Minutes of the Board of Trustees - The INCLEN Trust

Minutes of the Board of Trustees Meeting 

Of INCLEN Trust 

Heritage Village, Manesar, Haryana, India 

(April 7-8, 2006) 

Members Present: 

Ranjit Roy Chaudhury (RRC), Chair, Presiding Officer 

Demissie Habte (DH) 

Marcel Tanner (MT) 

Osman Sanipar (OS) (Coordinator, INCLEN SEA) 

Amr Hassan (AH) (Secretary General, INCLEN Africa) 

Antonio Jose Cunha (AC) (President, LatinCLEN) 

MKC Nair (MKC) (President, IndiaCLEN) 

Narendra. K. Arora (NKA) (Executive Director) 

Secretariat: 

Rodolfo Dennis (SPC) 

M. Lakshman (SPC) 

Manoja. K. Das (PC) 

Nitish Dogra (PC) 

Stephanie Combs (CFO) 

AK Patwari 

Madhusmita Mohanty 

Avitoli G Zhimo 

Sachin Ailawadi 

Chandan Singh 

Unable to attend: 

Palitha Abeykoon 

Francois Chapuis 

Peter Tugwell 

Jiyao Wang 

Summary of Significant and Action items resulting from the meeting: 

Agenda Item Decisions Action to be Taken 

Reports from the 

Chair, Executive 

Director 

A) LAMP, VC, 

KP 

1) IEO to send LAMP modules for evaluation 

by long standing Universities to be contacted 

by DH in Bangladesh, MKC Nair in India, 

and AC in Latin America 

B) IEO Agenda 

Items for BOT 

Meeting of 

Next Year 

1) Next presentation to include table of funds 

received vs. promised vs. applied 

for/pending 

2) Next year BOT to consider a new strategic 

planning session which would also include a 

review of the INCLEN name and its current 

appropriateness. 

3) CERTC evaluations and how can INCLEN 

establish: 

a)Criteria 

b) Motivation 

c) Incentives for development of 

uniform curriculum with quality assurance. 

Ultimate goal: INCLEN initiated 

international accreditation standards for such 

research capacity building programs 

1

C) Rockefeller 

Report 

1) Executive Summary to be prepared 

based upon the RF report and circulated 

to CLENs. IEO to pursue the 

possibility of preparing and submitting 

a suitable write-up for publication on 

“The History of an Organization” or 

some related topic. 

CLEN Reports 

D) Workplan 

06-07 

1) ED to prepare a short write upon the 

workplan and circulate to all network 

members 

1) CanUSA CLEN and IEO to discuss the 

possibility of INCLEN wide involvement in the 

Brain Disorders project. 

2) Next year CLEN reports to include a section 

for CLEN-CLEN and CLEN-IEO 

communications and projects. 

3) IEO to do background research on EDCTP 

and European Partners with LatinCLEN and 

EuroMed CLEN as well as INCLEN Africa 

and then follow-up with contacting the 

appropriate CLEN and CEUs. IEO to consider 

possible MoUs. 

4) IEO to facilitate SKYPE for all CLENs, 

CEUs, CERTCs, and other INCLEN friends 

possibly via website. 

5) All CLEN heads to prepare a report by 30 

Jun 2006 on the true financial needs for 

operating their offices, MUST be done 

independent of any CLEN – CLEN 

conversations to ensure non-bias, IEO to 

prepare a table of the combined needs and 

present during next BOT 

6) CLEN heads to prepare their own workplans 

and strengthen communications with CEUs. 

Progress to be included in next year report 

7) Spanish LAMP modules to be up loaded to 

INCLEN web site 

8) INCLEN-SEA and IEO to work together 

towards renaming INCLEN-SEA to PAN- 

ASIA CLEN after the consultations and 

approval of CLEN board 

9) IndiaCLEN to circulate the external 

evaluation report to BOT members and all 

CLENs, and to publish executive summary in 

2

INCLEN newsletter 

Administration SOPs 1) IEO to provide hardcopy to all CLEN heads 

SOPs to be uploaded to website. The SOPs to 

be annually reviewed by the BOT. 

2) Resolution passed to authorize the ED to 

dissolve the INCLEN Trust International, Inc. 

Manila, Philippines 

3) ED authorized to enter into retainer 

agreement with legal and audit companies M/S 

RK Bakshi & Co, Advocates and M/s 

Chandrayan and associates, Chartered 

Accountant respectively. 

Financial Matters 

1) Audit results of the FY04-05 year accepted 

2) Asher and Co. to be retained for FY05-06 

annual audit at the IEO Philadelphia 

BOT Nomination 

Jon Simon, Boston University accepted as new 

of Trustees 

Expanding 

INCLEN 

Network 

Work Plan for 

06-07 

AOB 

I. Meeting proceedings 

Trustee 

Wits School of Public Health accepted as new 

CEU for INCLEN Africa 

1) FY06-07 Workplan approved as presented 

2) SOPs to be expanded to include the 

reporting process for multsite/multicountry 

reporting 

1) Board to send comments to NKA on draft 

MoUs by 30 April, 2006 

The meeting was opened by the Chair at 9.00 a.m. on 7 th April 2006. Prof. Ranjit Roy 

Chaudhury, Chairman of the Board of Trustees welcomed all travelers from around 

the world. A special welcome was made to the new Trustees, Antonio da Cunha, 

LatinCLEN President; Osman Sanipar, INCLEN Sea; MKC Nair, IndiaCLEN 

President. He thanked all those attending and expressed his regrets to those who were 

unable to attend. He hinted about the crowded agenda, which must be dealt without 

loosing the perspective. He emphasized on the highest quality of work so that the 

INCLEN Program is built strong scientifically and creates impact not only on a 

national level but on international level too. 

The Chair reminded all attendees of the purpose of this two day meeting. He noted 

that it was most important to keep four major points at hand as the meeting 

progressed. 

1. Quality of content- All discussions, questions, presentations, and comments 

must be useful on the local, national, and international level. 

2. Strength of organization – Is the Network being used to the maximum of its 

capability? Globally there is high respect for INCLEN but when any 

opportunities arise, it is marginalized. Mobilizing the resources effectively 

would help the network rise up to challenge, for instance: SARS, Tsunami, 

and Bird Flu. 

3

3. Structure of CLENs – Can we increase effectiveness and use the most 

appropriate relationship from CLEN to CLEN, from CLEN to IEO and can we 

enhance, embrace, and invite new organizations and partners to achieve our 

goals. He urged the CLENS to coordinate with each other to make the 

network stronger. 

4. Resource Mobilization – There are no more core grants as the funder 

directives have changed since the early days of INCLEN and Rockefeller. Can 

we find and deliver on sufficient and meaningful grants to ensure the long 

term success of INCLEN and of the network? 

He talked about the need to identify 6-8 clinical trial groups / centres that have good 

track records. He also talked about resource mobilization like working through 

projects and surviving with the overheads e.g. Gates Foundation, Rockefeller 

Foundation etc, considering the fact that core funding is no longer available. 

He concluded by saying that he look forward to a fruitful meeting and handed over 

the further proceedings to the Executive Director, INCLEN, Narendra Arora (NKA). 

II. Introduction of INCLEN Staff 

NKA heartily welcomed the participants and before proceeding with the agenda, he 

asked the IEO staff to introduce themselves. All the staff present introduced 

themselves. He also welcomed Mrs. Ranjit Roy Chaudhury who was a welcome guest 

at the meeting. 

III. Review of the Minutes and Action Taken Report 

The Chair presented the minutes from the prior meetings for discussion and approval. 

The minutes for all meetings held in 2005 were included in the package for the 

information of the members. The action requested applied only to the most current 

unapproved minutes from the 22 nd December, 2005 teleconference. Since the 

minutes had been prepared and circulated previously, there were no correction noted 

and a motion was made by D. Habte to accept the minutes from the BOT 

Teleconference of 22 nd December 2005 without further notation. The motion passed 

by consensus. 

IIIa. Action Taken Report 

A summary of the action taken as a result of the 22 December, 2005 teleconference 

was presented by Narendra Arora (NKA). The following items were noted: 

Virtual Campus (VC) – LAMP – K+ The discussion started with NKA‟s 

statement that LAMP, K+, VC are currently included with ICOHRTA and also 

in every new proposal that is being submitted. Demisse Habte (DH) asked 

whether we receive any mileage or not from past efforts. Ranjit Roy 

Chaudhury (RRC) and Marcel Tanner (MT) said that internally it moved in the 

right direction and we made significant gains. INCLEN made significant 

investment in these programs totaling $722K over the life of the projects. 

There is a good base but very little in tangibles. All three programs will 

benefit by joining together. The current LAMP program and values will be 

combined into every future INCLEN project. In conjunction with ICOHRTA, 

4

VC at the global level has the potential to be a huge advantage for INCLEN 

and e-based learning is desired by many funders. 

In contrast, MT said that VC in the traditional format would not be very 

attractive and narrow distant learning courses would not create any impact. 

To make progress, the VC must be focused and specialized. A successful VCprogram 

will require partnerships with universities that currently run such 

programs. We cannot generalize but regionalization can really pay off. For 

example, China CLEN could do something in Traditional Medicine with 

IndiaCLEN. New initiatives are becoming VERY attractive to donors who are 

looking for fresh faces and ideas that have a strong regional context. Existing 

programs in LatinCLEN and the potential for distance learning in areas like 

INCLEN SEA will be evaluated. In order to be successful, we must find 

appropriate partners and we must convince potential partners, funders, and 

institutions that we can be successful. 

Regarding Virtual Campus, Osman Sanipar (OS) commented that the self 

instructional manuals being developed by INCLEN-SEA can be used for VC. 

Antonio Cunha (AC) said that there is no evidence as to whether the idea of 

VC will work or not keeping in mind the differences in language and structure. 

He suggested joining the VC with an existing campus for example US-based 

university or other university. RRC appreciated the suggestion and said that 

through this, more partnerships can be established and network expanded. He 

asked NKA to explore the organizations that have money but no man power 

resources e.g. SAARC, and will be interested in the idea.. 

