FCAA Resource Tracking 2009

U.S.
PhilanthroPic
SUPPort
to addreSS
hiv/aidS

2008
in 2008

acknowledgementS

FCAA wishes to thank the Ford Foundation and UNAIDS for their very generous funding and
in-kind support of this publication. The data, findings, and conclusions presented in this report
are those of FCAA alone and do not necessarily reflect the perspectives or the opinions of the
Ford Foundation, UNAIDS, or any other funder.
FCAA also gratefully acknowledges the efforts of the following people in ensuring the quality
and comprehensiveness of this report:

ww Erika Baehr, primary author
ww FCAA Board members Anu Gupta of Johnson & Johnson, Mark Ishaug of AIDS Foundation
of Chicago, and Jen Kates of The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation
ww Members of the Working Group on Global Philanthropic Resource Tracking: Makfire
Alija, EFG Network Coordinator, European Foundation Centre’s European HIV/AIDS
Funders Group (EFG); Astrid Bonfield, Chief Executive, The Diana, Princess of Wales
Memorial Fund and Chair, EFG; Nancy Cunningham, Research Consultant; Paul Di Donato,
Philanthropic Consultant; and Benjamin Gobet, Global Flows Technical Officer, UNAIDS
ww Chris Collins of amfAR
ww Pamela Hayman, design
FCAA thanks all the philanthropic entities that responded to the 2008 FCAA resource tracking
survey that provided the bulk of information for this publication. Thanks also to the Foundation
Center and Foundation Search for use of their data to supplement this report.

Finally, FCAA thanks all the funding institutions that supported us with a membership
contribution in 2009 – our work to build community in HIV/AIDS philanthropy would not be
possible without your support.

U.S. PhilanthroPic SUPPort to addreSS
hiv/aidS in 2008

table of contentS

3 Executive Summary 23 Geographic Distribution
of HIV/AIDS Funding
6 About FCAA and
This Report 34 Intended Use of
HIV/AIDS Funding
8 2009 Review and the
Road Ahead 36 Target Populations of
HIV/AIDS Funding
11 Total U.S. HIV/AIDS
Grantmaking in 2008 38 Appendix A:
Methodology
13 Top U.S. HIV/AIDS
Funders in 2008 43 Appendix B:
FCAA Survey
15 Concentration of
HIV/AIDS Funders 50 Appendix C:
Top U.S. HIV/AIDS
17 Changes in HIV/AIDS Funders Websites
Grantmaking
52 Appendix D:
20 2009 Forecast Global HIV/AIDS
Funding Organizations
21 U.S. Corporate
HIV/AIDS Funders

ACRONyMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

ARV = antiretroviral drug HCWs = healthcare workers PLWHA = people living
with HIV/AIDS
CBO = community-based IDUs = injecting drug users
organization STI = sexually transmitted
MSM = men who have sex
infection
CDC = U.S. Centers for Disease with men
Control and Prevention UNAIDS = Joint United
NGO = non-governmental
Nations Programme on
EFG = European HIV/AIDS organization
HIV/AIDS
Funders Group
OVC = orphans and
Note on text:
FCAA = Funders Concerned vulnerable children
All figures marked in $ are U.S.
About AIDS
PEPFAR = U.S. President’s dollar amounts.
Global Fund = Global Fund Emergency Plan for
to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis AIDS Relief
and Malaria

execUtive SUmmary

T
otal HIV/AIDS-related philanthropy by U.S.-based funders increased by 11% between
2007 and 2008, rising from $555 million to $618 million in estimated disbursements.
This increase was solely due to increased funding by the world’s largest private
philanthropy engaged in HIV/AIDS, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Without funding
from the Gates Foundation, estimated disbursements actually decreased slightly (by
approximately 3%) from 2007 to 2008.

Key findings and highlights for 2008 include:

ww HIV/AIDS-related philanthropic funding is increasingly concentrated among a relatively
small number of funders. The Gates Foundation alone accounted for 59% of funding
disbursements in 2008. The top 10 funders, including the Gates Foundation, accounted for
82% of all HIV/AIDS-related disbursements in 2008.
ww Corporate funders represented 16% of total 2008 disbursements, and 42% of all non-Gates
HIV/AIDS-related philanthropy that year.
ww Most funding in 2008 (84% of disbursements) was directed to addressing the
HIV/AIDS epidemic outside of the United States. Even without the Gates Foundation,
which exclusively funds HIV/AIDS projects outside of the U.S., the majority of funding
(59%) by other top funders was directed outside the U.S., and an increased percentage of
funders since 2007 (66% of funders in 2008, compared to 55% in 2007) devoted some
or all of their giving to addressing the international epidemic. A growing share of this
funding was given to organizations based in sub-Saharan Africa (42% in 2008, compared
with 33% in 2007), and Asia and the Pacific (22% in 2008, up from 14% in 2007).
ww Correspondingly, the share of funding for the domestic epidemic fell (from 18% of all
funding in 2007 to 16% in 2008), and a lesser percentage of the top funders provided
funding exclusively to address domestic HIV/AIDS issues in 2008. As in previous years, the
Northeast region of the United States received the largest share of domestic funding (41%).
Increased funding is needed in all regions—especially in Southern states, which continue to
account for the greatest number of new AIDS diagnoses and the largest number of people
living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA).
ww The biggest share of international funding went to research in 2008 ($215 million),
followed by prevention ($112m) and treatment ($80m). The biggest share of domestic
funding went to HIV prevention in 2008 ($27 million), followed closely by social services
($24m) and treatment ($21m). Smaller shares of both international and domestic funding
were allocated to advocacy—which traditionally lags behind research, prevention and
treatment—and orphans and vulnerable children (OVC) and human resources, two new
categories this year.
ww PLWHA were identified more frequently than any other population group as beneficiaries
of both international and domestic philanthropy by U.S.-based funders. Internationally,
other population groups identified after PLWHA were, in rank order, women, youth,
OVC, and injecting drug users (IDUs). Domestically, after PLWHA, funders identified, in
rank order, African-Americans, gay men and men who have sex with men (MSM), youth,
homeless/impoverished persons, women, and IDUs. It is notable that while data from
the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) indicate over half of new HIV
infections in the United States in 2006 were among gay and bisexual men, only a third of
domestic funders identified this group as a top beneficiary of their organizations’ giving.

U.S. PHIlANTHRoPIC SUPPoRT To ADDRESS HIV/AIDS IN 2008 3

execUtive SUmmary

Similarly, African-Americans accounted for almost half of new HIV infections in 2006,
but only a third of domestic funders identified this group as a top target population of
their funding.
ww Looking ahead, funder projections for 2009 suggest that HIV/AIDS-related
philanthropy funding levels will likely decrease: 42% of funders are forecasting
anticipated decreases for 2009, including six of the top 10 funders. Forty-three percent
of funders expect their HIV/AIDS-related disbursements to remain approximately
the same or are unsure about 2009 funding levels, while only 15% of funders expected
their funding to increase in 2009. This is the lowest percentage of funders expecting an
increase on record since FCAA began surveying funders about their predictions for the
upcoming year.

These findings carry several important implications for HIV/AIDS philanthropy. A trend
of note this year is that aggregate HIV/AIDS-related disbursements among funders other
than the Gates Foundation were flat from 2006 to 2007, and slightly decreased from 2007
to 2008 (by 3%). Given the extent of the economic crisis, increasing or even maintaining
a stable level of HIV/AIDS financing through 2008 may have been a challenge for some
funders, and funders deserve praise and recognition for the maintenance of support for
critical HIV/AIDS work in 2008. Yet the needs of individuals and communities affected by
HIV/AIDS have not leveled off since 2006; they continue to grow.

Internationally, the economic downturn has exacerbated the situation on-the-ground as
it disproportionately impacts poorer countries, home to the vast majority of the tens of
millions of people affected by HIV, who need more at precisely the time that donors are less
able to provide such financing. Some international donors and governments are likely to
cut health budgets, resulting in reduced funding for HIV/AIDS services. On the domestic
front, many states are facing major deficits that will result in millions of dollars in budget
cuts to HIV/AIDS programs, with prevention activities being some of the hardest-hit. Such
cutbacks place the health and well-being of millions of people at risk, and threaten to stall
progress toward scaling up HIV prevention, treatment, and care for all in need.

Private philanthropic funders have a unique opportunity to target funding for populations
and issues that governments and other donors are reluctant to prioritize because they are
perceived as too specific or controversial—such as advocacy activities that support the
rights of PLWHA and marginalized communities, or prevention strategies that include
harm reduction. The need is all the more urgent because in many countries and contexts,
the activities perceived as more controversial (prevention programs for higher risk
populations, for example) are more vulnerable to public budget cuts than other programs

4 FUNDERS CoNCERNED AboUT AIDS

because they have less political support. Private philanthropic funders should consider
developing programs and strategic collaborations aimed at increasing the level and scope
of targeted resources for these types of activities. Private philanthropic funders should also
consider resourcing local NGOs and community-based organizations, which tend to be the
most effective agents at reaching and delivering services to the most vulnerable HIV-
affected individuals and families, and thus, are primed to best engender a longer-term,
sustainable response.

Current economic and epidemiological realities demand greater resources for HIV/AIDS, not
acceptance of stable levels, and further yet, more effective uses of the resources at hand. The
economic crisis introduces new opportunities for critical funding, and can be seen as a catalyst
towards ensuring that the resources that are available have maximum impact. Funders should
be creative and committed in their efforts to increase resources and to sharpen the focus and
effectiveness of their programs, in order to sustain the momentum made and ensure support to
people living with and affected by HIV/AIDS, even in tougher financial times.

Approximately 33 million people are currently living with HIV around the world. Effective HIV
treatment reaches only one in three people in need, however, and for every two people who start
treatment, another five are newly infected. According to UNICEF, as of 2005, more than 15 million
children under 18 had lost one or both parents to AIDS, and in 2007, 2.1 million children were living
with HIV. There are over 1 million people in the United States living with HIV today, the highest
number of all the world’s industrialized countries. It is estimated that more than 20% of them do
not know they are infected. In the U.S., there are 56,000 new HIV infections each year.


aboUt fcaa and thiS rePort

F
unders Concerned About AIDS (FCAA) was founded in 1987 with the mission to
mobilize the leadership, ideas, and resources of U.S.-based funders to eradicate the
HIV/AIDS pandemic – domestically and internationally – and to address its social and
economic consequences. FCAA is the only U.S.-based organization comprised of and for private
philanthropic institutions engaged in the response to HIV/AIDS.

For more than 20 years, FCAA has fostered and enhanced a meaningful grantmaker response
to HIV/AIDS here in the United States and abroad. In early 2009 FCAA staff and board
entered into a strategic planning process to determine our organizational and programming
priorities, and emerged reaffirmed in our vision: to create a philanthropic sector that works
collaboratively, informedly and urgently to ensure that the HIV/AIDS epidemic is halted, and
that the communities already affected by it receive the resources they need.

The new economy necessitates working together to maximize our resources in the fight against
HIV and AIDS. However, we also realize that partnerships are not forged overnight. In order
to focus on building a community of funders through open dialogue and trust, FCAA convened
our first-ever annual gathering in September 2009. See Page 22 for a review of the significant
themes defined by gathering attendees around the role of private philanthropy in contributing
to an end to the pandemic.

This signature publication series is proof that collaboration is not just part of our vision, it is
the cornerstone of our approach. Four years ago FCAA, the European Foundation Centre’s
European HIV/AIDS Funders Group (EFG), and UNAIDS created the Working Group
on Global Philanthropic Resource Tracking to formalize the working relationships that
had existed among these three groups for years, and to further harmonize our collection
approaches and present the most accurate possible picture of HIV/AIDS-related institutional
philanthropy. Along with this publication, and EFG’s 2008 resource tracking work, a specific
result of this collaboration can be found in Appendix D, which includes an enhanced contact
list and profiles of select funding organizations located outside of the U.S. and Western and
Central Europe. At FCAA’s Annual Gathering, Keynote speaker Stephen Lewis, Co-Director
of AIDS-Free World, urged funders to partner closely with organizations on-the-ground; this
project provides a beginning list of potential local partners and new insight into the landscape
of global philanthropy.

This is FCAA’s seventh annual publication that provides data and analysis on HIV/AIDS-
related philanthropic giving by U.S.-based philanthropic institutions, including private, family,
and community foundations, public charities, and corporate grantmaking programs. This
edition covers funding disbursements made in 2008. All information in this report is accurate
and current as of September 2009. This year’s Top U.S.-Based HIV/AIDS Funders list includes
the top 72 U.S. HIV/AIDS philanthropic entities. Each of these entities disbursed $300,000 or
more to HIV/AIDS in 2008. Where possible, we have observed changes in grantmaking among
these top funders.


Now, more than ever, FCAA’s resource tracking publication is poised to analyze the true
impact of the economic crisis on HIV/AIDS grantmaking. While the funding landscape has
changed, there is still room for optimism. Throughout the publication you will find profiles
of grantmaker innovation: building the next generation of leaders in HIV prevention and
advocacy; taking a collaborative approach to comprehensive sexual education in an urban
school district; and funding grassroots organizations to effectively reach at-risk populations
on-the-ground.

Some funders receive substantial funding from the U.S. government to implement
HIV/AIDS programming or distribute funding to other programs. While we know these
public/private partnerships are extremely valuable in ensuring that funds are allocated
effectively, government funds (which are tracked and reported by UNAIDS) are not included
in total grantmaking reported here because this report focuses exclusively on private sector
philanthropy. See page 16 for a sidebar on public/private partnerships.

As noted in Table 1, some funders reported that they received some financial resources from
other funders tracked by FCAA. At least some of these funds were used to support HIV/AIDS-
related funding to other institutions. In order to avoid double-counting, the top grantmakers
total in Table 1 reflects a reduction of $19,644,373 to correct for reported re-granting of funds
from one FCAA-tracked top grantmaker to another.

FCAA’s resource tracking work is intended to contribute to a critical and thoughtful assessment
of the total U.S.-based philanthropic investment in HIV/AIDS. By building upon HIV/AIDS
grantmaking information reported by The Foundation Center and Foundation Search, and
collecting other types of detailed data directly from the HIV/AIDS funders, FCAA’s goal is to
create an easy-to-use, comprehensive, and informative publication that captures the scope and
depth of philanthropic funding and support for HIV/AIDS.

FCAA hopes that this report will enable a wide variety of readers to gain new understanding
about the overall distribution and diversity of U.S. HIV/AIDS philanthropic funding as well as
trends in this grantmaking. We welcome input from readers about how to make future editions
of U.S. Philanthropic Support more useful.


2009 review and the road ahead

T
he most recent UNAIDS update on the global AIDS epidemic, released in November
2008, suggested that new infections were stabilizing in sub-Saharan Africa and most
other parts of the world—a refreshing affirmation that something was indeed working
in the fight against AIDS. The six-fold increase in HIV/AIDS financing from public and private
funders since 2001 has been crucial to this progress. Such powerful momentum can and should
be sustained even as the world struggles to overcome the challenges associated with the global
economic crisis that began suddenly in 2008.

The global economic downturn has negatively affected the lives of millions of people around
the world, but few have faced as much uncertainty as HIV-affected individuals and members of
vulnerable populations.

It is estimated that the global economy as a whole will shrink this year for the first time since
the 1940s. The impact is already particularly devastating among people living in low- and
middle-income countries, which have limited resources to help citizens weather the downturn.
Many governments have been forced to reduce social-sector spending even as the value of
remittances from abroad—a key source of income in several resource-constrained countries
around the world—has declined. The World Bank has estimated that some 200 million people
around the world will have been pushed into poverty (living on less than $2 a day) in the 18
months prior to the end of 2009 due to a combination of rising joblessness and higher food and
energy prices.1

As individuals and families become poorer, they have less disposable income to spend on
health care (significant in regions like sub-Saharan Africa, where up to two-thirds of health
expenditures are out-of-pocket), while the other necessities of life (such as basic nutrition,
safe water, housing, and children’s education) become more difficult to afford. The current
and potential risks to the health and well-being of millions of PLWHA and their families are
numerous. For example, they may not be able to afford transport fares to clinics, let alone pay
various fees for services that once were cheaper or free.

Faced with major budget constraints, governments in some countries (such as Tanzania and
Botswana) have made plans to reduce spending on national AIDS programs. According to a
joint UNAIDS and World Bank report released in June 2009, treatment programs in 31% of
the countries surveyed were expected to fall short of necessary resources by the end of 2009
if current trends continue.2 The situation is likely to be even more devastating for prevention
programs, especially those targeting marginalized populations, because such programs tend to
be the first cut when budgets tighten.
1 World bank press release. “Crisis
Hitting Poor Hard in Developing World,
World bank says.” February 12, 2009.
http://web.worldbank.org/WbSITE/
It is therefore increasingly clear that most poorer and high-burden countries desperately need
EXTERNAl/NEWS/0,,contentMDK:22067 additional external help to maintain and further develop effective prevention interventions,
892~pagePK:64257043~piPK:437376~theS
itePK:4607,00.html enhance the focus on the interconnections between reproductive health and rights and HIV/
AIDS, support the myriad needs of especially marginalized HIV/AIDS populations such
2 UNAIDS and the World bank.
The Global Economic Crisis and HIV as OVC, MSM and women, and ensure the provision of basic services to people currently
Prevention and Treatment Programmes:
Vulnerabilities and Impact. June 2009.
receiving lifesaving HIV/AIDS treatment and support.
Available at: http://data.unaids.org:80/
pub/Report/2009/jc1734_econ_crisis_
hiv_response_en.pdf Bilateral and multilateral donors have been able to uphold their funding commitments through
2008 and 2009, but there may be some potential shortfalls on the horizon. As of November
3 Global Fund website. “latest figures
on pledges and contributions to the 2009, secured funding for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria totaled
Global Fund.” November 2, 2009.
http://www.theglobalfund.org/en/
$9.5 billion, little more than two-thirds of expected demand for 2008–2010.3 The launch of a
resources/?lang=en new, comprehensive global health initiative by the Obama Administration in the midst of the


difficulties of the economic crisis was welcome. Yet there is concern that the FY 2010 budget
request to Congress for HIV/AIDS and the Global Fund through PEPFAR does not include any
significant increase over FY 2009 levels, and will not be enough. HIV/AIDS was also not on the
agenda at the July 2009 G8 summit in Italy, also raising concern that world leaders no longer
consider the epidemic a major priority, and are failing to honor their commitment, made at a
summit in 2005, to provide adequate resources to achieve universal access to HIV prevention,
care and treatment by 2010.

