Copyright 2012 © Long Beach AIDS Foundation, Inc. A Tax Exempt Charitable Organization,
Federal Tax I.D. Number 73-
Donate Today!
Your donation actually saves lives through prevention education and emergency services.
and the World Health Organization. Having missed that original goal, the new target of 5% by the year 2014 was set in 2010. The United States does not have the experience or success of even achieving 1% reduction.
We believe that instead of making 10 years plan or 5 year plans is a waste of resources. Once we are able to achieve successes on 1 year and 3 year plans, then we can set bigger targets. Clearly the programs by Federal, State and County fund mostly existing prevention programs. A new way forward must be developed that is comprehensive, community wide and realistic. The latter part being the benchmark.
Even achieving a 1% reduction moves the needle forward one tick, something that hasn’t
been achieved, states Garry Bowie, Executive Director of the Long Beach AIDS Foundation.
Just look at the CDC graph. It is very telling in how one measures success. Our
Project: Pathway looks at the prevention of new HIV infections from “it takes a village”
approach. We believe that the whole community approach starting from early childhood
through adulthood is the most realistic approach to prevention and sustainability.
It is much like teaching good eating habits or healthy living models that create
a standard mindset. It likely will repeat itself into future generations when a
whole well-
While the number of new infections has remained relatively flat statistically speaking, the CDC considers success is being achieved when compared to the number of people living with HIV. The Long Beach AIDS Foundation feels this is a false matrix to pin any realistic approach to HIV reduction from. Instead of looking at the statistical spread between new HIV infections and number of people living with HIV, we feel the only line one should focus on is the number of new HIV infections. We believe success should be measured by an annual reduction in the trend of new HIV. CDC HIV Strategy
Infections regardless of the total living with HIV population. Long Beach averages from 1450 to 1550 new HIV infections annually, accounting for nearly 1/4th of the States annual total.
“The annual lifetime cost to Long Beach is half a billion dollars! That is each year!”, explains Bowie. “When you multiply the individual lifetime cost of someone with HIV at $379,688.00 by the total number of annual new infections, that’s a hell of a lot of money to spending on a lifetime of HIV maintenance. Nearly 60% of this cost is picked up by taxpayers.”
The Foundation believes that the most cost effective way to reduce new HIV infections
is through prevention and education programs. Moreover, the Foundation strongly
encourages all agencies to completely innovate their outreach programs with field
outreach and culturally adjusted programs for the under-
Risk taking should be limited to innovative programs not to ignoring communities where we don’t necessarily connect with them culturally. If you can’t connect, try again, and again, until finally someone listens in that community.
Nonetheless, the CDC is funding millions of dollars to the health departments based on new rates of HIV infection data. This data has only recently been accumulated in the last few years. Mostly the major metropolitan cities will seen an increase in funding. Small communities and rural areas will see a funding decrease.
The CDC intends to fund high-
The Foundation feels that the reports the drive grants are based too much on “contacts” and less on community infection data. If a County Prevention contract calls for the agency to make “25 contacts a week” and they test 25 people for HIV weekly, that is not a measurement for success. The Foundation believes that other methodologies for measurements be used to determine success.
We know many people will not agree with us on our analysis of the problem. We welcome the discussion on how we determine success on the war on HIV. We will simply ask, if the number of new HIV has not gone down annually on average, then by what measurement do you use to ultimately determine success?
“If we haven’t even acheive a simple 1% reduction in new HIV infections, then how in the heck are we going to get to 25%?” asks Garry Bowie. “And don’t go back to donors asking for more money if you don’t have an answer for that. They want results and accountability. They are funding a ‘cause’, not a building.”
“If we haven’t even achieved a simple 1% reduction in new HIV infections, then how in the heck are we going to get to 25%?”
Half-
How is success measured in HIV reduction? Are we using the wrong matrix to measure success if South Africa is able to achieve a 25% reduction in 5 years?