DH talked about marketing LAMP modules either as online courses or 

distance learning in order to get something in return. He suggested identifying 

some public health institutes in the developing countries and requesting them 

to try these modules. However, RRC shared his negative experience of 

marketing the modules while he was at WHO and suggested that the modules 

should be sent to at least three persons outside INCLEN so that a good quality 

product worth studying is sent to the concerned institutes. Amr Hassan (AH) 

said that before sending the modules for external review, there should be an 

internal review also. He suggested that LAMP, KPP and VC should be 

integrated to reap lots of benefits and should focus on some specific areas to 

train people in those areas of health. He also said that we should use those 

mentors who worked in this program for initiation; the important point is to 

get together people from diverse background and work in a constant and 

steady manner. AC commented that besides quality, the targeted population in 

need of the modules should be identified. MT suggested that the modules 

should be sent to the concerned Institutes asking them to send feedback on 

quality and appropriateness. INCLEN seems poorly associated with Global 

Health issues and we need to engage the current INCLEN crowd. Can we use 

the VC to build up capacity in Africa? AC commented about the constant and 

ongoing conflict with members and activities especially the clinical work. The 

group identified the following Public Health Institutes: BRAC Dhaka, IGNOU 

Delhi, Tropical Institute, Switzerland, Bogotá (Latin CLEN). Rodolfo Dennis 

(RD) said that the Course should be linked to one another and although the 

5

Spanish version modules have been updated recently, the English version 

modules of 2002 need updating and adoption into a single coherent form. 

Response to RSC&CB call for proposals were disappointing. INCLEN 

approved four projects for expansion and strengthening after the April 2005 

Board meeting. Of these four projects, only two are currently in progress. 

INCLEN SEA, Prof Cynthia Cordero and LatinCLEN, Prof Andres Pinchon- 

Riviere‟s projects have been launched and are currently on budget and on 

schedule. The other two projects were never launched due to non response 

from the PIs, IndiaCLEN, Dr. Shally Awasthi, and INCLEN Africa, Dr. 

Lovemore Gwanzura. 

Development activities from the focus areas will be reported in detail later in 

the day but all projects have been launched at some level with funders starting 

to comment on various LOIs, responses and proposals have been submitted. 

Financial and Legal matters have progressed during the past year with the 

Trust formally and legally chartered in India as of October 27, 2005 and 

FCRA clearance applied for is well under way. Approval for FCRA is 

expected later in the current year. 

The Chair reported that the letter of appreciation had been sent to Mary Ann 

Lansang for her years of service. 

All Board members were thanked for their comments on the SOPs and 

reminded that this is a dynamic process and periodic review and update of the 

documents is appropriate. The SOPs are to be uploaded to the website and 

CDs would be available to all Board members to take with them. CLEN heads 

were especially encouraged to review and circulate the SOPs within their 

membership. 

There were two nominations for Board member to fill current vacancies. 

Professor Alfred Sommer expressed an interest but requested another 

invitation in two years after his current commitments had been completed. Dr. 

Jon Simon was also suggested and would be discussed further in the agenda. 

The IndiaCLEN evaluation field work has been completed and a very early 

draft of the results will be presented by MKC Nair for the information of the 

Board during this meeting. 

IV. Executive Director’s Report of Activities 

NKA presented the developmental activities since last BOT (April 2005). Previously 

approved action by the BOT were projects that would focus on Multicountry/multisite 

collaborative studies with the following profile: 

1. High visibility 

2. High impact 

3. Short gestation periods 

4. Potential to create niche area for INCLEN 

6

A. Program Development: The following activities were presented in brief. 

i.) Neuro-Developmental Disabilities among children in India: This project was 

initiated in India. It has received funding from Autism Speaks ($100,000) and 

National Trust, GOI ($50,000). Letter of Intent has been resubmitted to NIH for 

additional funding. The study has been designed in a manner that is applicable to all 

Low and Middle Income Countries (LMIC). The project is expected to be rolled out 

in the next 8-12 weeks in India. NIH-USA reapplication submission May 2006. 

ii) Measurement and Determinants of Childhood Obesity: In collaboration with 

McMaster University, Canada, INCLEN has submitted the Letter of Intent to CIHR- 

IDRC and the result is expected in the next 2-3 weeks. The Letter of Intent has also 

been prepared for submission to Nestle and Wellcome Trust. The overall budget has 

been estimated to be approximately $4.3 million. INCLEN has requested a grant of 

$1.5 million from CIHR-IDRC. 

iii) Achieving MDG5: INCLEN Study into Governance of Health Systems: The 

Letter of Intent has been submitted to IDRC, Canada and the response is awaited in 

the month of May. The same will be submitted to the McArther Foundation too. 

iv) Applied Research Program for HIV / AIDS in Africa: PEPFAR/USAID has 

granted $300,000. NKA and Jon Simon (JS) from Boston University made a visit to 

Kenya (Nairobi) and Zambia (Lusaka) to explore possibilities of developing an 

applied research agenda for HIV-AIDS in sub-Saharan countries. NKA and JS met 

the CEU members in Nairobi, faculty at the School of Medicine in Lusaka, and state 

program managers and donor agencies (USAID,etc.). A field visit was also made in 

Kericho (Kenya) which is in the tea estate region and has ongoing research programs 

for HIV-AIDS patients by Boston University and a field site of Walter Reid Center. 

Several ideas of policy and program relevance emerged. BU and INCLEN, in 

consultation with INCLEN Africa, will develop a research program that involves the 

maximum number of INCLEN sites in sub-Saharan countries that will be leveraged 

later to major financial programs. This program has been made a full fledge program 

in the Sub-Saharan countries. 

v) Multicentre Observational Study to Assess Safety of Outpatient Treatment of 

Severe Pneumonia with Oral Amoxicillin in Children Aged 3-59 Months: A pilot 

study- (APPIS II): This project is spearheaded by JHU-GRA / WHO and $150,000 

has been granted. This is a 6 country study: INCLEN sites – Brazil/Egypt. The study 

is underway at the Egyptian site. 

vi) Global Model Injection Centre (MIC): Letter of Intent has been developed for 

23 INCLEN countries and will be submitted to Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, 

USA for the grant of $10 million for a period of 5 years. 

vii) Dengue Surveillance Study: The project is initiated in partnership with one of 

the founders of INCLEN, Dr. Scott Halstead. An amount of $58,650 has been granted 

and agreement signed with Pediatric Dengue Vaccine Initiative supported by GAVI. 

viii) Gastrointestinal Integrity and Childhood Diarrheas: IndiaCLEN & SEA 

CLEN Study. The Study covers India, Pakistan, Nepal and possibly Bangladesh. 

Letter of Intent will be submitted to FIC-NIH latest by May 2006. 

7

ix) One Dollar Cost Oximetry Project (ODCOP): Talks have been going on for the 

initiation of this project with University of Manchester. It will also involve the 

University of Auckland, NZ and INCLEN. Funding is expected by the GE 

Corporation. A series of meetings are expected. The first meeting is proposed for 

April 25, 2006 in Manchester. 

x) Research to Policy to Action for Prevention of Control of Chronic Diseases in 

LMIC. Letter of Intent submitted to CIHR-IDRC by Simon Fraser University, 

Canada, Sri Chitra Tirunal University, TVM and INCLEN. The result is expected by 

April 2006. 

xi) Capacity Building: 

International Clinical, Operational and Health Services Research 

Trainings Award for AIDS and Tuberculosis (India - ICOHRTA) NIH, USA. 

Administrative Grant awarded for $125,000. The main grant proposal will be 

submitted in May 2006 requesting $1.25M over the 5 year life of the project. 

Apart from the above program development activities, NKA presented the 

engagement of INCLEN with Research Partners from April 2005- March 2006 along 

with few slides on Global Health Forum 9. In spite of a somewhat limited travel 

schedule, the number of development and research partner contacts over the past six 

months was considerable. It was noted that many of the funders that are interested in 

various global health issues are frequently coming to New Delhi for a variety of 

reasons. Having the INCLEN office in New Delhi has served to facilitate contact 

with donors as they travel. Sometimes donors are available in New Delhi that could 

not be available in their own countries of office. A considerable list was presented 

including 26 potential partners, 27 funding and donor agencies, and three other useful 

contacts. The list is attached as Appendix A. 

Global Forum 9, September 12-16, 2005 

The attendance at the Global Forum 9 was impressive as the annual IndiaCLEN 

meeting was jux supposed to the Global Forum meet. There were more than 100 

INCLEN members present including 6 Board of Trustees. Eight countries were 

represented by INCLEN and there were four major projects showcased at a parallel 

session titled ”Transnational, Multicentric Studies as a Pathway to Health Equity” 

This session was widely attended by INCLEN and non-INCLEN participants. 

The Global Forum 9 meeting served INCLEN as an opportunity for BOT, members, 

and staff to meet with numerous funds and discuss a wide range of projects. 

Newsletter 

The INCLEN newsletter is now being published by CLENs in an effort to give them 

an opportunity to become involved and connected with the issues of the day and also 

to allow them to have an opportunity to receive some funds for staff support in order 

to produce the issues. To that end, the September edition of the INCLEN newsletter, 

Volume 26 no.2 was prepared by INCLEN Africa and was presented at the Global 

Forum 9 meeting noted above. The success of this publication was further evidenced 

by the request of INCLEN Africa to publish the next newsletter so that they could 

capitalize on lessons learnt. So, the May edition of the INCLEN newsletter will be 

8

prepared by INCLEN Africa. In order to continue this rotation of newsletter 

publication LatinCLEN to be invited next. Future issues to continue to rotate 

throughout the CLENs. 

Website 

The INCLEN Trust website has been updated and is now being maintained on a daily 

basis. The membership information has been updated and uploaded to the site and is 

available with a sort function that will give all necessary contact information. Current 

projects and publications are also listed and are being updated as new information 

becomes available. A counter has been added to the site and since the site has been 

updated, the average daily hits has increased from 18-20 a day to nearly 100 hits per 

day. The next and very immediate project will be to update the INCLEN. Inc website. 