A recent survey conducted by the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation found that the U.S.
public’s sense of urgency about the domestic HIV/AIDS epidemic as a national health problem
has greatly decreased over the past decade4. A concomitant decline was seen in regards to
understanding or concern about personal risk, even among members of groups most vulnerable
to HIV. Such complacency is dangerous, given that the annual number of new infections in
the United States has remained the same over the past decade—about 56,000—and almost a
quarter of those infected are not aware of their status. Also alarming is the domestic epidemic’s
disproportionate impact on racial and ethnic minorities and gay and bisexual men. To put it in
perspective, compared with the global epidemic, the total number of African-Americans living
with HIV in the United States is greater than the total number of HIV-infected people in seven
of the 15 PEPFAR focus countries, and on its own would represent the 16th largest epidemic in
the world.5

Domestic HIV prevention in particular requires more focus and more funding, as certain
populations (African Americans and MSM) are not being effectively reached, and 21% of HIV-
infected persons in the U.S. do not know they are infected. Yet prevention programs represented
the smallest share (only 4%) of the FY2009 and FY2010 federal HIV/AIDS funding6. And,
as a result of the economic crisis, state and local governments have been reducing budgets,
cutting prevention programs as well as health and administrative staff for HIV/AIDS programs
sharply. According to a survey by the National Alliance of State and Territorial AIDS Directors
(NASTAD), 74% of HIV/AIDS programs that receive state funding experienced cuts to HIV
prevention activities in 2009 as a result of state budget cuts. (The comparable share of HIV
treatment programs receiving state funding that experienced cuts in 2009 was nearly 50%.)

The economic crisis has impacted most private philanthropic funders of HIV/AIDS. Some
have reduced grantmaking and scaled back the provision of human and financial resources.
For funders that rely on endowments for their source of wealth, the financial downturn,
beginning in late 2007, has since cut a significant percentage of the value of their assets, with
some sustaining losses exceeding 30% to date. Meanwhile, funders that rely on fundraising
4 The Henry J. Kaiser Family for income are finding it more difficult to secure existing donors as well as identify new ones.
Foundation, press release, “less than a
year after CDC announced the U.S. HIV
Regardless of income source, therefore, some funders have had to make difficult decisions this
epidemic is much larger than previously year—including 1) reductions in staff, salaries, benefits, or extra costs such as travel in order
thought, public’s sense of urgency is
down, even among some higher risk to maintain current levels of grantmaking or limit the scope of cuts; and/or 2) reductions in
groups”. April 28, 2009. www.kff.org/ new or existing grantmaking. With no clear confidence in financial security for the future, the
kaiserpolls/posr042809nr.cfm%20
overall atmosphere is such that funders may be averse to supporting new or different projects.
5 black AIDS Institute. Left Behind:
Black America, A Neglected Priority in
the Global AIDS Epidemic. August 2008. All of these factors contribute to an atmosphere of pessimism and uncertainty regarding the
www.blackaids.org/image_uploads/
article_575/08_left_behind.pdf future of both the domestic and international HIV/AIDS response. It is necessary, though, that
all stakeholders recognize the importance of maintaining the hard-earned momentum built
6 The Henry J. Kaiser Family
Foundation, HIV/AIDS Policy Fact Sheet, up over the past decade of increased investments in HIV/AIDS and health service delivery.
“U.S. Federal Funding for HIV/AIDS: The
FY 2009 budget Request.” April 2008.
These investments have paid off in countless ways, most notably in the huge number of lives
www.kff.org/hivaids/upload/7029-041.pdf saved. Instead of a reason to retrench, the economic crisis should be viewed as an opportunity


2009 review and the road ahead

to ensure that the limited resources available have maximum impact. Instead of succumbing
to “HIV/AIDS fatigue,” or leaving AIDS behind to focus on other issues, all global players—
multilateral and bilateral donors, governments in needy countries, and private philanthropists—
should look anew at the epidemic, focusing on identifying and utilizing the most effective
evidence-based solutions to rally additional resources and ensure continued progress on all
fronts: human rights, prevention, social services, care, and treatment.

Private philanthropy has a critical and unique role in such efforts. Advocacy activities,
especially those that empower PLWHA, marginalized populations and others affected by
HIV/AIDS, are key to building campaigns, movements, and networks that support leadership
among these populations, a development that helps give them a stronger voice and influence
in policymaking, and creating social change. For a variety of reasons, they are also activities
that large multilateral and bilateral organizations and national governments are less likely to
support. Many smaller funders make up the field of private philanthropy, and, compared with
larger donor organizations or governments, private philanthropic funders can respond much
more flexibly to targeted prevention and treatment initiatives (such as the provision of clean
syringes to injecting drug users) and the particular needs of marginalized populations (such as
MSM, sex workers, and migrants). These are issues and populations that many larger and more
formal entities ignore, at best, or discriminate against (at worst).

Collaborations among private philanthropic funders, as well as with corporations,
governments, and large bilateral and multilateral organizations, are another important avenue
to pursue in the near future. Funders can help each other meet mutual goals by coordinating
and sharing best practices and skills, establishing successful models of service delivery, and
leveraging investments to bring in additional commitments and resources. Partnerships should
also be fostered with community-based organizations, thereby increasing the local capacity of
constituents as a longer-term sustainable solution.

The economic downturn has forced funders to take stock of their work and to streamline
programs to be as critically effective as possible. This could be precisely what is needed
to sustain the momentum of past years and enhance it in the future. To achieve the goal
of universal access to HIV prevention, treatment, and care by 2010, and the Millennium
Development Goal of halting and reversing the spread of HIV by 2015, HIV/AIDS
philanthropists must closely examine their successes and failures, join together with
colleagues, and recommit to combating the epidemic with their best efforts.


total U.S. hiv/aidS grantmaking
in 2008
FCAA identified 345 U.S.-based funders that made HIV/AIDS-related grant disbursements in
2008. Combined, these funders supported some 6,300 HIV/AIDS-related grants or projects,
disbursing a total of approximately $618 million to these projects.

Note on missing data:
The great majority of private philanthropic funding for HIV/AIDS in 2008 has been captured
in the available data. However, it is important to note that despite repeated efforts, FCAA was
unable to receive data from some funders, and they are not included in the report. No data
were received from the Children’s Investment Fund Foundation (US), which was a top funder
in 2005, 2006, and 2007; the Coca-Cola Africa Foundation, which was a top funder in 2004,
2005, and 2006; and Gilead Sciences, which was a top funder in 2005. In addition, several
other funders that have appeared in previous reports are not included this year for various
reasons. They include the Rockefeller Foundation (which is focusing increasingly on health
systems strengthening and not disease-specific programming) and The Henry J. Kaiser Family
Foundation7 (an operating foundation that develops and runs its own policy research and
communications programs, which are increasingly difficult to value financially). Two corporate
funders that appeared in past reports (ExxonMobil and Altria Group) moved away from
funding HIV/AIDS in 2008.

FCAA surveyed funders about funding commitments and disbursements in 2008. Tracking
commitments (funding pledged for grants/projects in a given year, whether or not the funds
were disbursed in that year) helps to gauge current and future outlays. Tracking disbursements
(funding actually made available in a given year, which may include funding from prior year
commitments) provides data on funds actually disbursed in a given year. For some funders,
commitments and disbursements are the same in a given year; for others, commitments indicate
funding above or below actual disbursements in a year.)

Among all funders for which FCAA has both 2007 and 2008 data, the total value of
disbursements increased 17% from 2007 to 2008.

Chart 1a:
Total HIV/AIDS Grantmaking Disbursements by U.S. Philanthropies 2005-20088
7 The Henry J. Kaiser Family
Foundation is a private operating
foundation with HIV-related 2005 $351
activities that are increasingly
integrated throughout its programs
across the entire foundation. 2006 $501
Though the foundation is usually
one of the top ten funders in terms
of highest annual disbursements, it 2007 $544
is no longer possible to separately
identify and report the level of
foundation resources dedicated
2008 $612
specifically to HIV/AIDS. It should
be noted that the foundation has
maintained its commitment and $0 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700
level of resources dedicated
to HIV/AIDS both domestically
and globally. (See Appendix A HIV/AIDS Grantmaking (in $ millions)
for a larger discussion about
operating foundations and Kaiser’s
contributions.)

8 This chart includes only the
funders for which FCAA has all
four years of disbursement data
(2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008)
for 2005-2008.


total U.S. hiv/aidS grantmaking in 2008

Among the top funders9 tracked by FCAA, commitments decreased 16% between
2007 and 2008.

Chart 1b:
Total HIV/AIDS Grantmaking Commitments by U.S. Philanthropies 2000-200810

2000 $312
2001 $501
2002 $300
2003 $394
2004 $346
2005 $354
2006 $979
2007 $491
2008 $413

$0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1000 $1200
HIV/AIDS Grantmaking Commitments (in $ millions)

9 “Top funders” are those identified by
FCAA that have disbursed $300,000 or
more to HIV/AIDS grants and projects in a
given year. In 2008, a total of 72 funders
met that criterion.

10 This chart includes all commitments
data available for all top funders
each year.


toP U.S. hiv/aidS fUnderS in 2008

Seventy-two funders reported HIV/AIDS-related grantmaking disbursements of $300,000 or
more in 2008. All are listed in Table 1.

Table 1:
Top 72 U.S. HIV/AIDS Funders in 2008
(ranked by amount of disbursements)11

Name Disbursements ($) Commitments ($)
1. bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, WA 378,482,751w w 234,155,177
2. The Ford Foundation, NY 27,777,195w w 31,714,691
3. Abbott and Abbott Fund, Il 25,229,419w w 0
4. M•A•C AIDS Fund and M•A•C Cosmetics, NY 23,461,948w w 27,362,165
5. Merck & Co., Inc, NJ 13,368,736w w Not available
6. open Society Institute, NY12 12,494,236w w 12,494,236
7. Johnson & Johnson, NJ 11,667,000w w 11,667,000
8. bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation
and bristol-Myers Squibb Co., NY 10,383,997w w 4,553,626
9. broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS, NY 10,039,298*w w 10,039,298
10. Pfizer Inc and Pfizer Foundation, NY13 9,162,372 Not available
11. Irene Diamond Fund, NY 8,305,366w w 9,820,866
12. Elton John AIDS Foundation, NY 6,375,034*w w 6,375,034
13. Tides Foundation, CA14 5,494,462*w w 3,044,581
14. The Foundation for AIDS Research (amfAR), NY 5,100,050*w w 4,619,805
11 The state associated with each entity 15. Robin Hood Foundation, NY 4,895,000w w 5,135,000
refers to the state in which the entity is
based, not necessarily where grants and
16. National AIDS Fund, DC 4,750,273*w w 5,456,797
projects are funded by the entity. 17. Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, CA 4,168,868*w w 4,756,639
12 The 2008 dollar amounts provided by 18. Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, NY 3,830,000w w 2,790,000
the open Society Institute are estimates 19. HIV Collaborative Fund, a project of the Tides Center, CA 3,001,210* Not available
and not exact figures. These estimated
disbursements only include HIV/AIDS- 20. Rockefeller brothers Fund, Inc., NY 2,550,000w w 2,692,500
related grants made to 1) the open
Society Institute’s Public Health Program,
21. The Starr Foundation, NY 2,005,000w w 10,005,000
2) the Southeast Asia Initiative/burma 22. W.K. Kellogg Foundation, MI 1,985,000 Not available
Project, and 3) national and regional Soros
Foundations. They do not include 23. Global Fund for Women, CA 1,968,090*w w 2,058,600
HIV/AIDS-related grants made by any 24. Firelight Foundation, CA 1,872,084*w w 1,977,584
other Soros Foundation network program
or entity. 25. levi Strauss & Co., CA 1,809,000w w 1,809,000
26. The New York Community Trust, NY 1,746,000*w w 1,746,000
13 This figure includes grants from both
Pfizer Inc. and the Pfizer Foundation, but 27. The Wells Fargo Foundation, CA 1,722,269 Not available
should be regarded as an estimate that
does not include all HIV/AIDS funding due 28. AIDS Foundation of Chicago, Il 1,663,982* Not available
to the unavailability of complete data. 29. American Jewish World Service, NY 1,640,623w w 1,430,009
14 A large part of HIV Collaborative Fund 30. The Sidney Kimmel Foundation, PA 1,640,000 Not available
monies are included in the total figure for 31. GlaxoSmithKline US, NC15 w 1,575,174 Not available
Tides Foundation, but the Collaborative
Fund also handles funds that are not 32. The San Francisco AIDS Foundation, CA w 1,512,500w w 750,000
included in the Tides Foundation total.
Double counting of funds is corrected in
33. Silicon Valley Community Foundation, CA 1,435,066 Not available
the aggregate total of disbursements. 34. Washington AIDS Partnership, DC w 1,354,984*w w 1,199,620
15 The figure for GlaxoSmithKline
includes grants data from the U.S.
branch of the company only. The
company is headquartered in the United
Kingdom, and non-U.S. HIV/AIDS funding
(approximately $4.7 million in 2008) is
tracked in the European HIV/AIDS Funders
Group (EFG) resource tracking report
(see www.hivaidsfunders.org to view the
report, European Philanthropic Support to
Address HIV/AIDS in 2008).


toP U.S. hiv/aidS fUnderS in 2008

Table 1, continued
Name Disbursements ($) Commitments ($)
35. Pride Foundation, WA w 1,316,952w w Not available
36. Missouri Foundation for Health, Mo w 1,185,662w w 1,421,612
37. H. van Ameringen Foundation, NY 1,091,000w w Not available
38. Children Affected by AIDS Foundation, CA w 1,057,593*w w 1,057,593
39. Alphawood Foundation, Il w 1,057,000w w Not available
40. The Design Industries Foundation Fighting
AIDS (DIFFA), NY w 1,026,131w w 1,264,008
41. James b. Pendleton Charitable Trust, WA w 990,411w w 990,411
42. International Fund for Health & Family Planning, NY 950,109w Not available
43. The Comer Foundation, Il w 940,775w w 940,775
44. The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, CA w 900,000w w 1,049,048
45. The Pew Charitable Trusts, PA w 881,000w Not available
46. Weingart Foundation, CA w 773,400w Not available
47. United Nations Foundation, DC w 753,346*w w 953,346
48. The Anne Dinning and Michael Wolf Foundation, NY 750,000w Not available
49. The Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation, Inc., MD 725,000w Not available
50. boston Foundation, Inc., MA w 713,850*w Not available
51. South Africa Development Fund, MA w 686,928*w w 686,928
52. Macy’s Foundation, oH w 673,070w Not available
53. Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Fund, CA w 645,000w w 505,000
54. The John D. & Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Il 615,000w w 250,000
55. The Summit Foundation, DC w 568,000w w 568,000
56. The David and lucile Packard Foundation, CA w 550,000w w 1,580,000
57. AIDS Funding Collaborative, oH w 544,763*w w 525,048
58. bD (becton, Dickinson and Company), NJ w 524,000w w 250,000
59. Houston Endowment Inc., TX w 522,500w w 465,000
60. Arcus Foundation, MI w 510,000w Not available
61. The Skoll Foundation, CA w 510,000w Not available
62. The Community Foundation for the
National Capital Region, DC w 504,030w Not available
63. The John M. lloyd Foundation, CA w 484,550w w 334,550
64. Staying Alive Foundation, NY w 480,810w w 665,458
65. San Diego HIV Funding Collaborative, CA w 470,081w w 541,000
66. The Campbell Foundation, Fl w 442,946w w 442,946
16 The Indiana AIDS Fund is a program 67. Indiana AIDS Fund, IN16 w 424,550w w 424,550
of the Health Foundation of Greater
68. The Health Foundation of Greater Indianapolis, IN 394,740w w 418,251
Indianapolis; however, the two conduct
separate RFPs and grantmaking. 69. Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, MI w 370,000w Not available

17 Funders with an asterisk (*) after
70. World Children’s Fund, CA w 322,019w Not available
their total reported that they received 71. The Duke Endowment, NC w 320,929w Not available
some financial resources from other
agencies tracked by FCAA. At least some 72. The Denver Foundation, Co w 315,500w Not available
of these funds were then re-granted to
support HIV/AIDS-related funding to other
institutions. To avoid double counting 2008 HIV/AIDS Grantmaking Disbursements by Top 7217 $600,814,259
of funds, the top 72 subtotal reflects a
2008 HIV/AIDS Grantmaking Commitments by Top 72 $412,986,752
reduction of $19,644,373 to correct for
re-granting of funds from one FCAA- Total 2008 U.S. HIV/AIDS Grantmaking Disbursements $617,883,789
tracked top grantmaker to another. The
total amount for all grantmakers also
reflects a reduction of $19,644,373 to
account for re-granting of funds from one
FCAA-tracked grantmaker to another. See
Appendix A for a more full explanation of
the methodology used for this report.


concentration of hiv/aidS fUnderS

HIV/AIDS funding by U.S.-based private philanthropic funders is increasingly concentrated
among a relatively small number of entities. Funding disbursements from the largest U.S.
HIV/AIDS grantmaker, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, accounted for 59% of all identified
HIV/AIDS grantmaking disbursements in 2008—a slightly higher share than the 54% recorded
for 2007. The top 10 U.S. HIV/AIDS funders, including the Gates Foundation, accounted for
82% of all identified HIV/AIDS grantmaking disbursements in 2008 (a slight increase from
79% in 2009).

Chart 2:
Distribution of Disbursements by Amount of the U.S. HIV/AIDS Funders in 2008
(by percentage of total disbursements)

Largest funder (Gates) 59%

Funders 2-10 23%

Funders 11-26 9%

Funders 27-72 6%

Funders 73-345 3%


INCREASING IMPACT THROUGH PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS
THE WASHINGTON AIDS PARTNERSHIP

In November 2007 headlines across the country pronounced
Washington, D.C. as home to the highest HIV infection rate among U.S.
cities. The first statistics amassed on HIV in the District revealed “a
modern epidemic remarkable for its size, complexity and reach into all
parts of the city.”

The Washington AIDS Partnership, an initiative of the Washington
Regional Association of Grantmakers, is the largest private funder
of HIV/AIDS prevention, education and advocacy services in the
Washington, D.C. metropolitan region. The Partnership awards
approximately $1 million a year to local HIV/AIDS agencies, and also
works to find ways to increase local HIV/AIDS resources and foster
collaborative relationships with a variety of local and national partners.

