UNAIDS/IOM. Has indicated their willingness to support the project in the framework of a recent global agreement called "improve access to HIV services for migrants”
• GIZ. Collaboration with other GIZ projects in South and Central America for exchange of documents, ideas and experience:
• The KfW financed CARISMA project will exchange Information-Education-communication material.
• The Clinton Foundation will share documents and prevention material for HIV/AIDS in creole language from their experience with migrants in Bahamas
9. Situation analysis was conducted by consultants: reports are available for component 1, 2, 3 & 4
• Reports presented by the regional consultant of component one and two were not conclusive, because of the unavailability of relevant information, resulting in much delay in next steps of the consultancies. As a consequence, the decision was taken to have the consultancies executed by national consultants and overseen by a Regional consultant.
10. The governance structures of the project were established
• The Regional Advisory Group (RAG) was developed. A multisectoral group which comprise of 13 regional experts from within the region. The objective of the RAG is to provide technical guidance to ensure a successful implementation of the project. Their roles and responsibilities are to review project documents, to advise on the resolution of factors that may impede an effective implementation of project activities and the achievement of defined outputs, to provide technical input to the specific activities of the components of the project and to make recommendations on short term consultancies needed to achieve the deliverables.The first RAG meeting was held on May 30–31st, 2011 in Georgetown, and major recommendations made for implementation of the project.
• Regional Group of Experts (RGE) for component one and two was developed. These groups comprised of experts within the region. The first RGE meetings for component one and two were held in October 2011. Components three & four met in November 2011 for a mapping workshop.
11. Short term consultants were hired and have started to conduct exploratory and/or need assessment studies to provide:
- a more in-depth baseline data/information for each component and per country
- clear, realistic and constructive recommendations in relation to each component for each country.
- the most adapted legal and policy framework per country
- a selection of the most relevant health financing instruments to be piloted in each country
- A detail mapping on:
o Migrant population with a particular focus on locations, numbers, socio-cultural aspects, etc.
o Organization working with/for migrants at regional/national levels
o Existing HIV-services in reach and/or used by migrants.