It will continue to hold all the historical data, 2000 and prior, and will become a 

“mirror image” of the Trust website for events and listings after the 2000 

incorporation of the Trust. These changes are expected to occur by the end of April at 

which time all the INCLEN websites will be updated and current. They will then be 

maintained simultaneously. 

B. INCLEN program for Traditional Medicine: 

RRC presented the INCLEN Indo-China program on Traditional Medicine. The 

program is being developed in partnership with ICMR and PGIMER, Chandigarh, 

India. 

Out of 157 plants looked at for diabetes, four plants were selected viz, Memordica 

Charantia, Gymnema Sylvestre, Pterecarpus Marsupium, and Trigonella Foenumgsaecum, 

of which, Gymnema Sylvestre was considered the most promising. The 

centre for clinical trial would be PGIMER. The protocol development will be done by 

the joint working group. The collection, standardization and stability work will be 

entrusted to a firm, Dabur Pharmaceuticals. The terms and conditions of the contract 

are still to be negotiated. He stated that the protocol would be comprehensive and 

would include double blind, randomized, controlled trial. 

The proposal will be submitted to ICMR for funding. Other potential donors are 

Samueli Foundation, CSIR, Central Clinical Facility for Research in Ayurveda and 

Siddha (CCRAS) and WHO. The political and scientific climate is created for the 

study. 

The future plan is that in India the project is likely to be rolled out in the next three 

months after ethics approval by PGI/ICMR. There after the project proposal and 

capsules will be sent to Jiyao Wang, China for further work. In China, eight plants 

have been selected to target diabetes control. Possible expansions could be considered 

in Brazil, Mexico, Thailand, and Pakistan. 

RD asked about the cost of toxicity study on plants. RRC replied that the cost is much 

less in traditional medicine. He further added that „Dabur‟ is the partner in this 

program whereby they are responsible for standardization and INCLEN gets the 

royalty. MT said that development of traditional medicine may take time but INCLEN 

should go ahead and involve INCLEN SEA in this project. Some of the institutions 

are interested in traditional medicine such as Novartis Institute in Singapore. Alex 

9

Mater, Director of Esparansa Foundation (non-profit organization) could be a useful 

contact in traditional medicine study since he is looking for anti-HIV products. 

C. Rockefeller Foundation Final Report 

The Rockefeller report was submitted in February 2006 and was nearly 5 years in the 

making. The report covered INCLEN‟s programs and progress spanning a grant 

period that ended December 31, 2005. It also focused on the $2,000,000 award that 

was given as the final seed money for the independence of INCLEN. The report 

outlined progress of: Knowledge Plus, LAMP, Regional Networks, Publications and 

Research Programs, Global Meeting/Global Forum, Strategic Plan, Organizational 

Matters, and Development Activities. 

Knowledge Management Plus (K+) 

The objective of the K+ Program was to: improve access to quality information on 

evidence-based, equity oriented practices; contribute to the reduction of the 

“information gap”; and enhance the “knowledge transition” process in low-income 

countries. These objectives were accomplished through the development, 

dissemination, and implementation of research driven health clinical practice 

guidelines (CPGs). 

INCLEN envisioned seven steps for the program, out of which Phase I focused on the 

first five: 

Step 1: Identification of priority health problems and potential clients; 

Step 2: Identification of available relevant knowledge; 

Step 3: Appraisal of efficacy, effectiveness, and efficiency; 

Step 4: Filters for local appropriateness and equity; 

Step 5: Preparation of Knowledge Plus Packages; 

Step 6: Dissemination and implementation; and 

Step 7: Development of tools to monitor and evaluate outcomes. 

LAMP 

The objective of the Leadership and Management Program (LAMP) was for INCLEN 

to take a leadership role in developing course training materials and workshops 

specifically designed for health care professionals because outstanding preparation in 

research design and methodology do not necessarily translate to leadership and 

management competence. The program utilized the “learn by doing” methodology 

and it resulted in workshops and initiatives in various regions. LAMP also resulted in 

the production of 9 modules and a 5 day basic workshop schedule. 

Regional Networks 

Each of the 7 regional networks submitted a summary of activities which was 

included in the final Rockefeller Report. These summaries included: governing 

committee members; a brief description; research; partnerships; regional and other 

meetings; education and training; and contributions to regional policy. 

Publications 

The Rockefeller Report contained a list of more than 1500 Publications in more than 

150 journals. Every CLEN was represented in the list of work, and there were more 

than 5,000 non-INCLEN collaborators. The INCLEN Delhi staff lead by Vaishali, 

Priyanka and Madhu was noted for their efforts to gather and update the massive 

publication listing. 

10

Global Meeting/Global Forum 

The report described the network regional, global meetings, and other international 

fora. The last Global Forum for Health Research (Forum 9) was held in Mumbai, 

India in September 2005. Progress reported from that meeting includes: INCLEN 

leveraged its attendance with a variety of satellite meetings; INCLEN hosted a well 

attended session in “Transnational, Multicentric Studies as a Pathway to Health 

Equity”; and the IndiaCLEN meeting was conducted as a satellite activity. 

Organizational Matters 

The report outlined the current BOT members and office bearers, the rotation of 

CLEN heads, and the recruitment of new BOT members. It introduced Dr. Arora and 

described the relationship of the newly constituted Delhi office with the Philadelphia 

office; described the legal process of opening the new office; and the development of 

standard operating procedures. It also gave details of new membership interest since 

the last report. 

Development Activities 

This section of the report concentrated on presenting the various partners that 

supported INCLEN network activities over the life of the grant. It detailed the 

network development activities year by year; highlights of the development activities 

including, but not limited to, various contacts with the Gates Foundation, Fogarty 

International Center, International Development Research Center and UBS Optimus 

Foundation; fourteen agencies, including the Rockefeller Foundation, that provided 

varying levels of support over the five year reporting period; and the major alliances 

that have developed. 

Summary 

The final Rockefeller report that was submitted in February 2006 provides both a 

view of where INCLEN has been for the past 5 years, and a road map of where 

INCLEN will be going in the future. The body of the report and most of the 

annexures are available in electronic format and can be emailed to all interested 

members. 

IPHIDE (Rodolfo Dennis) 

IPHIDE is the result of an RFA that was posted in April 2003 by the USAID Global 

Health Bureau. It yielded a cooperative agreement. The 5 strategic objectives of the 

Office of Global Health are: the reduction of unintended and mistimed pregnancies; 

improvement of infant and child nutrition and reduction in infant child mortality; 

reduction in deaths and adverse health outcomes to women as a result of childbirth; 

reduction of HIV transmission and the impact of the pandemic in developing 

countries; and reduction of threat of infection diseases of major public health 

importance. 

The new initiatives, the Global Research Activities (GRA) and the Country Research 

Activities (CRA), conduct health research for development of new and better 

technologies and tools, approaches and policies, and interventions. GRA and CRA 

also aim to improve the health status of infants, children, mothers, and families in 

developing countries, as well as coincide with the closure of CHR project. 

11

CRA conducts specific research to address local health priorities, including a broad 

range of country-specific locally relevant public health studies in country. CRA is 

also directly responsible for strengthening national research capacity and engaging 

new partners in country. One program under CRA is “The Child and Family Applied 

Research (CFAR) Consortium: Management and Governance,” which is directed by 

Jon Simon of Boston University. Partner and Subcontractor Institutions include: 

Harvard University, New England Medical Center and TUSM, Johns Hopkins SPH, 

University of Oxford/Kenya Medical Research Institute, INCLEN, CORE, ICDDR,B, 

and an extensive network of local partners. 

Lead implementers for activities were: requests by USAID under priority stetting of 

component 1 of the GH/HIDN research framework; requests as a result of CFAR 

institutions‟ interactions with USAID Missions; requests through proposals to USAID 

Missions by local partner organizations involving one core institution; and requests by 

Missions without prior interactions with core institutions or local partners. 

The IndiaCLEN Program for Health Intervention Development and Evaluation 

(IPHIDE) 

IPHIDE formally started in 2004 when the USAID Mission in New Delhi approved 

an initial (phase I) package of research and program evaluation activities in India. It 

was developed, prioritized, and conducted by IndiaCLEN. The three phase format, 

which would be extended to 2008, was worth over 7 million dollars. The Initial 

package, which was conducted between 2004 and 2005, approved funding for up to 

US $2,193,800 and was made available through the Country Research Activity (CRA) 

mechanism. 

Infectious Diseases & Disease Surveillance Initiative 

The Integrated Disease Surveillance Program (IDSP)- Participation in “phase II” 

states (14) is completed and the IndiaCLEN consultants and support staff facilitated 

various state PIP writing regional workshops. Participation in workshops to develop 

PIP for Phase III states in ongoing. Workshops began in August 2005 and have 

continued onwards. The start was delayed because of administrative reasons beyond 

the control of IndiaCLEN. IndiaCLEN consultants prepared and pre-tested the 

instruments for the external evaluation of IDSP training evaluation and will perform 

the evaluation in Tamil Nadu & Kerala beginning in April 2006. 

HIV/AIDS 

The study documents the success of HIV Intervention programs in Tamil Nadu, in 

collaboration with other stakeholders. The documentation will be ready by the end of 

May 2006. The Model of HIV scenario in the setting of the 3 by 5 Initiative has been 

dropped. The Program Implementation Plan for the National AIDS Control Program 

(NACP) - Phase III (2006-2011): Participation in three months of intense activity of 

state and regional workshops and writing of district based Program Implementation 

Plan (PIP) by several states was completed in December 2005. Analysis of NACO 

data set to make proposed interventions in NACP III is proposed for November 2006. 

Tuberculosis 

Many of the initial TB projects have been canceled due to relevance or are being 

reprogrammed at this time. Currently the TB group is preparing a protocol to be 

12

submitted to the IRB for consideration and approval. Specifically two projects are in 

the works: Documentation of the natural history and current management practices for 

patients with MDR TB and Current Practices of diagnosis & treatment of Childhood 

TB in the country. Project status should be known in the next 60-90 days. 