In 2008 the Partnership formed a new public-private partnership with
the D.C. government and the HIV/AIDS Administration (HAA) to expand
the HIV medication safety-net and improve advanced planning for
D.C.’s AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP). ADAP is a federal
program that provides funding to states for HIV medication for low-
income individuals with HIV/AIDS who have limited or no access to
prescription drugs. At FCAA’s Annual Gathering in September, Washington AIDS
Partnership Executive Director Channing Wickham (far left)
A significant problem with enrollment and planning had led to $5.8 moderated a panel on the local epidemic. Dr. Shannon Hader (far
million in unspent federal ADAP funding in the District – money that the right), Director, HIV/AIDS Administration, D.C. Department of Health,
D.C. government would have had to forfeit. As a result of this public- joined the panel to emphasize the District’s growing leadership in
private partnership, the surplus was transferred to the Washington innovative public-private partnerships.
AIDS Partnership to examine best practices in the field, ensure that D.C.
has an innovative drug procurement and delivery process in place, and According to Channing Wickham, Executive Director of the Washington
purchase much-needed HIV medications for low-income individuals AIDS Partnership, the District’s approach to ADAP had not been
living with HIV/AIDS. evaluated prior to 2008. “In order to create the type of forward-looking
program that can be responsive to shifts in enrollment and drug
utilization, we first had to study and align ourselves with best practices
With a staff of two and a 23 member advisory committee of from around the world.” The Partnership contracted John Snow, Inc.
funders, experts, and individuals living with HIV/AIDS to guide (JSI), a public health research and consulting firm, to provide technical
the work, the Washington AIDS Partnership invests resources assistance in establishing an HIV Medication Pipeline to ensure the
in local organizations to improve HIV/AIDS prevention and supply of antiretroviral (ARV) drugs and other HIV medications for the
care services in the Washington, D.C. region. In addition to D.C. ADAP. JSI’s detailed analysis included the exploration of alternative
grantmaking, activities include providing techincal assistance to sources of supply and options for procurement of ARV drugs, as well
local organizations, facilititating local public policy initiatives as the development of a forecasting methodology to guide long-term
to improve the HIV/AIDS system of prevention and care, and planning and management of the HIV Medication Pipeline.
recruiting and mentoring a team of young people who commit
to a year of full-time volunteer service at local HIV/AIDS Ultimately, the scale up of the D.C. ADAP will maximize drug availability,
agencies as AmiCorps members. HIV treatment stability, and enrollment of District residents who
desperately need HIV medications. The public-private partnership is
The Partnership is pursuing five important goals in its efforts to
just one step in this massive effort: with new systems in place, a public
end HIV/AIDS in the region. They are:
marketing campaign will also be needed to work with providers on
1. PROMOTING EFFECTIVE POLICy; getting HIV positive people back into care and treatment. “In this type
2. BUILDING NONPROFIT CAPACITy; of partnership, you have access to resources far beyond your own,”
3. PROMOTING BEST PRACTICES; says Wickham. “As private philanthropy, our fluency in grantmaking
4. DEVELOPING AND INVESTING IN LEADERS; and ability to negotiate flexible contracts has complemented the
5. ENGAGING PHILANTHROPIC PARTNERS. public sector’s epidemiology expertise and access to federal dollars.”
This unique combination of skills and resources has created the right
For more information on the Partnership, and their goals,
environment to support the D.C. government in the development of
please visit:
an innovative new model for drug access and provision in the
www.washingtonaidspartnership.org/PDF/AFightWeCanWin.pdf District of Columbia.


changeS in hiv/aidS grantmaking

Among the top 72 U.S.-based HIV/AIDS funders for which FCAA had disbursements data
for 2005 through 2008 (51 of 72 funders), a total of 41 reported a higher level of HIV/AIDS
grantmaking disbursements in 2008 than in 2005. Thirty-six funders reported higher amounts
of disbursements in 2008 compared with 2007.

Table 2:
HIV/AIDS Funders Reporting Higher Amounts of HIV/AIDS Grantmaking
Disbursements in 2008 than 2005
(ranked by amount of increase between reported amounts for those years)
Change %
Name 2005 ($) 2006 ($) 2007 ($) 2008 ($) 05-08 ($) Change
bill & Melinda Gates
Foundation, WA 137,546,593w 257,855,885w 308,917,741w 378,482,751w 240,936,158w 175%
M•A•C AIDS Fund and
M•A•C Cosmetics, NY 9,122,623w 16,187,422w 22,042,057w 23,461,948w 14,339,325w 157%
The Ford
Foundation, NY 14,692,292w 22,669,531w 18,482,541w 27,777,195w 13,084,903w 89%
Merck & Co.,
Inc, NJ 8,340,000w 15,696,000w 15,937,739w 13,368,736w 5,028,736w 60%
Johnson &
Johnson, NJ 7,812,000w 12,925,000w 12,490,000w 11,667,000w 3,855,000w 49%
The Foundation for AIDS
Research (amfAR), NY 2,568,944w 2,812,983w 2,085,840w 5,100,050w 2,531,106w 99%
Elton John AIDS
National AIDS
Fund, DC 2,568,944w 2,812,983w 2,085,840w 5,100,050w 2,531,106w 99%
broadway Cares/Equity
Fights AIDS, NY 7,986,298w 8,035,864w 8,824,046w 10,039,298w 2,053,000w 26%
Robin Hood
Irene Diamond
Fund, NY 6,426,715w 6,690,905w 7,127,787w 8,305,366w 1,878,651w 29%
Tides
Foundation, CA 3,976,736w 4,332,319w 5,037,793w 5,494,462w 1,517,726w 38%
American Jewish World
Service, NY 309,008w 1,839,061w 1,538,960w 1,640,623w 1,331,615w 431%
Abbott and Abbott
Fund, Il 23,933,226w 19,474,610w 26,449,721w 25,229,419w 1,296,193w 5%
Pride Foundation,
WA 73,000w 73,000w 77,864w 1,316,952w 1,243,952w 1704%
The New York
Community Trust, NY 730,000w 1,330,000w 1,545,450w 1,746,000w 1,016,000w 139%
Firelight Foundation,
CA 930,037w 1,507,723w 2,056,400w 1,872,084w 942,047w 101%
W. K. Kellogg
Foundation, MI 1,045,000w 1,520,073w 1,450,000w 1,985,000w 940,000w 90%
Rockefeller brothers
Fund, Inc., NY 1,650,000w 1,624,500w 2,050,000w 2,550,000w 900,000w 55%
Global Fund for
Women, CA 1,132,924w 1,371,583w 1,961,758w 1,968,090w 835,166w 74%


changeS in hiv/aidS grantmaking

Table 2, continued
Change %
Name 2005 ($) 2006 ($) 2007 ($) 2008 ($) 05-08 ($) Change

Weingart
Foundation, CA 35,000w 265,000w 130,000w 773,400w 738,400w 2110%
boston Foundation,
Inc., MA 80,000w 110,000w 140,280w 713,850w 633,850w 792%
The Pew Charitable
Trusts, PA 338,000w 0w 326,000w 881,000w 543,000w 161%
Washington AIDS
Partnership, DC 821,675w 1,010,800w 1,193,050w 1,354,984w 533,309w 65%
AIDS Funding
Collaborative, oH 49,565w 424,232w 386,398w 544,763w 495,198w 999%
The Design Industries Foundation
Fighting AIDS (DIFFA), NY 594,807w 683,000w 1,221,290w 1,026,131w 431,324w 73%
Charles Stewart Mott
Foundation, MI 48,600w 404,228w 260,000w 370,000w 321,400w 661%
Children Affected by AIDS
Foundation, CA 749,686w 911,364w 909,986w 1,057,593w 307,907w 41%
The David and lucile
Packard Foundation, CA 250,000w 750,000w 1,270,000w 550,000w 300,000w 120%
bD (becton, Dickinson
and Company), NJ 243,200w 837,464w 650,000w 524,000w 280,800w 115%
The Wells Fargo
Foundation, CA 1,470,175w 1,490,089w 1,607,101w 1,722,269w 252,094w 17%
AIDS Foundation
of Chicago, Il 1,435,148w 1,785,401w 1,186,594w 1,663,982w 228,834w 16%
The Comer
Foundation, Il 724,836w 806,000w 1,140,000w 940,775w 215,939w 30%
International Fund for Health
& Family Planning, NY 750,253w 1,703,029w 1,619,810w 950,109w 199,856w 27%
H. van Ameringen
Foundation, NY 933,500w 1,178,000w 1,434,000w 1,091,000w 157,500w 17%
The Health Foundation of
Greater Indianapolis, IN 933,500w 1,178,000w 1,434,000w 1,091,000w 157,500w 17%
Evelyn and Walter Haas,
Jr. Fund, CA 532,000w 585,000w 280,000w 645,000w 113,000w 21%
The Community Foundation for
the National Capital Region, DC 416,963w 472,067w 263,253w 504,030w 87,067w 21%
The John M. lloyd
Foundation, CA 404,175w 410,000w 390,000w 484,550w 80,375w 20%
South Africa Development
Fund, MA 614,041w 638,455w 686,828w 686,928w 72,887w 12%
Indiana AIDS
Fund, IN 375,550w 433,900w 515,050w 424,550w 49,000w 13%


Of the top 72 funders for which FCAA had HIV/AIDS grantmaking disbursement data from
2005 through 2008, a total of 10 reported disbursing less in 2008 than in 2005. Twenty-three
funders reported disbursing less in 2008 than in 2007. It should be noted that some changes
in funding are not indicative of larger trends of decreases in funding for some funders. Many
funders make multi-year commitments and expenditures of those commitments can vary
greatly between years.

Table 3:
U.S. HIV/AIDS Funders Reporting Lower Amounts of HIV/AIDS Grantmaking
Disbursements in 2008 than 2005
(ranked by amount of decrease between reported amounts for those years)
Change %
Name 2005 ($) 2006 ($) 2007 ($) 2008 ($) 05-08 ($) Change

bristol-Myers Squibb
Foundation and bristol-Myers
Squibb Co., NY 26,806,679w 31,935,113w 15,996,612w 10,383,997w -16,422,682w -61%
Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric
AIDS Foundation, CA 8,580,706w 8,619,232w 5,821,951w 4,168,868w -4,411,838w -51%
United Nations
Foundation, DC 1,531,278w 6,708,922w 1,537,977w 753,346w -777,932w -51%
Alphawood
Foundation, Il 1,700,600w 2,275,000w 570,000w 1,057,000w -643,600w -38%
The John D. & Catherine T.
MacArthur Foundation, Il 1,138,000w 1,336,000w 1,817,000w 615,000w -523,000w -46%
Missouri Foundation
for Health, Mo 1,667,440w 2,147,438w 1,086,099w 1,185,662w -481,778w -29%
levi Strauss & Co.,
CA 2,124,958w 2,212,370w 1,876,100w 1,809,000w -315,958w -15%
The William and Flora
Hewlett Foundation, CA 1,075,000w 1,390,417w 2,100,000w 900,000w -175,000w -16%
The Campbell
Foundation, Fl 603,400w 652,668w 644,687w 442,946w -160,454w -27%
Houston Endowment
Inc., TX 550,000w 1,040,000w 435,000w 522,500w -27,500w -5%


2009 forecaSt

In the FCAA survey on 2008 funding, funders were asked about their anticipated grantmaking
levels for 2009. Only 15% of HIV/AIDS funders that responded to this survey question (8 of 52
entities) indicated that they expected an increase in HIV/AIDS grantmaking in 2009, including
only one of the top 10 funders. This is the lowest forecast for a year-on-year increase since
FCAA began asking this question on the survey. Equally troubling is the sharp increase in the
share of funders that forecast their 2009 grantmaking levels to be less than in 2008—41% (21 of
52 responding), compared with only 17% of respondents forecasting a year-on-year decrease for
the report compiled in 2008 (on 2007 data). Six of the top 10 funders expect their funding to
decrease in 2009. Forty-four percent (22 of 52) reported that they anticipate disbursements to
remain at approximately the same level or were unsure.

Chart 3:
Forecast of 2009 U.S. Philanthropic HIV/AIDS Funding
(by percentage of funders)

Expect funding to remain
the same in 2009,
or unsure of likely levels 44%

Expect funding to
decrease in 2009 41%

Expect funding to
increase in 2009 15%


U.S. corPorate hiv/aidS fUnderS

In 2008, 11 corporate foundations and giving programs were among the top 72 U.S. HIV/AIDS
funders identified by FCAA. The total estimated support of these 11 entities in 2008 was $100
million (1,831 grants), representing 16% of the $618 million total estimated HIV/AIDS U.S.
philanthropy for 2008, and a 3% decrease in the amount of corporate giving compared with
results reported for the 11 top corporate funders for 2007.18

Table 4:
Top U.S. Corporate HIV/AIDS Funders in 2008
(ranked by amount of disbursements)

Abbott and Abbott Fund, Il $25,229,419
M•A•C AIDS Fund and M•A•C Cosmetics, NY 23,461,948
Merck & Co., Inc, NJ 13,368,736
Johnson & Johnson, NJ 11,667,000
bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation and bristol-Myers Squibb Co., NY 10,383,997
Pfizer Inc and Pfizer Foundation, NY 9,162,372
levi Strauss & Co., CA 1,809,000
GlaxoSmithKline US, NC 1,575,174
The Wells Fargo Foundation, CA 1,722,269
Macy’s Foundation, oH 673,070
bD (becton, Dickinson and Company), NJ 524,000

Total $99,576,985

2009 Corporate Forecast
Nine of the 11 corporate funders listed in Table 4 provided FCAA with information about their
grantmaking, including whether they expected their HIV/AIDS-related funding to increase or
decrease in 2009. None of the corporate funders forecasted funding to increase in 2009. Three
expected grantmaking to remain about the same, two funders were unsure, and four funders
said they expected funding to decrease in 2009.

18 FCAA reported $102.2 million in
disbursements among the top 11 corporate
HIV/AIDS funders in 2007.


BRINGING FUNDERS TOGETHER
THE FIRST ANNUAL GATHERING OF FUNDERS CONCERNED ABOUT AIDS

Alone we can impact the epidemic,
together we can end it.
- FCAA

From September 16-18, 2009, balancing the hope and opportunity
presented by new leadership in the fight against AIDS with unparalleled
global economic challenges, FCAA convened its first annual gathering
of more than 120 domestic and international HIV/ADS grantmakers,
advocates, and people living with HIV/AIDS; key federal administration
officials; newly appointed leaders of international efforts focused on
HIV/AIDS; and other distinguished thought leaders and innovators. Key
to the gathering was also the outreach to and attendance of stalwart
leaders from the field of private philanthropy, particularly other affinity
groups whose members’ work intersects with the myriad issues
surrounding HIV and AIDS.

over the course of three intensive and action-packed days, we heard
from all corners of the globe about innovative approaches to HIV/AIDS Members of the Future of Funding for HIV/AIDS in the Private
grantmaking, prevention, social services and care provision, and human Sector panel: (from L to R) Moderator, Steve Gunderson (Council
rights protections for people with or at high risk of HIV/AIDS; discussed on Foundations), Kim Frawley (Pfizer, Inc.), Thomas Coates (UCLA),
the impact of the new economic paradigm in which we all live and work; Nancy Mahon (M•A•C AIDS Fund), Todd Summers (Bill & Melinda
learned about the future of U.S. policy and funding for HIV/AIDS at Gates Foundation), and Kandy S. Ferree (National AIDS Fund).
home and abroad; discovered innovative and exciting uses being made
of media and technology in AIDS work; delved deep into the issue of
reproductive rights of women with HIV and AIDS; and explored new
collaborative possibilities between funders and among funders, the
public sector and NGos.

Several significant themes emerged around the role of private
philanthropy in contributing to the end of the epidemic, including:

• breaking through the blockages that exist in funding essential
to HIV/AIDS advocacy work at the local, state, regional and
global levels;
Grantmakers took part in roundtable discussions to help guide future
• Participating actively in the development of a coherent, evidence- FCAA programming.
based and effective U.S. National HIV/AIDS Strategy;

• Exploring and taking concrete action on grantmaker collaborations
to enhance philanthropy’s positive impact on the epidemic;

• Refocusing on building the basic capacity and leadership of “I look forward to continuing to
grassroots organizations, particularly those that serve marginalized
populations, and with a special focus on developing the next advocate for grantmakers to support
generation of leaders in the fight against HIV/AIDS. our common goal to maintain the energy,
NExT STEPS FOR FCAA
commitment, and results that we need
The net result of the gathering for FCAA is a richness of ideas on to reverse this epidemic.”
short- and long-term opportunities to continue to fulfill our mission
and further hone our approach to Inform, Convene and Collaborate. - Keynote Speaker Michel Sidibé,
our first tasks – already begun - to embark on the important work Executive Director, UNAIDS
prioritized for FCAA by participants include producing an in-depth
report on the gathering to be shared with our stakeholders, collecting
the vast resources shared by participants into one central location,
and continuing the conversations about collaboration begun at this
historic event.


geograPhic diStribUtion of
hiv/aidS fUnding
Among the top 72 U.S. HIV/AIDS funders in 2008, a total of 55 (76%) provided data on the
geographic distribution of their funding disbursements. FCAA gathered geographic distribution
data for 16 other funders from The Foundation Center, Foundation Search, grants databases on
a funder’s website, or 990 tax forms, but could not obtain data on geographic distribution for
one of the top 72 HIV/AIDS funders.

Analysis by FCAA suggests that of the estimated $618 million disbursed in 2008 by the top 72
funders, at least $521 million (84%) was directed to global or international HIV/AIDS work
(including funds granted to U.S. organizations for international work). At least $98 million was
disbursed to domestic U.S. HIV/AIDS efforts, representing 16% of the amount of all HIV/AIDS
grants disbursed by the top 72 funders. The geographic distribution of the remaining funds
(approximately $1.5 million, or 0%) could not be identified. In 2007, the figure for international
funding was $446 million (an increase of 77% from 2007 to 2008), and the figure for domestic
funding was $97 million (an increase of 1% from 2007 to 2008).

Chart 4:
U.S. Grant Dollar Disbursements in 2008 by Geographic Focus
(by percentage of total disbursements)

For international grants
and projects 84%

For domestic U.S. epidemic 16%

Unspecified 0%


geograPhic diStribUtion of hiv/aidS fUnding

Data collected by FCAA indicates that, in 2008, 32% of funders provided funding exclusively
to address the epidemic internationally, while 34% of funders provided funding exclusively to
address the epidemic domestically. In 2007, 45% of those funders for whom FCAA was able to
gather geographic distribution data were focused exclusively on the U.S. domestic epidemic,
indicating a decrease of funders focused exclusively on the United States.

Chart 5:
Geographic Focus of U.S. HIV/AIDS Funders in 2008
(by percentage of funders)

U.S. and international focus 34%

U.S. domestic focus only 34%

International focus only 32%


fUnderS with an international hiv/aidS focUS
FCAA identified 24 funders out of the top 72 funders that disbursed 90% or more of their
grantmaking to support international HIV/AIDS programming in 2008.

