The recently released 2012 World Malaria Report (WMR) brought in to focus both malaria progress as well as the charges in malaria funding for the 104 malaria-endemic countries. Increased rates of coverage with vector control and malaria case management measures has mean that 274 million cases and 1.1 million deaths have been averted between 2001 and 2010. Unfortunately, The WMR observes that, â€œThe enormous progress achieved appears to have slowed recently. International funding for malaria control has leveled off, and is projected to remain substantially belowâ€ projected needs.
We are not talking about small amounts of money or minor contributions to date. The WRM reports that, â€œThe past decade has witnessed tremendous expansion in the financing and implementation of malaria control programmes. International disbursements for malaria control rose steeply from less than US$ 100 million in 2000 to US$ 1.71 billion in 2010 and were estimated to be US$ 1.66 billion in 2011 and US$ 1.84 billion in 2012.â€ This must be put in context with amounts estimated to be needed to achieve universal coverage (including use) of the major prevention and treatment interventions.
The WMR explains that â€œThe enormous progress achieved appears to have slowed recently.â€ As noted above international funding for malaria control has leveled off, and â€œis projected to remain substantially below the US$ 5.1 billionâ€ annually required to achieve and maintain universal coverage of malaria interventions. The Roll Back Malaria Partnership has estimated a higher projected annual need. â€œResource requirements for global malaria prevention, control and elimination were estimated in the GMAP (Global Malaria Action Plan) to amount to some US$6.1 billion annually between 2012 and 2015.â€ This figure includes both program management costs as well as research needed to develop new tools.
The link between funding and coverage is clear in the WMR. The number of ITNs procured in 2012 (66 million) is far lower than in 2011 (92 million) and 2010 (145 million). â€œWith the average useful life of ITNs estimated to be 2 to3 years, ITN coverage is expected to decrease if ITNs are not replaced in 2013.â€ Recent reports from a regional malaria elimination meeting in Kigali show that replacement time may be even shorter, possibly every 18-24 months based on local use and environmental conditions.
When identifying what is happening in malaria financing, it is important to recognize that there are relatively few direct donors. Major international malaria funders accounting for over 90% of donor financing are Global Fund, US Presidentâ€™s Malaria Initiative (PMI), Department for International Development (DfID), World Bank, and AusAid. Others include bilateral assistance, corporate donors and foundations.
The Global Fund as an entity and as the sum of its country contributors shocked the malaria and global health communities in 2011 when it announced the cancellation of its Round 11 of annual funding. The situation was complex and reflected weak financial pledging and inputs as well as internal management issues. The new funding approach was discussed in the WMR.Â There are some uncertainties causing concern for the malaria community.
According to the 2012 WMR, â€œcountries will be grouped by the Global Fund into Country Bands based upon a composite score which is a combination of a countryâ€™s GNI and its disease burden. Then there will be a â€œglobal disease split (i.e. 52% for HIV, 32% for malaria and16% for TB), until a new formula is determined, the Board,â€ that will be combined with a split according to Bands.Â Finally actual allocation decisions will be made by the country coordination mechanisms (CCMs).Â Malaria appears to be in greater direct competition with the other two diseases than what obtained in the past.Â How other donors will compensate for any country shortfalls is unknown at present.
One possible implication of bands is that there may be less focus on lower burden countries that are heading toward malaria elimination.Â Just because disease burden is low, or becomes low due to effective intervention does not mean that funding is not needed. Continued surveillance and case containment activities are not cheap, and require constant vigilance and sustained efforts since not all of oneâ€™s neighboring countries are at the same stage of malaria elimination.