Child Health: 

ISCAP II Trial on amoxicillin for pneumonia with wheeze is in the final stages of data 

collection and analysis. This project will be concluded by June 2006. A new study, 

Effectiveness of community treatment with oral antibiotics of severe pneumonia is 

currently pending IRB approval 

Program Evaluation 

Program evaluation projects continue with a strong presence. The Model Injection 

Corners (MICs): A Program to Improve Injection Practices in the Country is ongoing 

and promised great expansion abilities. Another ongoing and promising study is the 

Evaluation of Safe Water System. Reproductive and Child Health, Nutrition and 

HIV/AIDS Program (RACHNA). External Evaluation is in progress in cooperation 

with Johns Hopkins University and KGMU. There are several possible studies in the 

works at the current time including Concurrent Evaluation of National Programme of 

Phased Scale up of Access to Antiretroviral Therapy for People Living with 

HIV/AIDS which is proposed for take-up after NACP III launching (see above under 

HIV). 

Neonatal Health Research Initiative (NHRI) 

Recent progress has been seen in the formally stalled NHRI area which did not start in 

view of the suggestions by Officers at USAID, New Delhi to combine the two 

identified activities into one and to launch at a single site. It was suggested that this 

site should be developed on the pattern of similar ongoing activity at Shivgarh, UP 

near Lucknow as part of JHU-KGMU collaboration. Drs. AK Niswade and NK Arora 

with inputs from Vishwajeet who is the current Project Director at Shivgarh, are 

working to start this activity at Nagpur site as soon as possible. 

Micronutrient Health Initiative 

Community Randomized Trial for Assessing Effectiveness of a Strategy for Delivery 

of Vitamin A did not launch and has now been canceled. A new project is currently 

under development for the Control Of Iron Deficiency Anaemia In Adolescent Girls. 

Urban Health Initiative 

Dropped as an IPHIDE initiative at present as per advise of Dr Massee Bateman (Feb 

2005). Subsequent requests as late as November 2005 for restarting this initiative 

have not yielded results. 

D. Specific Program Development 

M.Lakshman (ML) presented the specific program development on NDDP, Obesity, 

Governance, AfricaCLEN –HIV / AIDS, Global MIC, and Dengue Surveillance 

Study. 

Discussion: 

13

MT while appreciating the development of Obesity project, enquired about the 

availability of funds for phase I. NKA said that funds can be derived for phase I. The 

BOT suggested to keep on working for more funding for phase II and Phase III. AC 

recommended using the instruments of the International Study of Asthma and 

Allergies in childhood (ISAAC) model for NDDP and Obesity projects to get high 

visibility. IEO will follow up with this organization. MT again enquired about the 

funds for the Governance project. NKA replied that the Letter of Intent has been 

submitted for funding. 

MT suggested that INCLEN explore the possibility of taking benefit of IDRC‟s Reach 

Program in Tanzania for INSIGHT- MDG- 5 Study. 

The board appreciated the linkage of Global MIC with GAVI. In this regard MT 

suggested that INCLEN can play a major role in this project. MT commented that 

PEPFAR is a complicated funding mechanism because they are working at both 

Washington and local national / regional offices. He further added that it should not 

conflict with national agenda which is part of INCLEN philosophy. DH appreciated 

the efforts of the IEO to “resuscitate the dying infant” (INCLEN) and strongly 

endorsed the current direction adopted by the organization. 

AC suggested studying prevention of Dengue rather than Surveillance and link up 

with WHO. He wants Brazil to get involved with PDVI. NKA said that Scott Holstead 

is the prime mover of PDVI which has a grant of 53 million USD. They have been in 

touch with Osman and INCLEN will get in touch with Brazil as the opportunity 

arises. 

MKC Nair (MKC) while discussing IPHIDE related issues said that the major funding 

problem faced by IndiaCLEN with USAID is either due to the inability to reach 

USAID‟s expectation or USAID has changed its expectations. The slight confusion 

that exists will be taken care of. He further pointed out that there is a difference 

between national priority and national policy and scientific priority and scientific 

policy, for which a balance has to be maintained by looking back at the objectives of 

INCLEN that emphasized on quality research that bring changes in health system to 

make it equitable. 

MT was of the view that national policies do matter as well as INCLEN‟s priorities 

and affiliations. OS enquired about the dissemination and implementation of K+ 

management. RD said that there are challenges that are to be taken care of such as 

leadership, funding issues, and technical component. He further said that the tools and 

instruments are already developed and can be used initially for the program. Nitish 

Dogra (ND) suggested the development of GVC in partnership with French and 

Spanish Universities. He also named UN- University located in Japan with whom 

linkages can be explored. JHU also has a distance learning program and we can 

explore partnerships. AH said that the K+ modules are not only to be published but 

also can be uploaded on to the website as LAMP modules which might be used by 

others for academic and research purposes but RRC suggested to write a brief 

summary and publish. 

14

V. Regional CLEN Reports 

The afternoon session was chaired by MT. (RRC had to leave to attend to urgent 

work.) In the absence of CanUSACLEN, ChinaCLEN and EuroMedCLEN, their 

respective reports were discussed among the members present. 

a) CanUSACLEN: In the page 3 of the report, it was mentioned that Dr. 

Hossein Mohammad Rahbar is in the process of responding to a program 

announcement of FIC-NIH regarding Brain Disorders in the developing world. 

As INCLEN is also intending to resubmit LOI to NIH, it was decided that 

INCLEN and CanUSACLEN should come together as one in working for this 

particular project. The CLENs in the developed world were asked to work 

towards strengthening of the LMICs. The major problem faced by 

CanUSACLEN was its members overridden by other priorities. Finally the 

board advised all CLEN heads to make efforts to link with other CLENs. MT 

said that few sentences regarding CLENs‟ collaborative efforts should be 

mentioned in the next report. 

b) ChinaCLEN: The members appreciated the book published by ChinaCLEN 

„Exercise of EBM‟. NKA while summarizing his visit to Shanghai June 2005 

said that ChinaCLEN is strong in Evidence Based medicine. ChinaCLEN has 

started a journal and has expressed desire and willingness to participate in the 

studies of NDDP and Obesity. MT appreciated the linkage of Traditional 

Chinese Medicine Academy and IndiaCLEN. 

c) Euro-MedCLEN: EDCTP is likely to study conditions of LMICs regarding 

health issues. Euro-MedCLEN should play a pivotal role in negotiating the 

relationship with EDCTP in order to find European partners. To address this 

issue, a teleconference will be organized between Marcel Tanner, Francois 

Chapuis (FC), Amr Hassan and NKA. Further the agenda of the 

teleconference would also include the use of Francophony funds by INCLEN 

CEUs for Network activities. The relationship between CEUs and CLENs 

remain a challenge and needed to be addressed. This issue requires a constant 

monitoring as INCLEN moves from current phase to next phase for e.g. 

accreditation of CEUs, reaccreditations etc. MT said that the restructuring is 

very important and advised NKA and his team to prepare a proposal on how to 

engage partners. In order to achieve active participation from all CEUs, there 

is a need to identify the determinants of active CEUs and strengthen the same. 

Furthermore, the CEUs from LMICs and non-LMICs should be handled 

differently and the spirit of partnership should be high. 

d) INCLEN Africa: AH presented the report and stated that there is one 

CERTC, 7 CEUs and 145 members. MT appreciated the involvement of 

African sites in inter CLEN proposed studies. AH thanked NKA and his team 

for initiating the collaboration between IEO and INCLEN-Africa for the first 

time. INCLEN-Africa is organizing annual meeting in the month of May 2006 

at Johannesburg in conjunction with Public Health Association of South 

Africa (PHASA), which could be a good platform for INCLENAfrica. He also 

invited NKA to attend the meeting and speak on the INCLEN activities. There 

is possibility of a meeting between EDCTP, FC, AH and NKA. INCLEN- 

15

Africa is planning to partner with Africa Health Forum to develop training 

centres most probably at Wits or Pretoria. AC said that since Brazil is a 

Portuguese speaking country, AfricaCLEN should take advantage of this to 

expand network and initiate studies in Portuguese speaking African countries. 

e) IndiaCLEN: MKC stated that IndiaCLEN is registered as „not for profit‟ 

organization whose members are professional clinical researchers (part time) 

and are handicapped in responding to RFAs. The membership has increased 

from 143 (2002) to 202 (2005). Their major success is leadership in making 

PIPs. IPEN network is a model for all activities. He also stated that a training 

centre has come up in University of Kerala and funded by State Government. 

It was decided that for the next BOT, an agenda item is to be brought up for 

setting up a conglomerate of INCLEN CERTCs which develops uniform 

program curriculum & quality assurance can be incorporated. This can be a 

model of INCLEN initiated international accreditation standards. The 

activities are to be undertaken according to the work load. 

f) LatinCLEN: AC presented the report and discussed the up scaling of 

IntraCLEN studies. Regarding InterCLEN study, he stated that there are some 

projects coming up between organizations/CEUs. He also suggested uploading 

the Spanish version of the LAMP modules on INCLEN Trust website. He said 

that LatinCLEN should prepare a MoU with PAHO, so that partnership is 

expanded and technical assistance provided. In this regard, MT suggested AC 

to meet PAHO regional advisor representative in April 2006. Unless the 

CLEN is supported by some agency, the lack of funds issue will come up and 

there is a risk of CLEN slumping into nonsustaining mode. OS said that since 

one of his colleagues is working on a tobacco project, he would like AC to be 

partner with his colleague for the project to which AC agreed. Regarding 

maintaining and updating LatinCLEN website, NKA said that all the CLENs 

are welcome to send the information to IEO and it can be updated & 

maintained at IEO. 

g) INCLEN-SEA: OS while presenting the report said that INCLEN-SEA 

consist of 7 countries, 11 CEUs and 6 CERTCs. The board suggested taking 

the EBM book developed by their CEU for use of GVC module development 

and making the self-instructional modules. Regarding the coordination of 

many countries under one CLEN, he said that it is possible through emails, 

which of course is less expensive than telephone calls but the response is low. 