Table 5:
Top U.S. HIV/AIDS Funders with a Primarily International Focus in 2008
(ranked by amount of international disbursements)

International ($) % of total

bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, WA w 378,482,751w 100%
open Society Institute, NY w 12,494,236w 100%
Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, CA w 4,168,869w 100%
Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, NY w 3,830,000w 100%
HIV Collaborative Fund, a project of the Tides Center, CA w 3,001,210w 100%
Rockefeller brothers Fund, Inc., NY w 2,555,000w 100%
The Starr Foundation, NY w 2,005,000w 100%
Global Fund for Women, CA w 1,968,090w 100%
Firelight Foundation, CA w 1,872,084w 100%
American Jewish World Service, NY w 1,640,623w 100%
International Fund for Health & Family Planning, NY w 950,109w 100%
The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, CA w 900,000w 100%
United Nations Foundation, DC w 753,346w 100%
The Anne Dinning and Michael Wolf Foundation, NY w 750,000w 100%
South Africa Development Fund, MA w 686,928w 100%
The John D. & Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Il w 615,000w 100%
The Summit Foundation, DC w 568,000w 100%
The David and lucile Packard Foundation, CA w 550,000w 100%
San Diego HIV Funding Collaborative, CA w 541,000w 100%
bD (becton, Dickinson and Company), NJ w 524,027w 100%
The Skoll Foundation, CA w 510,000w 100%
Staying Alive Foundation, NY w 468,765w 97%
Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, MI w 370,000w 100%
World Children’s Fund, CA w 322,019w 100%



Of the top 72 funders in 2008, FCAA identified 48 that disbursed funds to address the
international epidemic. FCAA was not able to determine international regional distribution of
funding disbursements for one of these 72 funders.

In comparison with earlier reports, more detail was requested from funders for the 2008 report
in regards to the geographical distribution of their funding. Two new categories were added:
funds to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria; and funds to the World
Health Organization (WHO), the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS),
and other multilateral organizations. In addition, two regional categories were broken down
further: sub-Saharan Africa was divided into two separate categories (Western and Central
Africa, and Eastern and Southern Africa), and Asia and the Pacific was divided into two
separate categories (South Asia and the Pacific, and East Asia and Southeast Asia). Finally, the
Middle East and North Africa were combined as one new category.

Chart 6:
Geographic Distribution of International U.S. HIV/AIDS Philanthropic Funding in 2008
(by percentage of top U.S. Funders’ total international disbursements)

Eastern & Southern Africa 36%
North Africa & Middle East 0%
South Asia & Pacific 16%

East Asia & Southeast Asia 6%

Global Fund 12%

WHO, UN etc. 3%
Western & Central Africa 8% Unspecified 1%
Eastern Europe & Central Asia 4% U.S. for International 9%
Western & Central Europe 1% Caribbean 1%
Latin America 3% Canada 0%

Comparisons can be made for the larger regions with previous years’ data by combining the
new subcategories. For example, there was an increase in giving to the sub-Saharan Africa
region: Western and Central Africa’s 8%, plus Eastern and Southern Africa’s 36%, gives a total
of 42% of total international disbursements given to sub-Saharan Africa in 2008—compared
with the 33% share provided to sub-Saharan Africa in 2007. There was also an increase in
funding to the Asia and Pacific region: South Asia and the Pacific’s 16%, plus East Asia and
Southeast Asia’s 6%, gives a total of 22%—compared with the 14% given in 2007. Funding to U.S.
organizations for international work decreased in 2008, from 45% in 2007 to only 9% in 2008.


fUnderS with a domeStic U.S. focUS
Thirty of the top 72 U.S. funders in 2008 identified by FCAA disbursed 90% or more of their
grantmaking to domestic HIV/AIDS issues.

Table 6:
Top U.S. HIV/AIDS Funders with a Primarily Domestic Focus in 2008
(ranked by amount of domestic disbursements)
Domestic ($) % of total

broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS, NY 9,434,298w 94%
Irene Diamond Fund, NY 8,305,366w 100%
Robin Hood Foundation, NY 4,895,000w 100%
National AIDS Fund, DC 4,750,273w 100%
The New York Community Trust, NY 1,746,000w 100%
The Wells Fargo Foundation, CA 1,716,969w 100%
AIDS Foundation of Chicago, Il 1,617,115w 97%
GlaxoSmithKline US, NC 1,575,174w 100%
Washington AIDS Partnership, DC 1,354,984w 100%
Pride Foundation, WA 1,316,952w 100%
Missouri Foundation for Health, Mo 1,185,662w 100%
H. van Ameringen Foundation, NY 1,091,000w 100%
The Design Industries Foundation Fighting AIDS (DIFFA), NY 1,026,131w 100%
James b. Pendleton Charitable Trust, WA 990,410w 100%
The Comer Foundation, Il 940,775w 100%
The Pew Charitable Trusts, PA 881,000w 100%
Weingart Foundation, CA 773,400w 100%
The Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation, Inc., MD 725,000w 100%
boston Foundation, Inc., MA 702,350w 98%
Macy’s Foundation, oH 660,070w 98%
Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Fund, CA 645,000w 100%
AIDS Funding Collaborative, oH 544,763w 100%
Houston Endowment Inc., TX 522,500w 100%
Arcus Foundation, MI 510,000w 100%
The Community Foundation for the National Capital Region, DC 504,330w 100%
The Campbell Foundation, Fl 399,892w 90%
Indiana AIDS Fund, IN 424,550w 100%
The Health Foundation of Greater Indianapolis, IN 394,740w 100%
The Duke Endowment, NC 320,929w 100%
The Denver Foundation, Co 300,500w 95%

Chart 7 shows the U.S. regional distribution of domestic HIV/AIDS philanthropic funding.
Of the top 72 funders in 2008, FCAA identified a total of 49 funders that disbursed funds to
addressing the U.S. domestic epidemic. Approximately 4% of total grantmaking to address U.S.
domestic activities tracked by FCAA was not able to be identified by region.

FCAA asks funders to report domestic funding according to where the office of the grantee is
located. It is important to note that some funders’ grantees conduct HIV/AIDS work outside of
the region in which they are based. Therefore, the share of funding given to a domestic region
in Chart 7 is only an estimate of the actual funding spent in the region.



The funding patterns in Chart 7 do not reflect geographic HIV prevalence estimates in the
United States. According to the CDC, 46% of the country’s new AIDS cases in 2007 were in the
South, as well as the highest numbers of people living with HIV and AIDS and the most AIDS
deaths. That region was followed, in decreasing order of HIV prevalence, by the Northeast, the
West, and the Midwest.19

Chart 7:
Regional Distribution of Domestic U.S. HIV/AIDS Philanthropic Funding in 2008
(by percentage of total domestic disbursements)

Northeast 41%
South 22%

Midwest 13%

West 20%

Unspecified 4%
U.S. territories 0%

19 Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report,
2007, Vol. 19. Atlanta: U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services, CDC, 2009.
www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/
resources/reports/


Table 7:
Top Funders by U.S. Region in 2008
(ranked by amount of disbursements to grantees based in each region)

Northeast ($)

Irene Diamond Fund, NY 8,305,366
broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS, NY 6,381,574
Robin Hood Foundation, NY 4,895,000
The New York Community Trust, NY 1,746,000

South ($)

The Ford Foundation, NY 3,690,500
National AIDS Fund, DC 3,178,450
Elton John AIDS Foundation, NY 1,470,291

Midwest ($)

AIDS Foundation of Chicago, Il 1,617,115
Abbott and Abbott Fund, Il 1,279,691
Missouri Foundation for Health, Mo 1,185,662

West ($)

Merck & Co., Inc, NJ 5,247,648
The Wells Fargo Foundation, CA 1,410,425
Abbott and Abbott Fund, Il 1,279,691


geograPhic diStribUtion of hiv/aidS grantS

Table 8:
Focus of Funding by the Top 72 U.S. HIV/AIDS Funders in 2008
(in alphabetical order)

Domestic International Both

Abbott and Abbott Fund, Il ●
AIDS Foundation of Chicago, Il ●
AIDS Funding Collaborative, oH ●
Alphawood Foundation, Il ●
American Jewish World Service, NY ●
The Anne Dinning and Michael Wolf Foundation, NY ●
Arcus Foundation, MI ●
bD (becton, Dickinson and Company), NJ ●
bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, WA ●
boston Foundation, Inc., MA ●
bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation and bristol-Myers Squibb Co., NY ●
broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS, NY ●
The Campbell Foundation, Fl ●
Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, MI ●
Children Affected by AIDS Foundation, CA ●
The Comer Foundation, Il ●
The Community Foundation for the National Capital Region, DC ●
The David and lucile Packard Foundation, CA ●
The Denver Foundation, Co ●
The Design Industries Foundation Fighting AIDS (DIFFA), NY ●
Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, NY ●
The Duke Endowment, NC ●
Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, CA ●
Elton John AIDS Foundation, NY ●
Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Fund, CA ●
Firelight Foundation, CA ●
The Ford Foundation, NY ●
The Foundation for AIDS Research (amfAR), NY ●
GlaxoSmithKline US, NC ●
Global Fund for Women, CA ●
H. van Ameringen Foundation, NY ●
The Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation, Inc., MD ●
The Health Foundation of Greater Indianapolis, IN ●
HIV Collaborative Fund, a project of the Tides Center, CA ●
Houston Endowment Inc., TX ●
Indiana AIDS Fund, IN ●
International Fund for Health & Family Planning, NY ●
Irene Diamond Fund, NY ●
James b. Pendleton Charitable Trust, WA ●
The John D. & Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Il ●
The John M. lloyd Foundation, CA ●


Table 8, continued

Domestic International Both

Johnson & Johnson, NJ ●
levi Strauss & Co., CA ●
M•A•C AIDS Fund and M•A•C Cosmetics, NY ●
Macy’s Foundation, oH ●
Merck & Co., Inc, NJ ●
Missouri Foundation for Health, Mo ●
National AIDS Fund, DC ●
The New York Community Trust, NY ●
open Society Institute, NY ●
The Pew Charitable Trusts, PA ●
Pfizer Inc. and Pfizer Foundation, NY ●
Pride Foundation, WA ●
Robin Hood Foundation, NY ●
Rockefeller brothers Fund, Inc., NY ●
San Diego HIV Funding Collaborative, CA ●
The San Francisco AIDS Foundation, CA ●
The Sidney Kimmel Foundation, PA Not available
Silicon Valley Community Foundation, CA ●
The Skoll Foundation, CA ●
South Africa Development Fund, MA ●
The Starr Foundation, NY ●
Staying Alive Foundation, NY ●
The Summit Foundation, DC ●
Tides Foundation, CA ●
United Nations Foundation, DC ●
Washington AIDS Partnership, DC ●
Weingart Foundation, CA ●
The Wells Fargo Foundation, CA ●
The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, CA ●
W. K. Kellogg Foundation, MI ●
World Children’s Fund, CA ●


EXAMPLES OF FUNDER INNOVATION

As part of this year’s survey, FCAA asked grantmakers to provide SUPPORTING LEADERSHIP IN AIDS ADVOCACy:
examples of innovative programs they funded in 2008. While THE JOHN M. LLOyD FOUNDATION
collected responses ranged broadly in scope, we were pleased to find
common definitions of innovation, including: working collaboratively In 2008 the John M. lloyd Foundation created The John M. lloyd AIDS
to solve a problem and leverage resources towards greater impact; leadership Award to recognize, support and empower the unsung
and, trusting in grantees to best address the true needs of their local heroes of AIDS activism. A portion of the $100,000 award, modeled
communities. Below are just a few of the submitted examples. on the MacArthur Fellows Program, is paid directly to the honoree as
an unrestricted gift to be used however s/he believes will build their
leadership capacity. The balance is then given to the organization for
ASSESSING IMPACT:
which the honoree works. The first award was bestowed upon Gregg
AIDS FUNDING COLLABORATIVE
Gonsalves, formerly of the AIDS and Rights Alliance of Southern Africa
(ARASA). More recently, AIDS activists Paisan Suwannawong and Karyn
Around the country momentum continues
Kaplan of the Thai AIDS Treatment Action Group (TTAG) were selected
to build around K-12 comprehensive sexual
as co-recipients of the 2009 leadership Award.
education; however, the lack of replicable
evidence-based programming remains an
The leadership Award is just one of the Foundation’s strategic
obstacle to national progress.
responses to the changing AIDS epidemic. Established in 1991 by
John Musser lloyd (1948-1991) “to seek creative, compassionate and
In the summer of 2006, concerned by data on increasing HIV infection
courageous solutions to the root causes of the AIDS epidemic,” the
rates in local teenagers, Cleveland’s Mayor Frank G. Jackson called for
early work of the foundation was driven by the family’s grief and
a plan to address the issue in the public schools. A multi-stakeholder
personal connection to the epidemic. They operated through person-to-
collaborative -- composed of educators, public officials, community
person grantmaking, supporting mostly local AIDS service organizations
organizations, activists and funders -- responded by designing
in the los Angeles area. by 2001 the Foundation’s geographic focus
the K-12 Responsible Sexual behavior (RSb) Initiative to provide a
shifted from domestic to global, and in 2003 their funding priorities
comprehensive sexuality education to all students within the Cleveland
moved from education and prevention to an emphasis on mobilization,
Metropolitan School District (CMSD). At its inception, the RSb Initiative
grassroots movement in advocacy, and convening.
was one of the only, if not the only, such programs in a large urban
school district in the United States.
In 2006, led by board Chair Robert Estrin, the board, Staff and
select thought leaders gathered in New Mexico to commemorate the
A cornerstone of the approach of the AIDS Funding Collaborative (AFC)
Foundation’s 15th anniversary and reflect on the road ahead. Together
-- established as a public-private partnership in 1994 -- is “enabling local
they recognized the potential for long-term impact in supporting
funders to respond collectively to HIV/AIDS by increasing coordination
advocacy organizations active in the fight against AIDS. The leadership
of funding efforts and identifying gaps.” According to Director, laureen
Award is a direct result of the Foundation’s new approach and provides
Tews Harbert, AFC quickly recognized an opportunity to support the
the flexible money necessary for advocates to do innovative and
RSb Initiative’s evaluation phase. “We knew it would be a critical step
responsive work. “by trusting in grantees to make the best decisions
to ensuring that the program was responsive to, and reflective of, the
for their organizations, you create the space for them to dream,” says
needs of students, parents and teachers.” In November 2007, AFC
Executive Director Melanie Havelin. “but it requires new thinking, and
engaged Philliber Research Associates (PRA) to conduct the full-scale
the patience to creatively develop benchmarks to evaluate success
K-12 evaluation effort. To date, the AFC has committed to three years
along the way.”
of funding, as well as staff time, to manage the evaluation process in
partnership with local stakeholders.

Evidence-based case studies are essential to encourage other school
districts to replicate the success of the RSb Initiative. “For the
stakeholders in our community, the evaluation process is not just about
monitoring outcomes to improve the RSb initiative,” says Harbert. “It’s
also about a commitment to communicating about our program and
documenting our lessons learned so that the CMSD model can inform
conversations happening in other communities and at the state and
national level.”

The results of the first phase of the evaluation, released in January
2009, “demonstrated improvements in students’ knowledge, attitudes,
skills, and behavioral intent as a result of the program, and strong
2008 AIDS Leadership Award recipient Gregg Gonsalves,
support for the initiative among parents, teachers, and community
formerly of ARASA, and 2009 recipients Paisan Suwannawong
leaders.” In the 2009-2010 school year, the 3rd year of the evaluation,
and Karyn Kaplan of TTAG
one goal is transferring more of implementation and management of
the evaluation in-house in effort to build a sustainable program.


SUPPORTING THE GROWTH OF GRASSROOTS MOBILIZING NEW LEADERS IN HIV PREVENTION:
ORGANIZATIONS: THE GLOBAL FUND FOR WOMEN M∙A∙C AIDS FUND

The legal AIDS Division In 2007, the M·A·C AIDS Fund partnered with two of the world’s leading
of Shannxi Women’s educational institutions – Columbia University and the University
Federation was of California, los Angeles (UClA) – to create the M·A·C AIDS Fund
established in 1993 to leadership Initiative (MAFlI), a fellowship program aimed at cultivating
protect the rights of emerging leaders in HIV prevention and seeding innovative HIV
rural women in Shaanxi, prevention programs in South Africa. In 2009, the Human Science
an arid province in Research Council, South Africa’s statutory research agency, joined this
northern China. In 2002 collaboration as the primary implementing partner in South Africa.
the Division conducted
a survey of migrant Each year a group of local emerging leaders in the field of HIV/AIDS
workers living with HIV/ prevention apply for the fellowship program with a proposed HIV
AIDS that revealed prevention plan. Applicants are mid-career individuals who have
rampant discrimination, demonstrated strong leadership potential. After an open nation-wide
Members of the Legal AIDS Division poverty, fear, and competition, selected fellows undergo an intensive two-month HIV
conduct HIV training in Shaanxi, China. ignorance around prevention training program, facilitated by local and international
AIDS. At particular risk experts in HIV prevention, and develop a business model to rollout their
were women, whose frequent travel back and forth for jobs creates prevention plans. Upon completion, fellows receive seed funding from
opportunities for the virus to spread. the M·A·C AIDS Fund to launch their HIV prevention programs. Fellows
also receive ongoing one-on-one mentorship throughout a 10-month
As their own data predicted an explosion in both migration patterns implementation period to help identify solutions to possible roadblocks
and HIV, the Division quickly reprioritized their efforts on HIV/AIDS in their plans. In total, the M·A·C AIDS Fund committed more than $3.29
awareness. This led them to launch HIV/AIDS programs in 2002, now million dollars in support of MAFlI from 2007-2010.
known as their “love and Care” campaign for women and children
living with HIV/AIDS. Recent successes include education workshops, one of the more innovative aspects of this program is that it seeks out
distribution of over 100,000 illustrated pamphlets on self-protection applicants from a wide range of professional backgrounds as diverse
and medical services and training for 250 women migrant workers on entry points for at-risk individuals. Projects have ranged from working
sexual and reproductive health and rights. The project focuses on the with male juvenile offenders in local detention centers to factory
use of labor recruiters as a last “point of contact,” with migrant women, employees at large local employers such as the Ford Motor Company.
many of whom experience isolation once they are in a factory or MAFlI also prioritizes fellowships that give special consideration to
domestic care situation. gender-based inequities and their role in the spread of HIV.

The Global Fund for Women (GFW) has proudly provided the Division To date, 34 fellows have completed the training program and are
with general operating support for more than 12 years, and just recently implementing their HIV prevention programs. Together, the partners are
increased their commitment in 2009. Since its founding in 1987, GFW currently planning for the program’s evolution, and importantly, on the
has nurtured flexible and responsive grantmaking strategies deeply need to identify and leverage additional funding to help fellows to bring
rooted in the recognition that “women should have a full range of their programs to scale. “We created this program to support local
choices and that women themselves know best how to determine leaders to create and integrate HIV prevention programs into diverse
their needs and propose solutions for lasting change.” According to institutions like schools, churches and early childhood programs, in
Caitlin Stanton, Senior Development officer, Philanthropic Partnerships, which the fellows were already established and trusted. The programs
GFW’s emphasis on flexible support, “allows organizations to be truly they have created have been as varied, creative and effective as the
responsive to the needs of their community, sustainably grow their fellows themselves,” says Nancy Mahon, Executive Director, M·A·C AIDS
budget, and attract new and diverse funders.” The Division continually Fund. “With a relatively small investment of about $30,000 per fellow,
self-evaluates their own progress, measuring success in increased we have been able to foster leadership and much needed local capacity
numbers of women reached, publications produced, and the depth of on HIV prevention. We would very much like to find other funding
information shared. partners for this program.”

