Malawi, 600,000 LLINs
We have not proceeded with three potential distributions being considered during 2012 in Malawi, Togo and Mali.
Through January to June 2012 we offered to contribute 600,000 to 1 million nets to close the gap in nets required to achieve universal coverage. The NMCP would not progress discussions about sharing the extensive pre-distribution registration data they said they had. We considered it important for us to see to this information before contributing nets.
Togo, 500,000 LLINs
Through January to August 2012, we offered to contribute 500,000 nets when there were no other sources of funding to fill the net gap to complete a universal coverage campaign. The offer was not accepted. The NMCP would not agree to a Pre-Distribution Registration Survey (PDRS) being carried out even though our Distribution Partner had agreed to do so and had agreed to fund it. The NMCP said they had conducted a universal coverage campaign on the basis of one net per two people and they did not want to change the basis of the distribution. We said if the data was good, we could agree to that being the basis of the distribution. We asked to see the data. No data was forthcoming. A PDRS was required in our view as the existing NMCP data was:
Mali, 500,000+ LLINs
- for the number of people per household rather than the number of sleeping spaces (although not the best basis, we could have agreed to using this data if it were recently collected and accurate, with additional accuracy being sacrificed in order to achieve an immediate distribution and people protected); and
- gathered at least six months previously when discussions first began and at least 12 months old when we withdrew from discussions.
Unrest and fighting, including killings, in Mali have led to security fears and safety concerns. Our distribution partner has on several occasions withdrawn staff from the country. This has put our potential contribution of nets on hold. New timing is unknown. The need is for 4 million nets.
We have learned it is important to progress more potential distributions at the same time to avoid a delay in converting funds to nets.
Is the failure to progress with these distributions a concern?
Yes, in that it has meant we have taken longer to convert funds into nets being distributed.
What would we do differently if faced with the same situation?
We would progress more potential distributions at the same time. We are doing that now. See below
Could this be indicative of what we might find when trying to do more large-scale distributions with the degree of accuracy, transparency and accountability we require?
We do not think so. What supports this is there is a significant need for nets and the results we have achieved in Ntcheu have generated interest. More distributions with similar results will help further.