INCLEN-SEA was encouraged to have teleconferences. DH commented on 

the use of „health economics‟ instead of „clinical economics‟. OS presented 

the books published by INCLEN-SEA and said that the books contains 

volume of useful and relevant information extracted from public domains and 

is freely available on website. AC said to publish findings in local journal after 

main article is published elsewhere. Publication & dissemination of 

information is very important to bring visibility for INCLEN. INCLEN should 

have an institutional mechanism for disseminating information. So, DH 

suggested having one journal of INCLEN where all global CEUs can 

contribute. The board decided to upload on the website the complete project 

proposals and reports. MT concluded by saying that all the CLENs should 

16

think of InterCLEN activities so that INCLEN can capture important issues, 

areas and will have better platform. 

VI. Restructuring of Regional CLENs 

NKA presented the restructuring of CLENs and stated that INCLEN has a huge and 

potential network which covers 33 countries comprising of 81 CEUs and over 1400 

members. INCLEN has the potential to become a powerful body having impact on 

policy. There are some medical schools which have expressed their interest of joining 

INCLEN from Pakistan, Nepal, Srilanka, Iran etc. Similarly existing CEUs in Japan 

are not keen to be called as part of Southeast Asia. He further said that earlier the 

basic idea of regionalization was geographical which was later extended to include 

CEUs with language affinity. MT indicated that while carving out regional CLENs, 

both geographic factors and strategic reasons were considered. This took into account 

language and cultural values as well. Henceforth, Francophone Europe and parts of 

North Africa will be included together. 

Regarding constitutional strategy, everybody said that it is possible but it should be 

discussed with individual constituents of current CLENs. AC said that strategic 

thinking process has to be an important component. People may like to work together 

in same kind of grouping. It is not restructuring but reorganizing the whole thing. DH 

said that what is working should not be disturbed. He was of the view that language 

and customs can cut across geographic barriers. The working realities are that the 

socio-cultural / language should be focused and it should be a dynamic process. 

MKC said it is geographical and administrative basis which matters in the IndiaCLEN 

bylaws. So, including Nepal and Sri Lanka would be a difficult task for IndiaCLEN. 

MT responded positively and said that the board should find out the loopholes and not 

violate the bylaws/rules. 

RD commented that operational working is most important. There is a need to focus / 

clarify according to CLEN specific rather than looking at a global level. AH agreed to 

RD and stated that geographical basis is the most appropriate. But, there is a problem 

of defining boundaries of Euro-Mediterranean. So, the CLENs should be approached 

individually and resolve on their own to build up working / feasible affiliations. He 

further said that whatever is the grouping of CLENs, there is a need for proactive 

participation. MT also agreed with RD and AC. 

Finally it was agreed that initially the new CEU would be temporarily affiliated and 

after initiating activities within the CLEN, then they can be given permanent 

affiliation as a CEU to a region so that socially and geographically they should be 

close to their CLEN. 

Regarding the changing of name of INCLEN-SEA, MT suggested taking the opinion 

of its CLEN president and other members. He entrusted the responsibility of changing 

the name to PanAsiaCLEN to NKA and OS. 

VII. IndiaCLEN - External Evaluation 

17

MKC presented the draft report of IndiaCLEN External Evaluation report carried out 

during Feb-March 2006. The report had been originally requested by the BOT in 

order to formalize the lesson learnt that could possibly apply to the other CLENs and 

be useful in strengthening the network. The terms of reference for the external 

evaluation of IndiaCLEN were presented. Specifically the evaluation was to evaluate 

the performance of IndiaCLEN research programs and other research activities in 

relation with it vision/mission/mandate and examine how this has contributed to 

knowledge generation and policy formulations and implementations. The need to 

evaluate and assess the success of IndiaCLEN to adapt to the changing health 

problems, bridging the clinical and public health gap, interaction with policy makers 

and program managers and fostering partnerships was also identified as important 

objectives of the evaluation. Finally the evaluation of capacity building and 

organization structure relating to the function of India CLEN with a view to suggest 

changes was considered. 

The team consisted of 

o Dr. Dilip Mahalanabis, Health Research Scientist – Kolkota, India 

o Dr. Jonathon Simon, Health Research Scientist – Boston University, USA 

o Dr. Davidson Hamer, Health Research Scientist - Boston University, USA 

o Dr. Hari Singh, Health Management Expert – Bangalore, India 

The findings were presented including the strengths and weaknesses. IndiaCLEN has 

a strong team of highly committed trained professional researchers who are willing to 

work extra besides their routine assignments. The model of its operations through 

capacity building of medical colleges and not creating a parallel organization is very 

successful and exemplary. Most of the host institutions have very well adopted the 

CEUs and have provided good infrastructure and facilities. The organization has 

established its credibility in the market by conducting high quality research. The 

funding organizations hold a very high opinion about the IndiaCLEN and have shown 

interest in working with it in future. 

The evaluation team found may areas for improvement. The Governing Body has 

more IndiaCLEN members and very few external experts / funding agencies. The 

central command of the organization is weak in terms of technical and managerial 

capabilities. The sub committees have a large number of members from CEUs over a 

large geographical area – leading to poor effectiveness / efficiency? Some of the CEU 

lack young and dynamic leadership. Keeping in view the attrition of core members of 

IndiaCLEN, the pace of cultivation of second line of researchers is slow. The 

expansion of CEU network is not sufficient. Performance of a few CEUs and some 

members is not satisfactory. 

There is a gap between core members and adjunct members. Quality of research is 

variable among the individual CEUs and specific studies. Dissemination of study 

findings and advocacy for policy change are relatively week. The proportion of 

overheads is high and some of the funding agencies are seriously concerned about it. 

Although the demand driven/ competitive research projects are increasing there is a 

need to accelerate the process. Networking with stakeholders is not adequate. 

There were some suggestions for corrective action but the draft report was lacking in 

specific details. The board showed their interest in going through the report. So, it 

18

was decided to send copies of the report to the CLEN presidents and the non CLEN 

BOT members. MT commented on the lack of a SWOT analysis. His experiences 

had lead him to expect something more structured in the way of presentation. He 

acknowledged that the report was an early draft and expressed the expectation that the 

final report be something that would not just focus upon the future of IndiaCLEN but 

also give some perspective to the decisions that have lead to the obvious success of 

the IndiaCLEN network. 

MKC Nair commented that the final version would be available to everyone in the 

Network and would be routed to all the BOT members. He specifically noted the 

need to identify the methodologies that had been successful and the need to apply 

them in some form to the other CLENs. 

AC noted that the other CLENs might also benefit from a self evaluation along the 

same format. A serious and targeted evaluation would certainly show up the strengths 

and point out the weakness of the regions. It was discussed that each CLEN would be 

encouraged to do a self evaluation once the final IndiaCLEN version was released. 

DH further commented on the need to apply a wide review and to come up with a 

“real learning experience.” 

MKC Nair committed to routing the final version and seeing that the concerns of the 

BOT members would be considered in the final write up. 

VIII. Administration 

Legal setup of IEO in Delhi: ML, while talking about the registration of INCLEN 

TRUST stated that INCLEN has already been registered in India on Oct 27, 2005 and 

now it‟s fully functional. The government required fiscal year end will be every 

March 31 starting with the just ended March 31, 2006. He further stated that 

INCLEN is one of the multinational organizations in India who will soon have the 

permission to accept foreign contributions. INCLEN is awaiting the FCRA clearance. 

NKA added that the legal formalities took long time since all the CLEN President 

offices had Intelligence Bureau verifications. There are some additional copies of the 

Trust Deed to be signed and all BOT members were requested to make a point of 

signing to minimize the amount of traveling that will be needed for the documents. 

SOP’s: ML said that the SOPs have already been circulated twice to all the members 

and inputs are incorporated. This is a dynamic process and will be updated / modified 

as the situations demand. The board decided to upload the SOP on to the website and 

send hard copies & CD to all CLENs. It was also decided that the SOPs can be 

discussed in the Regional CLEN meetings and Governing body meetings and the 

CLEN presidents can give a feedback during the next BOT meeting. 

Resolution for dissolving the Manila Trust: Stephanie Combs (SC) presented that 

now that the Delhi Trust is a formal and legal entity, it is time to dissolve the Trust in, 

Manila. Mary Ann Lansang has been contacted regarding this matter and has offered 

to assist. Her brother, James Lansang, was instrumental in setting up the original 

company and has offered to supervise the dissolution. In addition to the dissolution, 

the BOT must authorize the closing of the Bank accounts that are still in existence in 

the Philippines. There is approximately $3,000 available which is sufficient to pay all 

19

fees and to compensate James Lansang for his efforts. Mary Ann will close the 

account at the end of the process and forward all remaining funds to the Philadelphia 

office. There was a motion to approve the resolution as presented in the background 

documents, authorizing Dr. Narendra Arora to execute all necessary actions to fully 

dissolve the Philippine Trust including but not limited to all bank accounts and legal 

entities related to the operation in both the Philippines and the US. The motion was 

passed by consensus. 

Appointment of Legal & Auditing Firms: Over the course of the past year, there 

has been a legal firm M/s RK Baxi & co, Advocates, Delhi that has assisted with the 

chartering. It would be in the best interest of the newly formed INCLEN Trust to 

retain this firm on a modest retainer. In addition, Mr. Ashotosh Chandrayan has left 

Bansal and Co. the IndiaCLEN auditors and has started his own firm. It would be in 

the best interest of INCLEN Trust to retain Mr. Ashotosh Chandrayan at his new firm 

to conduct the upcoming audit. The year end for this audit should coincide with the 

government required year end of 31 March, 2006. There was motion to accept both 

the retainer for the legal firm and the appointment of IndiaCLEN auditor for the new 

audit year. The motion passed by consensus. 

IX. Financial Matters 

Audit Report: SC presented the three auditing reports i.e. INCLEN Inc., INCLEN 

Trust and the consolidated report. From the presentations, it was clear that INCLEN‟s 

expenditure is lessening every year. The restricted money is the Rockefeller money 

which is transferred to INCLEN Trust. At present, INCLEN is still left with combined 

assets of $1,172,702 (unrestricted) and $767,258 (restricted). 