A former GFW board Member, Wu Qing, first met with the legal Aid
Division in 1996 at a training workshop organized by another GFW
grantee. This highlights the tremendous value of flexible grant dollars as
a tool to support networking opportunities that build leadership within
civil society organizations. “breaking the isolation of these groups is
critical,” says Stanton. “It is the reality that for women leaders of NGos
to develop their strength, they need the opportunity to interact with
each other and other experts in the field.”


intended USe of hiv/aidS fUnding

Fifty-three (74%) of the top 72 U.S. HIV/AIDS funders in 2008 provided survey data on
intended use of their HIV/AIDS grants. FCAA was able to gather intended use data for 15
additional funders from The Foundation Center, Foundation Search, grants databases on
funders’ websites, or 990 tax forms, but could not obtain intended use data for four of the top
72 HIV/AIDS funders.

For the 2008 survey, FCAA asked funders to provide detail on intended use of international and
HIV/AIDS grants separately. Also new were two additional categories: “orphans and vulnerable
children” (OVC) and “human resources.”

Chart 8:
International Intended Use of U.S. HIV/AIDS Philanthropic Funding in 2008

Prevention $111,777,498
Treatment $80,029,631
Social services $10,589,550
Advocacy $61,416,791
Research $215,394,610
OVC $8,168,442
Human resources $1,681,904
Other $29,814,774

$0 $100,000,000 $200,000,000 $300,000,000

The “other” category for international intended use includes funding that was un-specified and funding
for projects that did not fall under the pre-determined categories, such as: long-term health systems
strengthening, general operating funds to community-based and service organizations, funding that fell across
multiple categories and could not be broken down, organizational capacity-building, salaries, travel, rent and
other administrative costs, building facilities, stigma reduction, and creating organizational alliances.


Chart 9:
Domestic Intended Use of U.S. HIV/AIDS Philanthropic Funding in 2008

Prevention $26,953,627
Treatment $20,876,039
Social services $23,551,300
Advocacy $6,121,228
Research $12,636,120
OVC $391,061
Human resources $334,823
Other $7,565,474

$0 $10,000,000 $20,000,000 $30,000,000

The “other” category for domestic intended use includes funding that was un-specified and funding
for projects that did not fall under the pre-determined categories, such as: general operating funds to
community-based and service organizations, funding that fell across multiple categories and could not be
broken down, capacity-building of community-based organizations, technical assistance, fundraising events
and activities, stigma reduction, and creating organizational alliances.


target PoPUlationS of
hiv/aidS fUnding
Of the top 72 U.S. HIV/AIDS funders in 2008, FCAA was able to obtain information from
67 on the three population groups that receive the greatest benefit from their domestic and
international funding. Funders were asked to report the top three target populations of their
funding only. However, some funders reported more than three populations as their main focus.
The charts below show the percentage of funders of the total 67 that answered the survey
question that chose each category.

Chart 10:
International Target Populations for U.S. HIV/AIDS Philanthropic Funding in 2008
(by percentage of 41 top funders that responded to the survey question)

PLWHA 80%
Women 59%
Youth 51%
OVC 27%
IDUs 17%
Other 17%
MSM 12%
HCWs 5%
Sex workers 5%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Percentage of Top Funders

The “other” category for international target populations included responses such as: funding for all
populations, funding that does not have a specific target population, children living with HIV/AIDS, medical
research not directed to a specific population, apparel workers, and rural populations.

HCWs= healthcare workers
IDUs = injecting drug users
MSM = men who have sex
with men
OVC = orphans and
vulnerable children
PLWHA = people living
with HIV/AIDS


Chart 11:
Domestic Target Populations for U.S. HIV/AIDS Philanthropic Funding in 2008
(by percentage of 48 top funders that responded to the survey question)

Domestic Funding Target Populations

PLWHA 63%
African-Americans 33%
MSM 33%
Youth 31%
Homeless/impoverished 31%
Women 27%
IDUs 21%
Other 19%
Latinos 13%
HCWs 6%
Asian/Pacific Islanders 4%
OVC 4%
Migrants 2%
Sex workers 2%
Incarcerated people 1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Percentage of Top Funders

The “other” category for domestic target populations included responses that fell outside of the pre-
determined categories. Funders reported the following examples as “other”: funding for all populations,
people of color, medical research not directed to a specific population, all persons at risk of contracting
HIV, Jewish communities, and immigrant communities.

It is notable that while data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) indicate over
half of new HIV infections in the United States in 2006 were among gay and bisexual men, only a third
of domestic funders identified this group as a top beneficiary of their organizations’ giving.20 Similarly,
African-Americans accounted for half of HIV diagnoses in 2007, but only a third of domestic funders
identified this group as a top target population of their funding.21

20 Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. HIV/AIDS Surveillance
Report 2007, (Vol. 19). http://www.cdc.
gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/resources/
reports/2007report/default.htm

22 ibid.


APPENDIx A
methodology
SoUrceS of hiv/aidS grantmaking data
This report covers HIV/AIDS grant disbursements from all sectors of U.S. philanthropy,
including private, family, and community foundations; public charities; corporate grantmaking
programs (corporate foundations and direct giving programs); and major U.S. HIV/AIDS
grantmaking charities. FCAA included data for over 340 grantmaking entities in this report.
Data were collected using a variety of sources: 1) a survey tool developed and administered by
FCAA to funders, 2) grants databases maintained by The Foundation Center and Foundation
Search, 3) funder websites and 990 forms, and 4) direct communications with funders.
FCAA believes that this multi-faceted approach arrives at a more comprehensive data set
of HIV/AIDS funders than can be accomplished using any single data source or any single
method of calculation.

FCAA FUNDER SURVEy
FCAA distributed a survey instrument that asked respondents to describe their HIV/AIDS-
related grantmaking disbursements in 2008 (see Appendix B). The survey was sent to several
hundred U.S. funders in May 2009. FCAA staff distributed the survey to a pre-determined list of
grantmaking organizations which FCAA determined were most likely to have significant levels
of 2008 HIV/AIDS grantmaking and/or were most likely to list HIV/AIDS as a priority funding
issue. Staff conducted several rounds of follow-up to secure as much data as possible directly
from funders.

Responses to the survey were received from 79 funders, either through fully completed surveys
or other communications with foundation staff. Over 95% of estimated total HIV/AIDS
grantmaking activity is captured by surveys returned to FCAA.

FOUNDATION CENTER AND FOUNDATION SEARCH DATABASES AND OTHER SOURCES
To capture data for which FCAA did not have survey responses, FCAA conducted further
research of U.S. HIV/AIDS funders and 2008 HIV/AIDS grant disbursements using the
Foundation Center and Foundation Search grants databases, as well as grantmaker websites and
990 forms. FCAA reviewed HIV/AIDS grantmaking totals and notable dataset outliers.

It is important to reiterate that 2008 data for the Children’s Investment Fund Foundation (US),
Coca-Cola Africa Foundation, and Gilead Foundation (all likely to be top HIV/AIDS funders)
were not available, and therefore not included, at the time of publication of this report.

analySiS
DEFINITION OF HIV/AIDS PHILANTHROPy
FCAA was intentionally broad in its definition and selection of U.S. HIV/AIDS funders by
including the HIV/AIDS philanthropic activity of several large U.S.-based public charities,
donor-advised funds, corporate grantmaking programs, and operating foundations. While this
report focuses only on U.S.-based funders, it also includes HIV/AIDS grants from foreign offices
of U.S.-based foundations that operate internationally, such as the Ford Foundation.

Survey respondents were asked to distinguish between domestic (within the United States and
for U.S. programs) and international HIV/AIDS efforts, to the extent possible. For domestic U.S.
grantmaking, FCAA requested regional data based on five U.S. sub-regions, using Northeast,


South, Midwest, West, and U.S. territories categories as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau
and used by the CDC and other federal agencies.22 For internationally focused HIV/AIDS
grantmaking, FCAA requested data about where the grantee was located, using global regions
as defined by UNAIDS.23

FCAA also asked about the intended use of HIV/AIDS grants disbursed both inside and outside
the United States, using the following eight categories:

● HIV/AIDS awareness and prevention (including harm reduction);
● HIV/AIDS-related treatment and medical care (including provider and patient treatment
information);
● HIV/AIDS-related social services (e.g. housing, employment, food, legal);
● HIV/AIDS public policy, advocacy and communications;
● HIV/AIDS research (including medical, prevention, and social science research);
● Orphans and vulnerable children;
● Human resources (e.g. training, recruitment, and retention of healthcare workers); and
● Other.
FCAA also asked funders to indentify the three population groups that benefit the most from
their domestic and/or international funding. The tally of responses listed in this report captures
the number of funders focusing on particular groups, not the relative share of actual funding
dedicated to addressing these groups.

DISBURSEMENTS VS. COMMITMENTS
FCAA uses funders’ disbursements rather than funding commitments to calculate distribution
of total funding by geographic region, intended use and other details. The reliance on
disbursement data for funding details harmonizes the report with other resource tracking
projects.

Disbursements are the amount of funding expended on grants/projects in a given year and
may include funding from commitments made in prior years as well as in the current year.
Commitments are funding pledged for grants/projects in a given year, whether or not the funds
were disbursed in that year. For some funders, commitments and disbursements are the same
in a given year; for others, commitments indicate funding above or below actual disbursements
in a year.

CALCULATIONS OF RE-GRANTING
To avoid counting the same funds twice, data in this report are adjusted to account for known
re-granting. Re-granting refers to funds given by one FCAA-tracked grantmaker to another
for the purposes of making HIV/AIDS-related grants. The 2008 aggregate total grantmaking
for all funders was adjusted downward by $19,644,373 to account for known re-granting.
This adjustment represents approximately 3% of the total estimated 2008 HIV/AIDS grant
disbursements. The re-granting figures are estimates based on direct communications with
funders following review of FCAA survey and Foundation Center and Foundation Search
22 U.S. Census bureau. “Census Regions
and Divisions of the United States:” www. data. The true re-granting total is likely modestly higher than the total used for calculating the
census.gov.
2008 total.
23 www.unaids.org


aPPendix a
methodology

LIMITATIONS
FCAA’s data may differ from other data on HIV/AIDS philanthropy in several ways:

1) The use of multiple data sources is the main way FCAA seeks to ensure the accuracy
of the information presented in its report. However, such reliance also presents challenges
in reconciling the different methodologies—each of which has its respective advantages
and limitations—applied to obtain information about grantmaking and philanthropic
support activity.

2) Missing data/under-reporting: FCAA recognizes that its data for 2008 HIV/AIDS
grantmaking are likely to have missed HIV/AIDS disbursements from some institutions for
which FCAA had no information or incomplete or unverified data. FCAA was also unable to
collect data from some of the philanthropic organizations that did not respond to the survey,
in addition to institutions for which data were unavailable from the Foundation Center,
Foundation Search, or other sources.

In the case of corporations, although federal law makes a corporation’s tax returns open to
the public, businesses are not otherwise legally required to disclose details about corporate
philanthropic giving. Thus, determining levels of corporate philanthropic efforts are
more challenging than estimations of private foundation/public charity giving. Moreover,
corporations are neither required nor always able to place a value on the many forms of other
support they can and do offer, such as volunteer efforts by their employees, in-kind donations,
cause-related marketing, and similar activities.24 Finally, philanthropic support is often not
collected centrally within business organizations and may be higher than reported in this
publication.25

3) The definition of HIV/AIDS-related philanthropy in the survey was intentionally inclusive
and broad, in acknowledgement of the fact that such efforts often overlap with many
other issue areas of philanthropy. Several respondents chose a restricted definition and
reporting of HIV/AIDS-related grantmaking, excluding grants that were not wholly focused
on HIV/AIDS efforts.

24 See also Committee to Encourage
Corporate Philanthropy, “The Corporate
Giving Standard: A Measurement Model
for Corporate Philanthropy,” which aims
to establish methods of accounting
for corporate contributions: www.
corphilanthropy.org.

25 According to the National Committee
for Responsive Philanthropy, an estimated
50% of corporate philanthropy is
undisclosed to the American public.
National Committee for Responsive
Philanthropy. The NCRP Quarterly,
Summer 2003, p 7.


OTHER TyPES OF HIV/AIDS SUPPORT

The data in this report represent financial contributions only from CORPORATE PROGRAMS
HIV/AIDS funders, in the form of external grants and programs. Several corporations that operate HIV/AIDS programs are not willing or
Such financial contributions can be used to conduct a trend able to report those programs financially. In some cases, corporations
analysis because they are quantifiable as monetary amounts and do not centrally or specifically track HIV/AIDS expenditures and
are measurable in a clear and distinct way. However, many funders therefore reporting is not feasible. Also, many corporations with
contribute in other important ways that are not as easily quantifiable branch facilities in areas highly affected by HIV (such as in sub-Saharan
or measurable. Some examples are noted below. Africa) support workplace programs that provide HIV/AIDS services to
employees, sometimes extending those services to employees’ families
PRIVATE OPERATING FOUNDATIONS or all community members. These HIV/AIDS-specific services are usually
Private operating foundations are those specifically designated as offered with other health services at a corporate facility’s on-site clinic.
such by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). They use the bulk of As such, quantifying the monetary value of specific HIV/AIDS services
their resources to run their own charitable programs and make few, for a corporation with facilities in several countries as data is very
if any, grants to outside organizations. In some cases, the HIV/AIDS difficult, if not impossible.
philanthropy reported to FCAA includes the value of programmatic
efforts and operational grantmaking, but not operational (internal) In addition, other forms of support—such as volunteer efforts by
staff or other costs. corporate employees, matching donations programs, in-kind donations,
cause-related marketing, and donations of technical assistance—are
The Henry J. Kaiser Foundation is one example of a private operating not always able to be valued monetarily or tracked as such. They are
foundation that is not able to identify and report HIV/AIDS-specific nonetheless valuable resources offered by corporations, especially
funding. Nevertheless, it is a leader in HIV/AIDS policy, media, and those that can leverage other investments or build the capacity of
communications efforts. This includes serving as a major producer of communities to operate their own programs and services.
policy analysis and research on domestic and global HIV/AIDS policy
issues, providing fact sheets, polls, policy briefs, briefings, online news
information services, and numerous other web-based resources, and
developing and helping to run large-scale public health information
campaigns on HIV throughout the world, in direct partnership with
media companies, with an emphasis on reaching young people.


OTHER TyPES OF HIV/AIDS SUPPORT

IN-KIND DONATIONS FUNDERS WITH A BROADER FOCUS
FCAA offers funders the option of reporting donations of goods and In some cases, funders choose to support projects across broad focus
services that are not or cannot be valued monetarily. Some reported areas, such as health systems strengthening or sexual and reproductive
examples are noted below, illustrating the diversity of support: health, where funding for HIV/AIDS would only be a part of a grant or
project. FCAA asks funders to report a project or grant if a significant
• boston Foundation, Inc.: Staff time for boston Community
aspect is focused on HIV/AIDS; however, some funders may not be able
AIDS Partnership
to separately quantify specific HIV/AIDS funding. of course, all HIV/AIDS

• bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation and bristol-Myers Squibb Company interventions are important and should be encouraged, including the
(bMS): South-to-South technical assistance: grantees and partners more broad approaches, even though they are difficult to track.
from bMS’s Secure the Future program provide technical assistance
to organizations, governments, and communities in Africa on OTHER SOURCES OF SUPPORT
planning, fundraising, and advocacy. Community programs, research institutions, hospitals, clinics, counseling
centers, churches, homeless shelters, orphanages, private individual
• Children Affected by AIDS Foundation (CAAF): Distribution of toys
donors, and anonymous donors all represent other valuable sources of
to a non-profit serving American children infected or affected by
HIV/AIDS funding, goods, and services that are difficult to identify and/
HIV, and tickets for HIV-affected families to attend the CAAF Dream
or quantify.
Halloween Fundraisings in los Angeles and Chicago

• The Design Industries Foundation Fighting AIDS (DIFFA):
Distribution of approximately $100,000 in goods to AIDS service
organizations for sale and/or auction

• Firelight Foundation: Providing training in monitoring and evaluation
to grantees, and distribution of resource materials on program
planning, community mobilization, and resource mobilization

• M•A•C AIDS Fund and M•A•C Cosmetics: Donation of approximately
$60,000 in cosmetics to HIV/AIDS organizations in North America.
M•A•C makeup artists also participate in the M•A•C Good Spirits
program, where they volunteer their time to teach men and women
with HIV/AIDS simple makeup techniques and help them enhance
their appearance and minimize problems resulting from the illness
or medication regimens. The program aims to encourage those with
HIV/AIDS to be active in promoting their own health and well-being.
In 2008, M•A•C artists volunteered at more then 60 Good Spirits
sessions across North America, donating over $1 million in services
for 4,300 people living with HIV and AIDS.

• Merck & Co., Inc: Donations of the medicines Crixivan, Stocrin and
Isentress benefitting underserved populations in the United States
and Africa (botswana)

• Pfizer Inc and Pfizer Foundation: Donations of the medicine Diflucan
from Pfizer Inc to governments and NGos in developing countries.
Pfizer also provides materials to support patient education and
healthcare worker training.

• Staying Alive Foundation: HIV/AIDS awareness television
programming on DVDs; condoms


APPENDIx B
fcaa 2008 hiv/aidS reSoUrce
tracking SUrvey
Name of organization:

Person completing survey:

Email address:

Telephone:

organization website URl:

In answering the questions below, please note the following:

ww Changes to this year’s survey: We have made a few changes in this year’s survey in an effort to capture more useful
information for readers of the Resource Tracking report and to minimize time needed to complete the survey where
possible. For those with HIV/AIDS-related disbursements below $300,000 in 2008 we are only asking that you
complete the beginning of the survey. The “geographic” question for international funding now includes revised
categories for regional funding in harmonization with UNAIDS’ latest resource tracking regional definitions, and
includes categories for funding to the Global Fund and other multilateral organizations that work globally. This year
we are asking that you report “intended use” of funding for domestic and international funding separately. Two new
categories—oVC and human resources—have been added to the “intended use” question to harmonize with UNAIDS’
intended use categories. We have made minor changes to the “target population” categories. Finally, we have provided
space for you to let us know of particularly innovative funding projects in which you are engaged.

ww As with last year’s survey, questions about the geographic focus and intended use of funding are asked about your
organization’s disbursements rather than commitments. If you are unable to answer any of the survey questions for
your disbursements, but could provide data based on commitments, please provide that data with a note that the data
were based on commitments. We distinguish disbursements and commitments as follows:

• Disbursements: Disbursements are the amount of funding expended on grants/projects in a given year and
may include funding from commitments made in prior years as well as in the current year.
• Commitments: Commitments are funding pledged for grants/projects in a given year, whether or not the funds
were disbursed in that year.

ww Defining an HIV/AIDS grant or project: In addition to reporting on grants/projects that are focused explicitly on HIV/
AIDS, please include grants/projects made in other health, social, economic, and political areas when a significant
aspect of the grant or project included a focus on HIV/AIDS.

ww Activities to include: Please restrict your answers to external HIV/AIDS grantmaking/projects (i.e., do not count internal
expenditures on staff and/or other programming).