SC presented to the BOT members in the same manner as with previous years. Each 

BOT member was given a bound copy of each of three audits, INCLEN, Inc., 

INCLEN Trust International, Inc. and the Consolidated audits. The results of each 

company audit were presented separately and the consolidated results were presented 

as a conclusion. The statement of financial position again shows that the only asset 

of significance is cash. The bulk of the cash from INCLEN, Inc. was transferred to 

INCLEN Trust and now has only sufficient cash for the necessary cash flow for the 

IPHIDE funding. Boston University has been remitting funds approximately 30 days 

after receipt of invoice. The Trust now has the bulk of the cash assets of the 

consolidated corporations. Expenses from previous years were compared to the 

current year with special note being made of the general and continuing trend in a 

reduction of funds spent on research and capacity building. 

The balance of restricted and unrestricted assets was discussed. The BOT was 

reminded that the restricted assets were the balance of the Rockefeller grant which 

expired 31 December, 2005 and has been reported to the BOT by Rodolfo Dennis 

earlier in the meeting. The remaining funds are unrestricted accumulations from 

interest earnings and unused overheads from previous years. A question was raised 

from the floor about the current interest rate for the funds in the Philadelphia bank 

accounts. These minutes are to reflect the current rate which is 3.85% and currently 

rising. 

20

Stephanie Combs requested that the current auditors, Asher and Co. be again retained 

on a one year contract given the transition status of the organization. She reminded 

the BOT members that ultimately, it would be in the best interest of the organization 

to consider new auditors, a fresh set of eyes, after the transition phase was complete. 

There was a motion to retain Asher and Co. for an additional year. The motion was 


Financial Status: The company for the last year has been very stable in regard to 

financial matters in spite of shifting of IEO office from AIIMS. NKA pointed out that 

INCLEN Trust has co-funded all IEO-Delhi office expenses for the remaining 3 

months in this year on the basis of project activities going on. 

MT stressed the need to look at the issue of minimum core resources required to 

smoothly operate CLEN offices and asked the CLEN presidents to calculate and 

report to the board in the next meeting regarding their core resources. This is 

homework for each CLEN. NKA will compile the data received from each CLEN in a 

table format and include it in the agenda of the next meeting. 

The board discussed the importance of decentralization of the CLENs. There should 

be a balance between centralization and decentralization. NKA talked about achieving 

the three modes i.e. survival, sustaining and thriving. For this, INCLEN should create 

a viable network and collaboration between CLENs. All the CLENs should have 

some degree of accountability and responsibility to fulfill it. 

The current financial report was presented via graphs that were included in the 

background materials. The projected expenses were compared to the BOT approved 

budget and it was apparent that the budget would be under spent in all but two 

categories, the BOT travel/Office of the Chair and the CLEN regional meetings. It 

was explained that the 2005-2006 budget had been very aggressive and there were 

several explanations as to the slow uptake of the projects. First was the learning curve 

for the new Executive Director and second was the realization that the projects could 

be submitted to funding agencies for consideration without significant outlay of 

INCLEN resources. Finally, a significant proportion of administrative expenses at 

IEO New Delhi and Philadelphia were being cross subsidized from ongoing projects. 

There was a lengthy discussion about the method of projecting the year end balances. 

It was explained that the Executive Director and the Chief Financial Officer had 

evaluated each project and each significant budget item and together had come to the 

projections. Since the remaining year required only three months of projection and 

many of the projects are either in process or well documented as to the start dates, a 

high level of confidence was given to the projections. 

The result of the year of learning along with grants already received will allow the 

programs to be initiated and or completed while stretching the remaining funds 

beyond FY07-08 fiscal year. Additional information will be available to clarify these 

projections during the Executive Directors Workplan which will be presented later in 

the agenda. 

X. BOT - Nomination of New Trustees 

21

The name of Alfred Sommer-Professor Epidemiology, International Health and 

Ophthalmology at the School of Medicine, Baltimore was submitted for 

consideration. Professor Sommer was contacted and although he expressed an 

interest, he requested that INCLEN approach him again in two years after he was 

relieved of some of his current commitments. 

The name of Jon Simon, Director, Center of International Health and Development 

Chairman, Department of International Health, Associate Professor of International 

Health Boston University School of Public Health was submitted for consideration. 

Dr Simon was contact and agreed to being considered for a Board position. 

There was a motion to accept the nomination of Dr. Simon for a position on the Board 

of Trustees. The motion was passed by consensus. 

XI. New CEU membership 

A new CEU membership was submitted by INCLEN Africa Secretariat Office for 

Wits School of Public Health, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, RSA 

as a member CEU of the network. INCLEN Africa found that the Wits School 

satisfied the criteria of membership and 11 of 14 council members voted 

electronically to accept the school as a CEU. The Secretariat spoke highly of the 

school and the application; other pertinent documents were included in the 

background papers for the information of the BOT members. There was a motion to 

accept Wits School as a new CEU within the INCLEN Africa CLEN. The motion 


XII. Work Plan for 06-07 

The work plan for 06-07 was presented by NKA. The presentation began with a look 

at the prior year priorities and the lessons learnt during the first year of Directorship 

and the New Delhi office. Last year a very aggressive workplan was presented that 

focused upon the initiation of multi-country collaborative studies with high visibility 

and impact which would have a short gestation period. All these projects were 

referenced back to the INCLEN mission statement. 

During the course of the year several lessons were learnt and observed. First, there 

came a better understanding of the network. The disinterest and disillusionment 

seems to be pervasive as evidenced by the lack of applications for fellowships, 

scholarships and training opportunities that had been put together by the IEO staff. 

Further evidence of the state of the network was seen in the lack of response for 

circulated RFAs and RSC/CBS projects that dragged on long after deadlines. Upon 

traveling to one unit for possible project exploration, the team was greeted with 

suspicion and skepticism. 

However, at the same time it became evident that on a CEU level, almost every unit 

was active, productive, and involved at the local and national level. The Rockefeller 

report consolidation revealed that significant research and publications are being done 

throughout the network involving almost every CEU. Members at the individual level 

were involved with several research projects and many participated in non-INCLEN 

network activities as well. The call of the IEO for participants in obesity, Neuro 

22

development disabilities, TASC III, and governance has been overwhelming and 

heartening and indicative of a thriving and engaged network. 

Armed with these lessons a strategy was developed to operationalize INCLEN 

priority projects. The projects themselves became an integral part of repairing the 

confidence of Network members, developing persistent and consistent engagement 

with funding agencies all the while looking for alternative funding sources. The 

priority projects established during the FY 05-06 workplan consisted of several 

multicountry, multicentric projects specifically Obesity, Neuro Development 

disabilities, virtual campus, and governance. These projects have been developed 

each to some level and presented to interested and appropriate funders. New priority 

projects have also been developed as interest picks up from funders such as Global 

MIC potentially with Gates Foundation, Africa HIV/AIDS from the USAID new 

partner initiative, and rational use of drugs with INRUD. Recent global events and 

priorities also point to a need for surveillance programs related to avian flu in the 

Asian CLEN areas and the possibility of programs that will establish new partnerships 

with funding agencies, national governments, and renowned university programs. 

In order to establish these new partnerships several issues required clarification 

What is in it for INCLEN? 

What is in it for the Partner Organization? 

What is in it for both? 

Such questions were lead to the guiding principles to define the scope of work, the 

impact to stakeholders, working relationships and evaluation of the success or 

strengths of various collaborations. It became evident that strategic alliances required 

a more formal structure. Country and Global Universities, governments and 

organizations along with corporate for-profit organizations are approached and many 

MoUs have been developed and circulated. Such formal agreements will pave the 

way to a closer relationship and a better understanding of common areas of interest. 

The lessons learnt from the past year indicate that the IEO must maintain a greater 

technical presence in its staff. The network members require both leadership and 

technical expertise in order to fully engage with the priority projects that have been 

presented in the previous workplan. To that end, there is a distinct restructuring that 

has occurred during the past six months with full implementation expected by the end 

of the fiscal year 30 June, 2006. It has become apparent that INCLEN has a need for 

full time dedicated program consultants who can assist with the ongoing development 

efforts. In order to accommodate that need a variable number of full time program 

consultants will reside in the IEO Delhi office as projects are identified and mature as 

well as the placement of a full time program consultant to be located in the 

Philadelphia office. 

Next, there was a need to evaluate the opportunities lost and found over the course of 

the past year. Quickly the needs of the PI came into focus. We can continue to 

engage the PI by maintaining a established network of trained researchers with 

credibility and visibility. High possibility of funding and the implementation of an 

award system should not only engage the PI but strengthen the affiliated CEU. To 

further these needs the IEO with its full time program consultants is establishing 

systems designed to “handhold” new/young investigators. Activities will include 

assistance with protocol development, donor introductions and partner identification 

23

and follow-up to proposals. The IEO will continue to provide complete and 

appropriate administrative and financial management especially for multicentric 

collaborative studies and will continue to maintain the mechanism for routing funds to 

multiple sites/countries. 

Internships have been established with the first phase starting March 2006. The 

response was overwhelming with 27 qualified applicants clearly stating the desire to 

live and work in Delhi to receive the experience that INCLEN can provide along with 

a very modest stipend. Such programs will attract new talent and provide INCLEN 

with future partners, capacity strengthening, expanded good will and visibility. 

The network is under a revitalization program. The newsletter is currently being 

rotated annually to each CLEN in order to engage local members and encourage 

CLEN to CLEN interaction and exchange of information. CLEN heads will play an 

increasing leadership role as they continue to be engaged by the new programs and 

the need for local participation. Meeting funds which are still available will continue 

to require co-funding in order to encourage the development of local, national, and 

regional alliances within the CLEN structure. The next Global Forum meeting will be 

in Cairo, 29 October to 2 November and a large INCLEN presence will again be 

encouraged. 

INCLEN must continue its vigilance toward fiscal responsibility and sound financial 

management. Core actives must be supported by the overheads of priority projects 

and the IEO offices continue to be cross subsidized. Financial discipline and suitable 

staffing levels must lead to a balance suitable to sustain the basic function of the IEO 

while enabling it to move quickly and appropriately to the needs of Global Health and 

the network members. A budget was prepared and presented that will allow the 

current level of activities to continue for the next two years. The budget clearly 

shows the significant cross subsidies of the IEO staff and office expenses while 

preserving significant funds for the continuing development of the priority projects. 

The program started in FY05-06 will continue with the emphasis on the development 

of multi-country collaborative studies with high visibility, impact and short gestations 

periods. The budget is appended here for the reference of the reader and for formal 

records. The current budget projects that the current activities of Obesity, 

Governance, Neuro Disability development, and other priority programs can be 

sustained along with the core activities of the IEO offices for the next two years. 

Discussion started with the issue of core funding / core resources. DH said that now 

there is an urgent need to start thinking of long term strategy for INCLEN/Regional 

CLENs. He noted a high level of satisfaction with the progress and the comprehensive 

plan presented today. He noted that it did appear as though there was “light at the end 

of the tunnel.” MT said that it is the responsibility of the IEO to plan out the 

mechanism of long term and mid term strategies and circulate this to all CEUs. He 

especially noted the need to continue to focus on fewer but larger projects in order to 

push the agenda and not to overload the IEO with too many activities. AC 

appreciated the comprehensive presentation and the obvious opportunities for the 

CLEN to take a more active and engaging role. He requested the NKA circulate 

portions of the plan and suggested an article in the next newsletter. 

24

MT further said that the Agra statement mentioned in the presentation was very 

powerful. The donors and partners were waiting for some action to happen before 

they begin to support. He appreciated the progress made in signing MoUs with other 

universities and organizations and suggested to involve some European partners as 

well as the American partners. 

MT appreciated the enthusiasm and vision of NKA and supported the activity of 

encouraging new talents in the program. DH commented on the active involvement of 

the CLEN presidents / CEUs and suggested to try and restore the confidence of the 

CEUs / CLEN members and bridge the communication gap between the members. 

MT added that the CLEN presidents should be more forceful and the enthusiasm of 

the BOT should be transmitted to individual members in every CEU. NKA was given 

the responsibility of writing a specific covering letter to all the CLEN presidents 

about the key points of BOT meeting. 

MKC stated that some of these issues have already been taken up by IndiaCLEN. The 

most important hindrances are: 

- lack of functioning of the CEUs due to director‟s lack of interest and lack of 

minimal funds 

- at IndiaCLEN level, structural management is not effective due to lack of 

prime movers to initiate and sustain a project and lack of USAID support. 

DH said that the CLEN presidents have to take a much more active role. They should 

make their own work plan, communicate better with their CEUs & support the IEO. 

CLENs may build up their workplan based on the 06-07 workplan of BOT and the 

guiding principle of INCLEN. AH pointed out that the CLEN faces difficulties in 

functioning when there are many countries involved. 

AC was of the opinion that instead of being afraid of the difficulties, there is need to 

identify them. Communication between CLEN heads and sharing the difficulties may 

help to improve the condition. The board suggested having a progress report in this 

matter in the next BOT meeting. 

Finally, MT concluded by saying that CLEN‟s can improve communication within 

and between regions through SKYPE‟. AC will be the engine of the vehicle. He will 

pull all these issues & think for improvement and report to the board next year. 

Regarding the MoUs, all the board members should review and give comments to 

NKA within 2 weeks time. NKA to look up for prospects of collaboration with 

European Universities. Include EDTCP in the strategic plan and review it after a year. 

After discussion, the BOT members moved to accept the FY06-07 workplan as 

presented with the thanks and appreciation of the Board. The motion passed by 

consensus. 

XIII. Any other business 

AH discussed the issue of identifying the source of funds for INCLEN Africa meeting 

in May 2006. MT said that the board will definitely explore the possibilities and 

inform him. 

Vote of Thanks 

25

The Chair thanked the IEO staff for their excellent work in organizing the meeting so 

well and thanked the members for their efforts to make the meeting a success. The 

meeting was adjourned. 

Appendix 1 

Engagement with INCLEN Development & Research Partners 

April 2005 to March 2006 

Sl. Donor/Partner Met with Date 

No. 

1 Tufts University Davidson Hamer, Associate April 11, 2005 

Professor of Medicine 

2 World Bank David Gisselquist, Consultant April 22, 2005 

3 Rockefeller Foundation Charles Gardner, Associate 

Director, Health Equity 

May 31, 2005 

4 32nd Annual Conference 

Global Health Council, 

Washington, DC 

Nils Daulaurie June 1, 2005 

Afaf Meleis, Professor of Nursing 

and Sociology, Margaret Bond 

Simon Dean of Nursing at the 

University of Pennsylvania School 

of Nursing, Director of the School’s 

WHO Collaborating Center for 

Nursing and Midwifery Leadership 

Chris Murray, Associate Professor, 

Department of Economics, 

University of Houston 

Jack Killer, Director, NIH NCCAM 

(complementary Medicine) 

Robert Black, Professor and 

Chairman, International Health, 

JHU 

Jolvey Bouffores 

5 Johns Hopkins University Robert Black, Professor and 

Chairman, International Health 

6 NIH/National Center of 

Complementary and 

Alternative Medicine 

Jack Killen, Director of 

International Health Research; 

Craig Carlson, International Health 

Program Specialist 

June 1, 2005 

June 1, 2005 

7 Boston University Jon Simon, Chairman, International June 1-3, 2005 

Health 

8 USAID/India Neal Brandes, Health Specialist June 2, 2005 

Patricia Paredes Jodrey, Senior 

Advisor for Global Health 

Vic Barberio, Chief of HIV/AIDS 

9 Boston University Jon Simon, Chairman, International 

Health 

10 John Hopkins University Mark Steinhoff, School of Public 

Health 


Health 

June 2, 2005 

June 2, 2005 

June 3, 2005 

26

12 Pan American Health 

Organization (PAHO) 

Luis Gabriel Cuervo, Chief, 

Research Promotion and 

Development;Richard Van West- 

Charles, Area Manager, 

Information and Knowledge 

management; Rebecca De Los 

Rios, Regional Advisor in Public 

Health Research, Research 

Coordination 

13 University of Pennsylvania Dr. Donald Silberberg, Professor of 

Neurology, Senior Associate Dean; 

Jennifer Pinto-Martin, Professor of 

Nursing; and Dr. Gihan 

Tennekoon, Chief, Division of 

Neurology 

14 Rockefeller Foundation Charles Gardner, Associate 


15 Fudan University Dr. Yaghao Gui, Chairman, Fudan 

University Children's Hospital 

16 Peking Union Medical 

College Hospital 

Paul Glarizou, Center for evidence 

based medicine 

Zhu Chauwen 

(Hepatologist)Associate Professor, 

Director, China Medical College 

Prof. Jiyao Wang, President, 

ChinaCLEN 

Zhang Zhenxin (Neurology Chief), 

CEU Director 

17 Zhejiang University Dr. Chen Kun (Cancer 

Epidemiology) CEU Director, 

Zhejiang Province 

Dr. Shi Hongying, Biostatistics 

Dr. Sing Lang, Molecular 

Epidemiology 

18 China Academy of 

Traditional Chinese 

Medicine (CATCM) 

19 International Education 

College, Shangai University 

of Traditional Chinese 

Medicine 

20 Ministry of Health & Family 

Welfare, India 

Dr. Ren Yanjun, Bioinformatics 

Epidemiology 

Dr. He Hanging, Epidemiology 

Dr. Jon Mong-Juan, Molecular 

Epidemiology 

June 3, 2005 

June 4, 2005 

June 6, 2005 

June 16, 2005 

June 16, 2005 

June 16, 2005 

June 16, 2005 

June 16, 2005 

June 17, 2005 

Liu Baoyan, CEU Director June 17, 2005 

Dr. Zheng Liuyun, Director, Brand 

Administration & Promotion Centre 

Dr. Zhu Li Ming, Executive Vice 

Director 

Dr. Li Jie, Vice Researcher 

Dr. Liu Ping, Vice President, 

Shangai Academy of Traditional 

Medicine 

Dr. V.K.Manchanda, Deputy 

Director General 

Dr. Sangeeta Saxena, Assistant 

Commissioner (Child Health) 

June 19, 2005 

July 7, 2005 

27

21 UNICEF Dr. Marzio Babille, Chief, Health 

Division 

22 World Health Organization- 

SEARO 

Sudhansh Malhotra, Advisor, Child 

Health 

July 7, 2005 

July 7, 2005 

23 Harvard University Christopher Murray August 4, 2005 


Health 

25 USAID/India Christopher Barrett, USAID 

Infectious Disease Fellow 

26 Johns Hopkins University Robert Black, Professor and 

Chairman, International Health 

27 SIDA Viveka Person, Research Advisor, 

Health Research 

28 NIH/National Institute of 

Child Health Development 

Danuta Krotoski, NICHD Acting 

Associate Director for Prevention 

Research and International 

Programs 

29 University of Cape Town Marion Jacobs, Professor, 

Department of Paediatrics & Child 

Health 

30 World Bank Dr. David Gwatkin, Consultant, 

Health Equity 

31 Canadian International 

Development Agency 

(CIDA) 

32 International Development 

Centre (IDRC), Canada 

Garry Aslanyan, Senior Health 

Advisor 

Sharmila Mhatre, Senior Program 

Specialist, Gender, Equity and 

Health 

33 John Hopkins University Robert Black, Professor, 

International Health 

34 UCLA John L. Fahey, Director, Center for 

International Research in 

Immunology and Disease 

September 11-14, 

2005 

September 12, 2005 








October 22, 2005 

October 27-28, 2005 

35 DFID, UK Anna Maslin, International Officer November 23, 2005 

Health Professions Leadership 

Team 

Sue Hill, Chief Scientific Officer 

36 Gates Foundation Bill & Melinda Gates December 6, 2005 

37 UNICEF Ms. Ann M. Veneman, Executive December 8, 2005 

Director 

38 GAVI Alliance Julian Lob Lent, Ex. Sec, CEO December 8, 2005 

Jon Hankram, Research Board 

Ms Grace Machael, Board Member 

39 International Vaccine 

Institute, Seoul Korea 

Dr. Luis Jodate December 8, 2005 

40 Canadian International 

Development Agency 

(CIDA) 

Gary Aslanyan, Senior Health 

Advisor 

December 8, 2005 

41 WHO, SEARO, New Delhi Namiyal December 8, 2005 

42 UNICEF - HQ, New York Francois Gasse, Senior Project December 8, 2005 

officer , Immunization 

28

43 WHO Jean Mani Okwo Bile, Director, 

Immunization, vaccine & 

Biologicals 

44 WHO, Africa Deo Nshimirimana, regional 

adviser 

45 UNICEF Peter Salama, chief of 

Immunization and Child Survival 

46 DFID, UK Catriona Waddington, health 

economist and project manager 

and consultant on GAVI to DFID, 

the UK government's Department 

for International Development. 