• Private operating foundations (as defined by the IRS)* should include the direct costs of HIV/AIDS-related
programs only and not costs for staff.
• Do not include the value of donated services, products, or other in-kind donations. (there is a space to list
examples of your organization’s in-kind donations, if you wish)
• Do not include grants/projects committed or disbursed from funding received from the U.S. government or
any other government.

* Private operating foundations are those specifically designated as such by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) that use the bulk of their resources to run their own charitable
programs, making few, if any, grants to outside organizations. Very few funders that FCAA surveys qualify as private operating foundations.


aPPendix b
fcaa 2008 hiv/aidS reSoUrce tracking SUrvey

Please complete the survey by June 15, 2009. Return your completed survey to Erika baehr via email at erikabaehr@
gmail.com or fax at (617) 674.2240. Questions? Call Erika at (617) 987.0095

QUeStionS for calendar year 2008
1a. What was the total dollar amount of your HIV/AIDS grant/project disbursements in 2008? $ ________________

Note: Disbursements means the total dollar amount actually paid out to grantees/projects or for projects during
the calendar year. This total should include funds re-granted from other organizations.

1b. What was the total dollar amount of your HIV/AIDS grant/project commitments in 2008? $ ________________

Note: Commitments means the total dollar amount pledged during the calendar year, whether the funds were disbursed
in that or another year. This total should include funds re-granted from other organizations. A multi-year grant/project
should be fully counted in the year that it was committed.

Note: If your answer to question 1a was below $300,000, please STOP HERE. You do not need to complete the rest
of the survey. Please send us the information above. Thank you.

All SUbSEQUENT QUESTIoNS FoR THIS YEAR REFER To GRANT/PRoJECT DISBURSEMENTS ONLy.

(Private operating foundations should include only the direct costs of HIV/AIDS-related programs)

1c. Private operating foundations only*: of the amount reported in #1a above,
please provide a breakdown between:

The dollar amount of HIV/AIDS cash grants disbursed in 2008 $ ________________

The dollar value of HIV/AIDS program activities conducted in 2008 $ ________________

1d. All organizations: Compared to 2008, please predict whether the total amount of your HIV/AIDS
disbursements in 2009 will (please type ‘x’ by only one response):

increase ____
decrease ____
remain the same ____
discontinue ____
unsure ____

2. What was the total number of HIV/AIDS grants/projects disbursed in 2008?

2a. Were any of these grants/projects multi-year commitments? Y( )/N( ) (type ‘x’ next to one)

* Private operating foundations are those specifically designated as such by the IRS that use the bulk of their resources to run their own charitable programs, making few, if any, grants
to outside organizations. Very few funders that FCAA surveys qualify as private operating foundations.


3. In 2008, where were your HIV/AIDS grant/project dollars disbursed?

(Please approximate total dollar amounts as best you can for the locations of grant recipients/projects. The
geographical location would be where the recipients’ main offices are situated. If you are unable to provide
geographical data on disbursements, but could provide data based on commitments, please provide the data with a
note that the data was based on commitments.)

The amounts in 3a, 3b, and 3c should add up to the total reported for question 1a.

3a. Total dollars disbursed to U.S.-based grantees/projects for domestic
HIV/AIDS programs: $ ________________

Please provide total dollar disbursements by region (the definitions of U.S. regions are consistent with
U.S. Census definitions):

Amounts should add up to the total reported for question 3a.

Northeast $ _____ (CT, MA, ME, NH, NJ, NY, PA, RI, VT)
South $ _____ (Al, AR, DC, DE, Fl, GA, KY, lA, MD, MS, NC, oK, SC, TN, TX, VA, WV)
Midwest $ _____ (IA, Il, IN, KS, MI, MN, Mo, NE, ND, oH, SD, WI)
West $ _____ (AK, AZ, CA, Co, HI, ID, MT, NV, NM, oR, UT, WA, WY)
U.S. territories $ _____ (PR, VI)

3b. Total dollars disbursed to U.S.-based grantees/projects for international HIV/AIDS work: $ ________________

3c. Total dollars disbursed to grantees/projects based outside the United States for
international HIV/AIDS work: $ ________________

Please provide total dollar disbursements to grantees/projects by region. Funding provided directly to the
Global Fund, WHo, UNAIDS or other multilateral organizations should be entered in the appropriate area
below, and not in a geographic region. Please see Appendix 1 for definition of each region.

The amounts here should add up to the total reported for question 3c.

Canada $ _____
Caribbean $ _____
latin America $ _____
Western and Central Europe $ _____
Eastern Europe and Central Asia $ _____
West and Central Africa $ _____
East and Southern Africa $ _____
North Africa and the Middle East $ _____
South Asia and the Pacific $ _____
East Asia and South East Asia $ _____
The Global Fund $ _____
WHo, UNAIDS, other multilaterals $ _____


aPPendix b

4a. In 2008, what was the intended use of your disbursed grants/projects to address the epidemic in the United States?

(Please approximate total dollar amounts as best you can for the intended use of your grants/projects. If you are
unable to provide intended use data on disbursements, but could provide data based on commitments, please provide
the data with a note that the data was based on commitments.)

These amounts should add up to the total reported for question 3a.

HIV/AIDS awareness and prevention (including harm reduction) $ ________________
HIV/AIDS treatment and medical care (including provider and patient
treatment information) $ ________________
HIV/AIDS-related social services (e.g. housing, employment, food, legal) $ ________________
HIV/AIDS public policy, advocacy, and communications $ ________________
HIV/AIDS research (including medical, prevention, and social science research) $ ________________
orphans and vulnerable children (oVC) $ ________________
HIV/AIDS human resources (e.g. training, recruitment, and retention of health care workers) $ ________________
other (e.g. long-term health systems strengthening and/or facilities investment, program
management and administration) - Please specify: ( ) $ ________________

4b. In 2008, what was the intended use of your disbursed grants/projects to address the epidemic outside of the
United States (including funds given to U.S.-based organizations to address HIV/AIDS outside the United States)?

(Please approximate total dollar amounts as best you can for the intended use of your grants/projects. If you are
unable to provide intended use data on disbursements, but could provide data based on commitments, please provide
the data with a note that the data was based on commitments.)

These amounts should add up to the total reported for questions 3b and 3c combined.

HIV/AIDS awareness and prevention (including harm reduction) $ ________________
HIV/AIDS treatment and medical care (including provider and patient
treatment information) $ ________________
HIV/AIDS-related social services (e.g. housing, employment, food, legal) $ ________________
HIV/AIDS public policy, advocacy, and communications $ ________________
HIV/AIDS research (including medical, prevention, and social science research) $ ________________
orphans and vulnerable children (oVC) $ ________________
HIV/AIDS human resources (e.g. training, recruitment, and retention of health care workers) $ ________________
other (e.g., long-term health systems strengthening and/or facilities investment, program
management and administration) - Please specify: ( ) $ ________________


5. Target populations: Please place an ‘x’ next to the three population groups that receive the greatest benefit from your
domestic and international funding. The categories below are not mutually exclusive. Please mark the three that best
reflect the main target populations reached through your funding.

Domestic funding – Please only pick three International funding – Please only pick three

People living with HIV/AIDS ______ People living with HIV/AIDS ______
Women ______ Women ______
Youth ______ Youth ______
orphaned/vulnerable children (oVC) ______ orphaned/vulnerable children (oVC) ______
African-Americans ______ Migrants ______
latinos ______ Refugees ______
Native Americans ______ Injecting drug users (IDUs) ______
Asians/Pacific Islanders ______ Sex workers ______
Migrants ______ Health care workers ______
Injecting drug users (IDUs) ______ Men who have sex with men (MSM) ______
Sex workers ______ Incarcerated people ______
Healthcare workers ______ other: (_______________________) ______
Men who have sex with men (MSM) ______
Incarcerated people ______
Homeless/impoverished persons ______
other: (_______________________) ______

6. In-kind donations (optional): If you would like to, please list examples of HIV/AIDS-related in-kind donations
you made in 2008.

7. Re-granting: If you received $50,000 or more from any of the foundations noted in Appendix 2 in 2008, please list
the value of grants received from each foundation that were subsequently re-granted through your organization.
Note that your organization’s total grantmaking, including funds you re-granted, will be reflected in the FCAA report.

Grant received from Total re-granted to other organizations

__________________________________________ $__________________________________________
__________________________________________ $__________________________________________
__________________________________________ $__________________________________________
____________________________________________________ $___________________________________________________

8. Innovative funding (optional): Please feel free to use the space below to share an example of innovative funding
that you would like others to know about. We will publish several examples in our report.



aPPendix 126
definitions of global regions
(note: these definitions are taken from UnaidS)

CARIBBEAN
Anguilla, Antigua and barbuda, Aruba, bahamas, barbados, bermuda, british Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands,
Cuba, Dominica, Dominican Republic, French Guyana, Grenada, Guadeloupe, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica,
Martinique, Montserrat, Netherland Antilles, Puerto Rico, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. lucia, St. Vincent and the
Grenadines, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Turks and Caicos Islands, U.S. Virgin Islands

LATIN AMERICA
Argentina, belize, bolivia, brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras,
Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela

WESTERN AND CENTRAL EUROPE
Austria, belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, liechtenstein,
luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom of Great britain
and Northern Ireland, Vatican City

EASTERN EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA
Armenia, Albania, Azerbaijan, belarus, bosnia and Herzegovina, bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic,
Estonia, Georgia, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan, latvia, lithuania, Macedonia, Malta, Moldova,
Poland, Romania, Russian Federation, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovakia, Slovenia, Tajikistan, Turkey,
Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan

WEST AND CENTRAL AFRICA
benin, burkina Faso, burundi, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo (brazzaville),
Congo (DR), Côte d’Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea-bissau, Guinea (Conakry),
liberia, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Sao Tome, Senegal, Sierra leone, Togo

EAST AND SOUTHERN AFRICA
Angola, botswana, Comoros, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius,
Mozambique, Namibia, Rwanda, Seychelles, Somalia, South Africa, Swaziland, Uganda, United Republic of
Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe

NORTH AFRICA AND THE MIDDLE EAST
Afghanistan, Algeria, bahrain, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, lebanon, libya, Morocco, oman,
Palestinian Territories, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen

SOUTH ASIA AND THE PACIFIC
Australia, bangladesh, bhutan, Fiji, India, Maldives, Nepal, New Zealand, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Samoa,
Sri lanka, Timor-leste

EAST ASIA AND SOUTH EAST ASIA
brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Japan, lao People’s Democratic Republic, Korea (DPR),
Korea (Republic), Malaysia, Mongolia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam

26 This appendix was associated with the
original survey sent to funders. It should
therefore be considered a sub-appendix
to Appendix b.


aPPendix 227
grantmaker list to review for calculating re-granting
(this list includes the top 82 funders in alphabetical order, based on 2007 data.)

Abbott Laboratories Fund, IL The Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric James B. Pendleton Charitable Kate B. Reynolds Charitable
AIDS Foundation, CA Trust, WA Trust, NC
AIDS Foundation of Chicago, IL
Elton John AIDS Foundation, Johnson & Johnson, NJ Richmond County Savings
AIDS Funding Collaborative, OH Inc., Ny Foundation, Ny
The Robert Wood Johnson
Alphawood Foundation, IL ExxonMobil Foundation, Tx Foundation, NJ The Robin Hood Foundation, Ny

Altria Group, Inc., Ny Firelight Foundation, CA The Henry J. Kaiser Family The Rockefeller Brothers Fund,
Foundation, CA Inc., Ny
American Jewish World Service, The Ford Foundation, Ny
Inc., Ny W. M. Keck Foundation, CA The Rockefeller Foundation, Ny
The Foundation for AIDS
The Annenberg Foundation, PA Research (amfAR), Ny W. K. Kellogg Foundation, MI San Diego HIV Funding
Collaborative, a project of
Bill & Melinda Gates The Kresge Foundation, MI the Alliance Healthcare
Atlanta AIDS Partnership
Foundation, WA Foundation, CA
Fund, GA
Levi Strauss Foundation, CA
The Gill Foundation, CO San Francisco AIDS
BD (Becton, Dickinson and
Foundation, CA
Company), NJ The John M. Lloyd
Glaser Progress Foundation, WA Foundation, CA
The San Francisco
Bickerstaff Family
Foundation, CA
Foundation, CA The Global Fund for Women, CA M•A•C AIDS Fund and M•A•C
Cosmetics, Ny
Silicon Valley Community
The Bristol-Myers Squibb The George Gund
Foundation, CA
Foundation, Inc., Ny Foundation, OH John D. & Catherine T. MacArthur
Foundation, IL
South Africa Development
Broadway Cares/Equity Fights Hartford Foundation for Public
Fund, MA
AIDS, Ny Giving, CT Merck Company Foundation and
Merck & Co., Inc., NJ
The Starr Foundation, Ny
The California Endowment, CA The Health Foundation of
Greater Indianapolis, IN Missouri Foundation for
Health, MO Staying Alive Foundation, Ny
The California Wellness
Foundation, CA The Healthcare Foundation of
New Jersey, NJ National AIDS Fund, DC Tides Foundation, CA
The Campbell Foundation, FL
The William and Flora Hewlett The New york Community United Nations Foundation, DC
Children Affected by AIDS Foundation, CA Trust, Ny
Foundation, CA Until There’s A Cure
HIV Collaborative Fund, The John R. Oishei Foundation, CA
The Children’s Investment Fund a project of the Tides Center, CA Foundation, Ny
Foundation, Ny H. van Ameringen
Houston Endowment Inc., Tx The David and Lucile Packard Foundation, Ny
The Comer Foundation, IL Foundation, CA
Indiana AIDS Fund, IN Washington AIDS
The Pew Charitable Trusts, PA Partnership, DC
The Design Industries
Foundation Fighting AIDS International Fund for Health &
(DIFFA), Ny Family Planning, Ny The Pfizer Foundation, Inc., Ny The Wells Fargo Foundation, CA

Doris Duke Charitable Irene Diamond Fund, Ny Polk Bros. Foundation, IL White Flowers Foundation, Ny
Foundation, Ny
Public Welfare Foundation, Williamsburg Community Health
Inc., DC Foundation, VA
27 This appendix was associated with the
original survey sent to funders. It should
therefore be considered a sub-appendix
to Appendix b.


APPENDIx C
toP U.S. hiv/aidS fUnderS webSiteS
Abbott and Abbott Fund, IL Bill & Melinda Gates The David & Lucille Packard Global Fund for Women, CA
www.abbott.com Foundation, WA Foundation, CA www.globalfundforwomen.org
www.gatesfoundation.org www.packard.org
AIDS Foundation of Chicago, IL The Harry and Jeannette
www.aidschicago.org The Boston Foundation, MA The Denver Foundation, CO Weinberg Foundation,
www.tbf.org www.denverfoundation.org Inc., MD
AIDS Funding Collaborative, OH www.hjweinbergfoundation.org
www.communitysolutions. Bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation The Design Industries
com/projects/displayProject. and Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., Ny Foundation Fighting AIDS The Health Foundation of
asp?project_id=16 www.bms.com (DIFFA), Ny Greater Indianapolis, IN
www.diffa.org www.thfgi.com
Alphawood Foundation, IL Broadway Cares/Equity Fights
www.alphawoodfoundation.com AIDS, Ny Doris Duke Charitable HIV Collaborative Fund,
www.broadwaycares.org Foundation, Ny a project of the Tides Center, CA
American Jewish World www.ddcf.org www.hivcollaborativefund.org
Service, Ny The Campbell Foundation, FL
www.ajws.org www.campbellfoundation.com The Duke Endowment, NC Houston Endowment
www.dukeendowment.org Inc., Tx
The Foundation for AIDS Charles Stewart Mott www.houstonendowment.org
Research (amfAR), Ny Foundation, MI Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS
www.amfar.org www.mott.org Foundation, CA Indiana AIDS Fund, IN
www.pedaids.org www.indianaaidsfund.org
The Annenberg Foundation, PA Children Affected By AIDS
www.annenbergfoundation.org Foundation, CA Elton John AIDS Foundation, Ny The John D. & Catherine T.
www.caaf4kids.org www.ejaf.org MacArthur Foundation, IL
Arcus Foundation, MI www.macfound.org
www.arcusfoundation.org The Comer Foundation, IL The Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr.
www.comer-foundation.com Fund, CA The John M. Lloyd
Atlanta AIDS Partnership www.haasjr.org Foundation, CA
Fund, GA The Community Foundation for www.johnmlloyd.org
www.aidsfundatl.org the National Capitol Firelight Foundation, CA
Region, DC www.firelightfoundation.org Johnson & Johnson, NJ
BD (Becton, Dickinson and www.cfncr.org www.jnj.com/community/index.
Company), NJ The Ford Foundation, Ny htm
www.bd.com/responsibility www.fordfound.org

GlaxoSmithKline US, NC
us.gsk.com


Levi Strauss Foundation, CA Pride Foundation, WA The Starr Foundation, Ny Note:
www.levistrauss.com/citizenship www.pridefoundation.org www.starrfoundation.org The Anne Dinning and
Michael Wolf Foundation, the
M•A•C AIDS Fund and M•A•C Robin Hood Staying Alive Foundation, Ny
International Fund for Health
Cosmetics, Ny Foundation, Ny www.staying-alive.org/en/home
www.macaidsfund.org www.robinhood.org and Family Planning, the Irene

The Summit Foundation, DC Diamond Fund, the James b.
Macy’s Foundation Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Ny www.summitfdn.org Pendleton Charitable Trust, and
www.macysinc.com/Community/ www.rbf.org the H. van Ameringen Foundation
Tides Foundation, CA do not have websites.
Merck & Co., Inc., NJ San Diego HIV Funding www.tides.org
www.merck.com/cr Collaborative, CA
www.alliancehf.org/sdhiv/who_ United Nations Foundation, DC
Missouri Foundation for we_are.html www.unfoundation.org
Health, MO
www.mffh.org San Francisco AIDS Washington AIDS
Foundation, CA Partnership, DC
National AIDS Fund, DC www.sfaf.org www.washingtonaidspartnership.
www.aidsfund.org org
The Sidney Kimmel
The New york Community Foundation, PA Weingart Foundation, CA
Trust, Ny www.kimmel.org www.weingartfnd.org
www.nycommunitytrust.org
Silicon Valley Community Wells Fargo Foundation, CA
Open Society Institute, Ny Foundation, CA www.wellsfargo.com/about/
www.soros.org www.siliconvalleycf.org charitable

The Pew Charitable Trusts, PA The Skoll Foundation, CA The William and Flora Hewlett
www.pewtrusts.com www.skollfoundation.org Foundation, CA
www.hewlett.org
Pfizer Inc and Pfizer South Africa Development
Foundation, Ny Fund, Ny W.K. Kellogg Foundation, MI
www.pfizerphilanthropy.com www.southafrica-newyork.net/ www.wkkf.org
sadf.htm
World Children’s Fund, CA
www.worldchildrensfund.org


APPENDIx D
global hiv/aidS fUnding organizationS
GLOBAL RESOURCE TRACKING: HISTORy AND HARMONIZATION
The Working Group on Global HIV/AIDS Philanthropic Resource Tracking is a current
collaboration among FCAA, the European HIV/AIDS Funders Group (EFG) and UNAIDS that
was formed to investigate HIV/AIDS philanthropy on a global level. UNAIDS began convening
meetings of key players to examine global resource flows several years ago by creating the
Global Consortium on Resource Tracking. Representatives included staff from multilateral
agencies and NGOs (including WHO, the United Nations Population Fund [UNFPA], the Global
Fund, the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative, and others), HIV/AIDS experts, and experts
in tracking global resource flows. Members of the group met twice a year to begin creating
coherent resource tracking mechanisms and reporting on global HIV/AIDS resource flows.

The European HIV/AIDS Funders Group (EFG) was created in 2002 by a group of European-
based funders working to promote greater transparency, collaboration, and effectiveness in
European HIV/AIDS philanthropy, and to encourage new activity in the field. FCAA and
EFG have deepened their collaborative relationship since, stepping away from a country- or
region-specific approach towards connecting funders in both regions and mobilizing a global
philanthropic response to HIV/AIDS.

In 2008, FCAA and EFG worked to harmonize their resource tracking data by using a similar
survey tool, categories, and layout in their resource tracking reports; they subsequently
launched the reports jointly to a global audience. The regional and intended use categories
found in both the FCAA and EFG resource tracking reports for 2008 coordinate with the
UNAIDS categories, which are also used by PEPFAR and the Global Fund, in an effort to make
all resource flows data comparable.28

CURRENT OBJECTIVES
In continuation of the earlier exploratory resource tracking efforts of UNAIDS and others, the
Working Group on Global HIV/AIDS Philanthropic Resource Tracking has sought to identify
funders of HIV/AIDS in regions of the world beyond those tracked by FCAA (U.S.-based
funders) and EFG (Western and Central Europe-based funders), including private and public
foundations, corporate foundations, and other funding institutions. The Working Group aims to
connect with these funders as best as possible, to offer information and support for their work,
to foster channels of potential collaboration between funders in the global North and those in
the global South, Eastern Europe and Asia, and to inform the global dialogue about HIV/AIDS
resource tracking.

METHODOLOGy
In 2008, the Working Group drafted a preliminary list of funders located outside the United
States and Western and Central Europe that were likely to be engaged in funding HIV/AIDS-
related programming. This list, which also included the funders’ websites, resulted from a brief
web-based and literature-review research project. More recently, in 2009, the Working Group
engaged in deeper research into private global philanthropy over a longer period and reached
out to the funders previously identified and others in a much more systematic way—by, for
example, identifying resources on philanthropy in different regions of the world, consulting
with experts in philanthropy at the global and regional levels, and surveying the global funders
directly about their HIV/AIDS giving. Surveys were sent in June to over 80 funders.

28 See www.hivaidsfunders.org for the
EFG HIV/AIDS resource tracking report,
European Philanthropic Support to
Address HIV/AIDS in 2008.


CHALLENGES
The formidable challenges to this research include: a lack of any kind of centralized or
comprehensive database of philanthropic entities (such as the Foundation Center in the
United States); a wide range of different kinds of philanthropic resources; language barriers;
lack of transparency of financial information; and great variety in the definition of private
philanthropy. It should also be noted that in general resource tracking surveys request a level of
detail that can be prohibitively time-consuming or otherwise difficult for funders to voluntarily
share. Therefore, high response rates are always a challenge, especially in the early efforts of
outreach to newly identified funders unfamiliar with the project.

RESULTS
The results of this research have provided a new understanding of private philanthropy
climates and regions, and the barriers in identifying them, outside of the United States and
Western and Central Europe. Moreover, they enabled the production of a refined and expanded
global funders list with additional in-depth information about select funders for this report.

Research and survey results revealed that in many regions outside of the United States and
Western and Central Europe, there are few private foundations or trusts as they are defined in
the United States. A majority of the organizations featured, for example, acted as local funding
intermediaries and were financially, technically, or otherwise supported by governments and/or
multilateral and bilateral organizations (e.g., the Global Fund or PEPFAR). Others, meanwhile,
were corporations with main offices based in the United States or Western and Central Europe,
and/or branches of private foundations with main offices based in those two regions.

While the responses received from such funders were informative, there was not enough of a
critical mass of data to produce analysis as extensive as that provided in the FCAA and EFG reports.

Research highlights include the following:

● Few funders on the list had exclusively independent sources of income such as traditional
endowments, which are common among funders in the United States and Western and
Central Europe.
● In the Asia and Pacific, Latin American, Eastern Europe and sub-Saharan Africa regions,
research suggested that most HIV/AIDS organizations are structured as community-based
organizations (CBOs) or non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and are funded in part or
wholly by governments and other organizations.
● In the Asia and Pacific region, private philanthropy was reported as not very visible—at least
partly because bilateral and multilateral donor programs are so large.
● Similarly, in Latin America, public policies funded by governments largely overshadow
private philanthropy, which plays a much smaller role.
● In India, a source reported that there are few indigenous HIV/AIDS funders; rather, HIV/
AIDS programs are supported by the government, multilaterals, and a few major foreign
foundations.


aPPendix d

● In the Middle East, a source reported being “appalled” at the lack of private HIV/AIDS
funders.
● Many major foundations and corporations based in the United States and Western and
Central Europe have active funding branches in sub-Saharan Africa, particularly in South
Africa, that provide local philanthropic funding.

GLOBAL RESOURCE TRACKING—AN IMPORTANT WORK IN PROGRESS
Despite the many variables that make private institutional philanthropy different in different
regions of the world, institutions engaged in such grantmaking can be as uniquely poised as
their counterparts in the United States and elsewhere to fund projects and populations that
governments, corporations, and other organizations may consider too controversial or sensitive
to fund. One foundation officer in the Central American region reported that philanthropists
with private or corporate wealth avoid funding HIV/AIDS in general and seek more
conservative issues to support.

This situation highlights the difficulties faced by many local community groups and PLWHA
seeking funding and support, especially those working with and on behalf of marginalized
groups. Private HIV/AIDS philanthropy funders from more robust and well-resourced regions,
such as the United States and Western and Central Europe, should be encouraged to fill the
gap by seeking out and supporting individuals and groups engaged in HIV/AIDS activities that
local stakeholders ignore. One potentially useful strategy would be to prioritize the creation of
partnerships between organizations in the global North and the global South, Eastern Europe
and Asia, with the goal of promoting impactful philanthropy in these regions. Structures
and opportunities such as collaborative partnerships, networks, and coalitions with partner
organizations and business partners can increase access to funding and other vital resources at
the grassroots level in those needy areas.

Given the flexibility of private philanthropy to respond to critical issues, the synergistic
opportunities of global partnerships, and the potential of emerging economies in parts of the
world outside of the United States and Western and Central Europe, global resource tracking
efforts are a valuable work in progress that will continue to be pursued.

FCAA welcomes any feedback related to this section of the report. Comments or
suggestions about how to improve global resource tracking in the future should be sent to
Makfire Alija at makfire.alija@hivaidsfunders.org.


liSt of global ARMENIA
Open Society Institute
Helen Macpherson Smith Trust
level 43
CANADA
Canadian Foundation For AIDS
hiv/aidS fUnding Assistance Foundation 80 Collins Street Research (CANFAR)

organizationS 7/1 Tumanyan St. 2-nd cul-de-sac,
375002
Melbourne, Australia 3000
Tel.: +61 03 9631 2551
165 University Avenue, Suite 710
Toronto, ontario
Yerevan, Armenia Fax: +61 03 9631 2530 Canada M5H 3b8
The following is a list of
Tel./Fax: +374 10 53 38 62 www.hmstrust.org.au Tel.: +1 416 361 6281
funding organizations
www.osi.am Fax: +1 416 361 5736
outside of the United States The Trust awards a limited
www.canfar.com
and Western and Central The Foundation supports number of HIV/AIDS grants
Europe that are involved in harm reduction programs through its health program. CANFAR is the only national
HIV/AIDS-related activities. to reduce HIV transmission organization in Canada dedicated
among IDUs and others at risk. BRAZIL to privately funding research
ARGENTINA It supports capacity-building, Fundacao Athos Bulcao into all aspects of HIV infection
Fundacion Mantovano Para public awareness and advocacy Setor de Autarquias Norte and AIDS.
La Prevencion Del Sida y programs throughout Quadra 01 bloco E
Drogadiccion the country. 70041-904 brasília – DF – brasil Farha Foundation
Rodriguez Peña 69 1º Piso Tel./fax: +55 61 3322 7801 100-576 rue Ste-Catherine West
(1020) Capital Federal AUSTRALIA www.fundathos.org.br Montréal, Quebec
buenos Aires, Argentina AIDS TRUST of Australia Canada H2l 2E1
Athos bulcao supports HIV/
Tel./Fax: +54 114 371 7393 P.o. box 1030 Tel.: +1 514 270 4900
AIDS awareness and prevention
www.drwebsa.com.ar/fmsida Darlinghurst NSW Fax: +1 514 270 5363
programs for youth.
Sydney, Australia 1300 www.farha.qc.ca/en/index.html
The Foundation provides HIV/
Tel.: +61 02 9285 4400
AIDS awareness and prevention Fundo Angela Borba Farha funds organizations
Fax: +61 02 9261 8845
education, direct services, Rua Hans Staden, 21 - botafogo, throughout Quebec providing
www.aidstrust.com.au
and financial stipends to help Cep 22281-060 HIV/AIDS care and services
PlWHA and their families. The Trust raises funds and Rio de Janeiro - RJ - brasil as well as prevention and
distributes grants to community- Tel.: +55 21 2286 1046 education programs.
UBATEC based organizations that provide Fax: +55 21 2286 6712
Viamonte 577 5º Piso, C1053AbK HIV/AIDS awareness education, www.angelaborbafundo.org Match International
Ciudad Autónoma de buenos research and direct support 310 - 411 Roosevelt Avenue
The Foundation has a Women &
Aires, Argentina for PlWHA. ottawa, ontario
HIV/AIDS project.
Tel./Fax: +54 11 4313 3600 Canada K2A 3X9
www.ubatec.uba.ar Bobby Goldsmith Foundation Tel.: +1 613 238 1312
P.o. box 97 Fax: +1 613 238 6867
UbATEC serves as an
Darlinghurst NSW www.matchinternational.org
intermediary for funds for
Sydney, Australia 1300
HIV/AIDS public awareness, MATCH supports initiatives,
Tel.: +61 02 9283 8666
prevention and education including those addressing HIV/
Fax: +61 02 9283 8288
programs with a focus on AIDS, which are identified by
www.bgf.org.au
women, youth and lGbT women in the global South and
communities in Argentina. The Foundation provides are led and implemented by
financial support to PlWHA women in Africa, Asia, South
for medical, housing and America and the Caribbean.
educational expenses.


aPPendix d

Rooftops Canada Foundation CHINA, PEOPLE’S Kadoorie Charitable Foundations INDIA
720 Spadina Avenue, Suite 313 REPUBLIC OF 1st Floor, St. George’s building Rajiv Gandhi Foundation
Toronto, ontario Chi Heng Foundation 2 Ice House Street Rajendra Prasad Road
Canada M5S 2T9 P.o. box: GPo box 3923 Hong Kong, China New Delhi - 110 001, India
Tel.: +1 416 366 1445 Central Hong Kong, China Tel.: +852 2905 3386 Tel.: +91 11 2375 5117
Fax: +1 416 366 3876 Tel.: +852 2517 0564 Fax: +91 11 2375 5119
The Foundation funds a wide
www.rooftops.ca Fax: +852 2517 0594 www.rgfindia.com
range of initiatives in health,
www.chihengfoundation.com
Rooftops focuses on community development, poverty The Foundation supports HIV
disadvantaged communities in The Foundation funds and alleviation and education. It training programs for health
Africa, Asia, latin America, the operates projects in education supports community health professionals working with NGos
Caribbean and Eastern Europe. and care for children and education and HIV prevention to treat the underprivileged
It provides support for housing adults impacted by AIDS, as programs. throughout India. It also supports
and support services for PlWHA. well as HIV prevention and anti- education, prevention and direct
discrimination programs. ECUADOR services programs for PlWHA as
Snowy Owl AIDS Foundation Corporación KIMIRINA well as capacity-building grants
200 2500 Palladium Drive Hong Kong AIDS Foundation Ramirez Davalos 258 y Paez for Cbos working in this area.
ottawa, ontario 5/F, Shaukeiwan Jockey Club Clinic Quito, Ecuador
Canada K2V 1E2 8 Chai Wan Road Tel.: +593 22 55 67 50 Vasavya Mahila Mandali
Tel.: +1 613 828 8843 Hong Kong, China Fax: +593 22 56 87 67 benz Circle, Vijayawada - 520 010
Fax: +1 613 828 7964 Tel.: +852 2560 8528 www.kimirina.org Andhra Pradesh, India
www.snowyowl.org Fax: +852 2560 4154 Tel.: +91 86 6247 0966
KIMIRINA supports HIV/AIDS
www.aids.org.hk Fax: +91 86 6247 3056
The Foundation supports education, awareness prevention
www.vasavya.com
organizations dedicated to HIV/ The Foundation has a PlWHA and treatment programs
AIDS education, prevention, and Support Fund through which it throughout Ecuador from a Vasavya is an intermediary for
direct support services in the provides limited direct assistance human rights perspective with a international and national
ottawa-Hull region of Canada. to PlWHA. focus on gender equality. funders and governments. It
supports home and community-
Stephen Lewis Foundation Hua Qiao Foundation GHANA based HIV/AIDS care and
260 Spadina Avenue 6 lane 1279 African Women’s Development prevention programs.
Suite 501 Zhong Shan Xi Road Fund
Toronto, ontario Shanghai 200051, China PMb CT 89 Cantonments MAMTA Health Institute for
Canada M5T 2E4 Tel.: +86 21 3209 5514 Accra, Ghana Mother and Child
Tel.: +1 416 533 9292 www.huaqiaofoundation.org Tel.: +233 21 521257 b-5, Greater Kailash Enclave-II
Fax: +1 416 850 4910 Fax: +233 21 782502 New Delhi, India 110048
Hua Qiao serves as an
www.stephenlewisfoundation.org www.awdf.org Tel.: +91 11 2922 0210
intermediary for international
Fax: +91 11 2922 0575
The Foundation supports funding to HIV/AIDS programs in The group’s HIV/AIDS Fund
www.mamta-himc.org
community-based organizations China that support AIDS orphans. supports women’s organizations
in Africa working to assist throughout Africa advocating MAMTA is an intermediary for
AIDS orphans, provide care for non-discrimination and international and national funders
to women who are ill, support gender equality as well as direct and governments. It supports
grandmothers caring for their support for HIV prevention, HIV/AIDS programs focusing
orphan grandchildren, and sustain treatment, support and on direct care, advocacy, and
associations of PlWHA. community care. The Fund training throughout the country.
also provides capacity-building
grants to women’s organizations
working on HIV/AIDS issues.


Palmyrah Workers Development organization, providing direct KENyA Kenya Community
Society (PWDS) monetary support to PlWHA Africa Medical and Research Development Foundation
Crystal Street, Marthandam – 629165 and their families. It also Foundation (AMREF) P.o.box 10501
Kanyakumari District engages in advocacy, training, P.o. box 27691-00506 Nairobi 00100, Kenya
Tamil Nadu, India organizing, and networking Nairobi, Kenya Tel.: +254 20 676 3002
Tel.: +91 46 5127 0241 with local community members, Tel.: +254 20 699 300 Fax: +254 20 676 2538
Fax: +91 46 5127 0138 communities of faith, local Fax: +254 20 609 518 www.kcdfoundation.org
www.pwds.org governments, and others to www.amref.org
KCDF awards grants for
educate and promote care
PWDS is an intermediary for AMREF supports HIV prevention education scholarships, asset
for PlWHA.
international and national and treatment programs as development, early childhood
funders and governments. well as advocacy and capacity- development, arts and culture,
JAPAN
It supports Cbos and NGos building for HIV/AIDS Cbos youth development, HIV/AIDS,
Japanese Foundation For
working with AIDS orphans as and NGos in most countries organizational capacity-building
AIDS Prevention
well as organizations providing throughout Africa. and food security.
Suidobashi bldg. 5F, Misakicho 1-3-12
community-based care and
Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101-0061, Japan
support programs for PlWHA. Allavida K-Rep KyRGyZSTAN
Tel.: +81 3 5259 1811
Development Agency Soros Foundation – Kyrgyzstan
Fax: +81 3 5259 1812
LEPRA Society P.o. box 10434 – 0100 55A, logvinenko St.
www.jfap.or.jp/english/index.htm
Post box No. 1518 Nairobi, Kenya bishkek, 720040 Kyrgyzstan
West Marredpally, Secunderabad JFAP raises funds from the Tel.: +254 20 310 526 Tel.: +996 312 66 34 75
Andhra Pradesh, India public to support its SToP AIDS Fax: +254 20 310 525 Fax: +996 312 66 34 48
Tel.: +91 040 2780 2139 Fund, which provides grants to www.allavida.org www.soros.org/about/
Fax: +91 040 2780 1391 Japanese grassroots HIV/AIDS- foundations/kyrgyzstan
Allavida’s mission is to transform
www.leprasociety.org related NGos.
the practice and outcomes The Foundation administers
lEPRA is an intermediary for of development funding, the Central Asia Regional
JORDAN
international and national funders grantmaking and philanthropy in HIV/AIDS Program, which is
Noor Al-Hussein Foundation
and governments. It supports a Africa. one of its projects funded designed to prevent the further
P.o. box 926687
wide range of HIV/AIDS projects by PEPFAR provides credit and spread of HIV in Central Asia
Amman 11110 Jordan
from direct care to advocacy savings interventions to HIV- through capacity-building for
Tel.: +962 6 560 7460
to education and vocational positive and affected persons to organizations addressing harm
Fax: +962 6 560 6994
programs throughout the country. enable them to start or expand reduction, supporting prevention
www.nooralhusseinfoundation.org
micro-enterprises and small-scale activities, and advocating
TEST Foundation The Foundation addresses farming activities. for policies to increase the
4, Sathalvar Street HIV/AIDS through its Family effectiveness of awareness and
Mugappair West Planning and Reproductive Development Innovation for prevention programs.
Chennai, India 600037 Health program, which focuses Rural Communities (DEVIRUCO)
Tel.: +91 044 2624 4100 on education, prevention and P.o. box 542
Fax: +91 044-2625 0315 awareness campaigns. busia, Kenya 50400
www.testfoundation.in Tel.: +254 722 693 689

TEST is both an operating DEVIRUCo serves as an
foundation, running its own intermediary to disburse a
programs including home-based small amount of funding to
care and a hospice for AIDS Cbos. It also operates HIV/AIDS
patients, and a grantmaking education, prevention
and treatment programs.


aPPendix d

MOZAMBIQUE NICARAGUA ActionAid International Atlantic Philanthropies
Foundation for Community Fondo Centroamericano PostNet suite #248 South Africa
Development de Mujeres Private bag X31 Cradock Heights, Second Floor
Av. 25 de Setembro Edificio Rotonda El Gueguense Saxonwold 2132 21 Cradock Avenue
Times Square 1 c. al Norte Johannesburg, South Africa Rosebank 2196
C.P - 4206 Managua, Nicaragua Tel.: +27 11 731 4500 Johannesburg, South Africa
Mozambique Tel.: +505 254 4981 Fax: +27 11 880 8082 Tel.: +27 11 880 0995
Tel.: +258 21 355 300 Fax: +505 254 4982 www.actionaid.org Fax: +27 11 880 0809
Fax: +258 21 355 355 www.fcmujeres.org www.atlanticphilanthropies.org
ActionAid serves as an
www.fdc.org.mz
The Fund supports HIV intermediary for foundations Atlantic supports HIV/AIDS
FCD supports education, prevention and treatment and governments throughout research, policy development and
prevention and treatment programs for women in the world. It builds the organizational infrastructure in
programs for PlWHA, capacity- Central America. capacity of NGos and Cbos South Africa.
building for HIV/AIDS Cbos, and in 23 countries to advocate
care for orphaned children. PHILIPPINES and provide support for DG Murray Trust
Philippine Business for comprehensive HIV prevention, P.o. box 23893
NEW ZEALAND Social Progress treatment, care and support. Claremont 7735
J.R. Mckenzie Trust P.o. box 3839 Cape Town, South Africa
P.o. box 10 006 Manila, Philippines Adelle Searll Memorial Trust Tel.: +27 21 670 9856
Wellington 6143, New Zealand Tel.: +63 2 527 7741 28 Norwich Drive Fax: +27 21 670 9850
Tel.: +64 04 472 8876 Fax: +63 2 527 3743 bishops Court Est, Claremont www.dgmt.co.za
Fax: +64 04 472 5367 www.pbsp.org.ph Cape Town, South Africa
The Trust funds NGos providing
www.jrmckenzie.org.nz Tel.: +27 21 797 2890
PbSP supports advocacy efforts services to AIDS orphans
The Trust makes grants in to increase awareness of HIV/ The Trust awards small grants and children.
the areas of social services, AIDS throughout the Philippine in the Western Cape to Cbos
health services and community business sector. It has supported working on aging, mental health, Dockda Rural
development, with a focus on the development of HIV/AIDS AIDS orphans and other issues. Development Agency
children, young people and education prevention programs P.o. box 186
people with disabilities. It for employees in companies AIDS Foundation of South Africa Rondebosch 7701
supports HIV/AIDS programs in across the country. P.o. box 50582 Cape Town, South Africa
all of its focus areas. Musgrave, Durban 4062 Tel.: +27 21 685 1236
SOUTH AFRICA South Africa Fax: +27 21 689 7199
New Zealand AIDS Foundation Ackerman Family Foundation Tel.: +27 31 277 2700 www.dockda.org.za
P.o. box 6663, Wellesley Street P.o. box 23087 Fax: +27 31 202 9522
The agency’s HIV/AIDS program
Auckland 1141, New Zealand Claremont www.aids.org.za
supports Cbos that provide
Tel.: +64 09 303 3124 Cape Town 7735, South Africa
The Foundation supports HIV treatment for PlWHA, support
Fax: +64 09 309 3149 Tel.: +27 21 658 1000
prevention, education and for orphans, and advocacy for
www.nzaf.org.nz Fax: +27 21 658 1135
treatment in the poorest and increased resources, prevention
The Foundation supports MSM The Foundation funds a wide most under-resourced areas of and education.
who have HIV and AIDS through range of issues in South Africa, the country. It also supports
its Wellness Fund and a small including HIV/AIDS. AIDS orphans programs.
scholarship fund.


Ikhala Trust Nelson Mandela Children’s Fund Starfish Greathearts Foundation TANZANIA
P.o. box 210957 P.o. box 797 Postnet Suite 510, Private bag X9 WAMA Foundation
The Fig Tree Highlands North 2037 benmore 2010 P.o. box 10641
Port Elizabeth, South Africa South Africa South Africa Dar es Salaam
Tel.: +27 41 585 0970 Tel.: +27 11 274 5600 Tel.: +27 11 259 4000 Tanzania
Fax: +27 41 582 1425 Fax: +27 11 486 3914 Fax: +27 11 259 4111 Tel.: +255 22 212 6516
www.ikhala.org.za www.nmcf.co.za www.strafishcharity.org Fax: +255 22 2121 916
www.wamafoundation.or.tz
The Trust provides seed funding Children orphaned by AIDS are Starfish builds the capacity
and organizational capacity- supported through the fund’s of NGos and Cbos throughout WAMA’s focus is to improve
building grants to Cbos in the Wellbeing Program. South Africa to meet the the social and economic
Eastern Cape working on HIV/ educational, material and advancement of women and
AIDS issues. Networking AIDS Community of emotional needs of girls in Tanzania by increasing
South Africa (NACOSA) AIDS-orphaned children in access to education, maternal
The Isidore, Theresa and Ronald P.o. box 6358 their own communities. and newborn health and sexual
Cohen Charitable Trust Roggebaai, 8012 reproductive health services
P.o. box 7256 South Africa Uthungulu Community including HIV and AIDS.
Cape Town, 8000 Tel.: +27 21 461 7348 Foundation
South Africa Fax: +27 21 461 7953 P.o. box 1748 UKRAINE
Tel.: +27 21 421 7110 www.nacosa.org.za Richards bay 3900 Elena Franchuk
Fax: +27 21 421 7191 South Africa Anti-AIDS Foundation
NACoSA is a network of over
Tel.: +27 35 797 1882/3 Horizon office Towers, office
The Trust funds a wide range of 300 NGos and Cbos working
Fax: +27 35 797 3134 419-А
issues in South Africa, including to reduce the impact of HIV and
www.ucf.org.za Shovkovychna Street, 42-44
HIV/AIDS. AIDS. It operates primarily in the
Kyiv, Ukraine 01601
Western Cape, where it provides UCF awards small grants
Tel.: +380 44 490 4805
Ken Collins Charity Trust small seed grants to Cbos. to grassroots organizations
Fax: +380 44 490 4885
P.o. box 2330 providing direct service,
www.antiaids.org
Pietermaritzburg 3200 Open Society Foundation advocacy and education and
KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa for South Africa awareness on HIV/AIDS issues. The Foundation supports
Tel.: +27 33 345 3947 P.o. box 143 information and educational
Howard Place TAIWAN campaigns and NGos providing
The Trust supports Cbos
Pinelands, South Africa 7450 Nurses’ AIDS Prevention direct support to PlWHA and
providing HIV resources in
Tel.: +27 21- 511 1679 Foundation HIV-positive children.
South Africa.
Fax: +27 21- 511 5058 4F, 279 Hsinyi Rd., Sec.4
www.osf.org.za Taipei, Taiwan ZIMBABWE
Nelson Mandela Foundation
Tel.: +886 02 2531 7575 Community Foundation for the
Private bag X70000 Through its Human Rights and
Fax: +886 02 2567 7585 Western Region of Zimbabwe
Houghton 2041 Governance Program, oSF
www.napf.org.tw/intor7_E.htm 21 Walter Howard Road
South Africa promotes policy development
North End
Tel.: +27 11 728 1000 and public awareness of HIV/AIDS In addition to HIV/AIDS
bulawayo, Zimbabwe
Fax: +27 11 728 1111 as a human rights issue. counseling and education/
Tel./Fax: +263 9 200 078/209 617
www.nelsonmandela.org prevention work, the Foundation
www.westfound.com
supports a competition that
The Foundation sponsors
presents cash awards for HIV/ The Foundation supports school-
community dialogues
AIDS nursing-related articles on based programs providing
throughout the country on
research and special projects. It psychosocial support for young
HIV/AIDS resulting in expanded
also provides stipends for nurses children affected by AIDS and
education and awareness
who become infected through funds advocacy efforts to
leading to community action.
their work. increase support for a wide range
of HIV/AIDS programs.


aPPendix d

As part of the global resource tracking effort, the following profiles present examples of
funding organizations (with income from various public and private sources) outside of
the U.S. and Western and Central Europe. Their work offers useful models for utilizing the
power of partnerships, creative fundraising, and a human rights approach to PLWHA and
marginalized populations.

Profile of a fUnding
T
he statistics reflecting the number of
children in South Africa orphaned or left
organization vulnerable by HIV/AIDS are staggering,
with an estimated 1.4 million AIDS orphans in
Starfish Greathearts the country in 2008. In response to the growing
Foundation pandemic, a group of young South Africans founded
Johannesburg, South Africa the Starfish Greathearts Foundation in 2001.
HIV/AIDS funding in 2008:
Driven by a vision to ensure that every orphaned
$3,824,632
and vulnerable child has access to basic services,
Andre van Rensburg Starfish’s goal is to support over 100,000 children
Chief Executive Officer within the next five years. It hopes to achieve this goal by building the capacity of non-
avanrensburg@iqgroup.net governmental and community-based organizations throughout South Africa to meet the
www.starfishcharity.org educational, material and emotional needs of AIDS-orphaned children in their
Tel.: +27 11 259 4000 own communities.

Starfish is a not-for-profit developmental organization that enters into partnership with local
organizations in under-resourced communities in the country’s nine provinces. It currently
supports 120 projects that provide services for over 36,000 AIDS-orphaned children. Its
primary services include home visits, counseling, nutritional support, access to education and
access to social grants.

Starfish offers a unique capacity-building program that empowers community-based
organizations (CBOs) so that they are able to provide more effective services to a larger number
of children orphaned by AIDS. This program provides mentors to teach basic management and
fundraising skills to CBOs and provides training to local caregivers to assess and appropriately
care for orphaned children in their community. General operating support is provided to the
CBOs while in the program.

Once they have completed the capacity-building program, organizations are eligible to apply
for annual grant funding of $12,000 to $36,000 to provide direct services to the children they
serve. One such organization is the Alex AIDS Orphans Project in the Johannesburg suburb
of Alexandra, which was set up over a decade ago to provide food for families and ensure that
local children have access to education in local schools. With the support of Starfish, newly
added programs now include home visits, bereavement counseling for children, and support
groups for grandparents and HIV-positive mothers caring for children.

Children orphaned by AIDS seldom have the resources to continue with their education.
Recognizing this critical problem, and being passionate about educational development,
Starfish established an educational support program. Through this program the foundation
provides needed assistance to CBOs such as Gozololo in KwaZulu-Natal, where its funding pays
for children’s school fees and stationery and provides a new school uniform each year.


In addition to basic food and education, every child needs emotional support, encouragement
and care. Starfish ensures that orphans and vulnerable children receive much-needed
counseling and home visits by caregivers in the community. Many caregivers receive training
through its capacity-building program. The Ethembeni Orphan Care project near Port
Elizabeth receives support from Starfish for food and education, and equally important,
psychosocial support.

Starfish is supported by a range of foundations, corporations, charitable trusts and development
agencies in addition to generating income from innovative fundraising events. The vast
majority of funding for its programs is provided by PEPFAR.

Children throughout South Africa orphaned by AIDS are given a chance to be nurtured and
loved by families in their communities thanks to the vision and commitment of the
Starfish Foundation.


aPPendix d

T
he economic crisis that Ecuador has been
experiencing since 1999 has resulted in a
organization dramatic increase in the levels of poverty
throughout the country. Hardest hit by this crisis are
Corporación KIMIRINA communities already vulnerable to HIV infection,
Quito, Ecuador such as sex workers, migrants and men who have
sex with men. The government has reduced funding
for public health, thereby leaving many people
$428,213
living with HIV unable to afford adequate nutrition,
Amira Herdoiza medical attention and medications.
Executive Director
amiraherdoiza@hotmail.com Partly in response to this growing crisis, Corporación KIMIRINA was founded in late 1999
Website: www.kimirina.org to help address the needs of people living with HIV and expand HIV/AIDS awareness and
Tel.: +593 22 556 750 prevention efforts across the country. Unique among many funders in the country, KIMIRINA
approaches its work from a human rights perspective with a focus on gender equality.

A registered not-for-profit charity, Corporación KIMIRINA sponsors fundraising events and
receives funds for re-granting to local organizations. During the past several years KIMIRINA
has partnered with over 30 non-governmental and community-based organizations in 12
of Ecuador’s 22 provinces, providing technical support and financial assistance to build
organizational capacity to address a range of advocacy, policy and service issues.

In partnership with the International HIV/AIDS Alliance, KIMIRINA developed the Frontiers
Prevention Project (FPP), which was implemented in six cities within Ecuador. The target
populations included MSM, transgendered individuals, sex workers, and PLWHA. Working
with dozens of local grassroots public and private partners, KIMIRINA provided organizational
and programmatic technical support to increase counseling and HIV testing services. In
addition, it trained partner organizations to advocate with local and national decision-makers
for expanded rights and access to services. One significant result of these efforts was the
inclusion of sex workers in a national program providing free HIV and STI testing services.

KIMIRINA has supported many projects to raise awareness and community involvement in
HIV prevention. In collaboration with local and regional governments it supported training
activities for municipal employees, utilized innovative theatre and artistic techniques with
teenagers in public and private schools, and increased awareness and prevention education
with indigenous and Afro–Ecuadorian organizations.

Currently, KIMIRINA is supporting the development of a program for the Empowerment
of Women Living with HIV/AIDS. Workshops, training of peer educators and a campaign
on women and HIV/AIDS are components of this program targeting the cities of Quito and
Guayaquil. The project will also empower women to lobby local and national decision-makers
for a broader, more holistic response to HIV and AIDS, emphasizing the importance of
sustainable public policy advocacy.

KIMIRINA has effectively built the capacity of NGOs, CBOs and government entities to address
issues of sexual and reproductive human rights, awareness and prevention of HIV/AIDS. Its
work has been supported by foundations, corporations, and multi/bilateral organizations.
Through community mobilization initiatives, public policy advocacy strategies and expansive
social dialogue, Corporación KIMIRINA has made an important impact on HIV/AIDS
awareness, prevention and services in Ecuador.


U
kraine remains one of the most affected
countries in Europe, with an estimated adult
organization HIV prevalence of 1.4%. WHO/UNAIDS
estimates that the number of people living with HIV
Elena Franchuk in Ukraine totals nearly 400,000. Ukraine also has
Anti-AIDS Foundation one of the highest rates of HIV-positive pregnant
Kyiv, Ukraine women in Europe. In 2008 alone, over 3,600
children were born to HIV-positive mothers and the
number is increasing 20-30% annually.
$2,399,547

Olga Rudneva, Founded in 2003, the Elena Franchuk Anti-AIDS
Executive Director Foundation is trying to change these statistics. As the only private foundation dedicated to
o.Rudneva@antiaids.org fighting HIV/AIDS in Ukraine, it works in partnership with the Ukrainian government and
Website: www.antiaids.org/en other foundations around the world. The Foundation’s activities focus on conducting large-
Tel.: +38 44 490 4805 scale information and educational campaigns primarily through the mass media; providing
direct support to people living with HIV and AIDS; attracting additional resources to support
projects for prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS; and working to decrease stigma and
discrimination against people living with HIV/AIDS.

The Foundation supports a number of programs working with HIV-positive children, providing
direct support for families who have adopted HIV-positive children as well as awarding grants
to orphanages and hospitals caring for them. In 2008 it entered into a partnership with the
Elton John AIDS Foundation to create the Children Plus (+) project. That project focuses on
ending discrimination against HIV-positive children, changing public attitudes through teacher
training programs, and helping the children move out of orphanages and into adoptive or foster
homes. The lives of hundreds of HIV-infected children have already been positively impacted
by this work in 11 districts throughout Ukraine.

A new and unique project, Mobile Clinic, was recently launched with funds raised through the
largest charity auction ever held in the country, which was organized by the Foundation under
Anti-AIDS’ social brand Fashion AID. Five fully equipped mobile clinics were purchased and
given to regional HIV/AIDS centers in the areas most impacted by the epidemic. These clinics
will provide thousands of children with critical medical treatment and care which would
otherwise be nearly impossible to obtain.

Children are not the only focus of the Anti-AIDS Foundation. The Foundation is in its third
year of a five-year collaborative project with the Clinton HIV/AIDS Initiative. The project
aims to reduce the growth rate of HIV cases in Ukraine and to improve access to treatment
and care for PLWHA. Target areas include increasing access to HIV/AIDS testing; training
healthcare providers; improving the government procurement system; and extending access to
substitution therapy for IDUs.

Saving lives and providing a better quality of life for thousands of children and adults affected
by HIV/AIDS in Ukraine is a major goal of the Anti-AIDS Foundation. Through innovative and
creative partnerships, it is turning that goal into reality.


fcaa board and Staff
board of directorS Staff © November 2009, Funders
Concerned About AIDS,
Patricia Doykos Duquette John L. Barnes Brooklyn, NY.
Bristol-Myers Squibb Executive Director
Foundation, Inc. Permission is granted to
Bob Bronzo reproduce this document
Gregory W. Edwards Former Program Manager in part or in its entirety,
Flowers Heritage Foundation provided that Funders
Sarah Hamilton Concerned About AIDS
Kandy S. Ferree Development & Communications (FCAA) is cited as the source
National AIDS Fund Manager for all reproduced material.
This document is posted
Anu Gupta Ann Maldonado and distributed primarily
Johnson & Johnson Administrative Coordinator as an electronic condensed
PDF file. Please feel free to
Melanie Havelin contact FCAA if you would
The John M. Lloyd Foundation prefer printed copies of
this report.
Mark Ishaug
AIDS Foundation of Chicago Funders Concerned
About AIDS
Jen Kates 189 Montague St., Suite 801A
The Henry J. Kaiser Family Brooklyn, NY 11201
Foundation Telephone: 718-875-0251
Fax: 718-875-0255
Daniel Jae-Won Lee Email: info@fcaaids.org
Levi Strauss Foundation Website: www.fcaaids.org

LaTida Smith
Chair
Saint Luke’s Foundation of
Cleveland, Ohio

Jasmine Thomas
Surdna Foundation

64

Funders Concerned
About AIDS
189 Montague St., Suite 801A
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Telephone: 718-875-0251
Fax: 718-875-0255
Email: info@fcaaids.org Website:
Website: www.fcaaids.org

FCAA Resource Tracking 2009

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to FCAA Resource Tracking 2009 (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

FCAA Resource Tracking 2009