47 National Institutes of Health, 

Fogatry International Centre 

Mark Miller, Associate Director for 

Research 

48 USAID - A2Z/India Laxmikant Palo, Country Director, 

USAID Micrinutirent Program 

49 Finlays Tea Estate (Jon 

Simon's Productivity Impact 

Study), Kericho 

Titus Korir, Director, Corporate 

Affairs 

Bruce Larsen, Project Manager, 

Kenya 

50 Johns Hopkins University Mark Steinhoff, School of Public 

Health 

51 Gates Foundation Gena Rabniowich, Director, 

Infectious Disease. 

52 UCLA Dr. John Fahey, Director, Center 

for International Research in 

Immunology and Disease 



January 1, 2006 




53 GSK, Singapore Sanjay K Dutta January 25, 2006 

54 USAID/REDSO-ESA, Kenya Dr. Jeffrey Ashley, Director, Office January 31, 2006 

of Regional HIV/AIDS Programs 

Dr. Mary Pat Kieffer, Deputy 

Director, Office for Regional 

HIV/AIDS Programs, Senior 

Technical Advisor for PMTCT and 

Pediatric AIDS 

55 Boston University Dr. Jonathon Simon, Chairman, 

Associate Professor of 



56 Kenayatta University Dr. Michael Wainaina M., Lecturer January 31, 2006 

& Social Science Research 

Consultant 

57 CDC, Lusaka Dr. Mark January 31, 2006 

58 PEPFAR, Walter Reid Office Lisa Mambo, Pediatric HIV/AIDS January 31, 2006 

Kiracho Director 

Dr. Helen, Clinical Manager 

Col. Samual Martin, Country Chief 

of Walter Reid Operations in Kenya 

59 USAID-Family Health 

International, Institute for 

HIV and AIDS, Kenya 

Fanta Mwademy January 31, 2006 

Robert Nathan, Pediatric AIDS 

29

60 CEU/CERTC Nairobi Dr. Mark Joshi, Director January 31, 2006 

Dr. James Kiarie, OBS/GYN 

Patrick Ndavi, OBS/GYN 

Ruth, Pediatrician, Immunology 

Dorothy, Pediatrician, Immunology 

Wafula Ezekiel, Paediatrician 

Macharia William, Paediatrician 

Obimbo Elizabeth, Paediatrician 

Machoki, OBS/GYN 

Muriithi Assumpta, 

Epidemiologist/Paediatrician 

Dr. Vincent, Orthopedics 

61 PEPFAR, Walter Reid Office Dr. Charlie Carpenter, Clinical 

Researcher 

62 Litieu Missuri Hospital, 

Western Kenya 

63 USAID-Family Health 

International, Institute for 

HIV and AIDS, Kenya 

64 Ministry of Health, National 

AIDS/STD, TB and Leprosy, 

Control Programme 

(NASCOP/NLTP), Kenya 

February 1, 2006 

Bruce February 1, 2006 

Maggie 

Carolina 

Nancy, Nursing 

Dorothy Murugae, Pediatricain 

Immunology 

Gail A.W.Goodridge, REDSO 

Project Director 

David Stanton, REDSO Project 

Director 

Panu, REDSO Project Director 

Dr. Sylvia Ojoo, Consultant 

Physician HIV/AIDS Medicine, 

Technical Advisor ART Programme 



65 SABE Dr. Gene Gellis, Director February 2, 2006 

66 CEU/CERTC Nairobi Dr. Mark Joshi, Director February 2, 2006 

Dr. James Kiarie, OBS/GYN 

67 Boston University, School of 

Public Health/Center for 

International Health, Lusaka 

Dr. Dave, Obstetrics & 

Gynaecologists 

Dr. Jeru, Biostatistician 

Dr. Vincent, Orthopedics 

Machoki, Institute of Tropical & 

Infectious Disease 

Michael B. MacDonald, Resident 

Advisor, Malaria 


68 World Bank Dr. Rosemary Sunkutu, Deputy February 4, 2006 

DG, Research in public health 

69 HSSP, USAID, Lusaka Mubiana Macwan'gi, Research February 4, 2006 

Advisor 

70 Michigan State University Thom Jayne, Health Economists February 5, 2006 

71 UTH, Lusaka Dr. P. Matondo, Department of 

Medicine 


72 Ministry of Health, 

Directorate in Research, 

Lusaks, Zambia 

Dr. Nobane, Research Officer, 

Assistant Director for Directorate in 

Research 


30

73 SHARe (Support to the Peter Mijere, Deputy Chief of Party February 6, 2006 

HIV/AIDS Response in 

Zambia 

74 HSSP, USAID, Lusaka Dr. Elijah Sinyinza, Deputy Chief of 

Party - Systems 


75 University of Zambia, 

School of Medicine 

76 National Malaria Control 

Centre, Lusaka 

Prof. S. Siziya, Associate 

Professor of Medical Biostatistics 

Prof. Yakub F. Mulla, Dean, 


Orthopaedic Surgery, Consultant 

Orthopaedic Surgeon 

Dr. Gavin Silwamba, Head of 

Department, Community Health 

Dr. Thomas Glover Akpey, 

Co-ordinator (Health Economics) 

Dr. Yolan Banda, Biostatistician 

Prof. Kumar Sridutt Baboo, 

Professor, Community Health 

Dr. Pascolina Chanda, National 

Research Working Group Meeting 



77 WHO -SEARO, India Supriya Bezbaruah, 


Communications Officer 

78 USAID/India Massee Bateman, Senior Advisor February 15, 2006 

in Child Health 

79 Safe Point Centre, Sussex Dr. Mark Coska, Convenor February 15, 2006 

80 UNICEF, India Country 

Office 

Dr. K. Suresh, Project Officer, 

Epidemiology Health Section 

81 National Trust, India Dr. Vinod Aggarwal, Joint 

Secretary/CEO 

82 John Hopkins University Rebekah, Master of Health 

83 Brandies University, 

Massachusetts 

84 Pediatric Dengue vaccine 

Initiative 

Sciences 

Jose A. Suaya, Senior Research 

Associate - Adjunct Faculty 




March 1, 2006 

Scott Halstead, Research Director March 1, 2006 

85 Boston University Dr. Jonathon Simon, Chairman, 



March 3, 2006 

86 USAID/India Massee Bateman, Senior Advisor March 7, 2006 


87 CARE/India Vishawajeet, Shivgarh Project March 9, 2006 

Usha Kiran, Program Director, 

RACHNA 

88 NIAID Jack Whitescan, Director March 9, 2006 

89 USAID/India Massee Bateman, Senior Advisor March 10, 2006 


Christopher Barrett, USAID March 10, 2006 

Infectious Disease Fellow 

90 World Bank/India G.V.Ramana, Public Health 

Specialist 

March 12, 2006 

91 UNICEF, India Country 

Office 

Win Win Soe, Project Officer, Safe 

Motherhood Women's Health 

92 John Hopkins University Robert E. Black, Professor, 


March 13, 2006 

March 20, 2006 

31

93 Harvard University Richard A. Cash, Dept. of 

population and International Health 

94 Boston University Jon Simon, Director, Center for 


Gerald T. Keush, Assistant Provost 

(Medical Campus), Associate Dean 

(School of Public Health), Director 

(Global Health Initiative at Boston 

University) 

March 20, 2006 

March 20, 2006 

95 INRUD, Nepal Dr. Kafla, Nepal March 21, 2006 

Dr. Sauwakane, Thailand March 21, 2006 

Dr. Usha Gupta, India March 21, 2006 

96 US Embassy, India Altaf Lal, chief of the Molecular 

Vaccine Section of the Immunology 

Branch, Center for disease control 

and Prevention (CDC) 

March 29, 2006 

Paolo Miatti, NIH Representative March 29, 2006 

Chair INCLEN (Wilton Park meeting on Pandemic Influenza, U.K) 

1 Rockefeller Foundation Dr. Katherine Bond, Associate 


2 CDC, Atlanta Dr. James Leduc, Coordinator for 

Inflenza, CDS 

3 WHO Dr. Michael J Ryan, Coordinator, 

Global Alert and Response Unit 

4 UN/UNSIC Mr. Peter Scoot-Bowden, Chief 

Contingency Planning, 

5 European Community Mr. Vincent De Vischer, Head of 

Unit, Asia Directorate 

6 Canadian Institute of Health 

Research 

7 Immunization and 

Respiratory Infection 

Division 

8 Ministry of Health, Govt. of 

Sweden 

Prof. Bhagirath Singh, Scientific 

Director 

March 3, 2006 

March 3, 2006 

March 3, 2006 

March 3, 2006 

March 3, 2006 

March 3, 2006 

Dr. Arlene King, Director March 3, 2006 

Mrs. Dorrit Alopaeus-Stahl - 

Director of the Department for 

Multilateral Development 

March 3, 2006 

9 Hoffman La Roche Dr. David Reddy March 3, 2006 

Ms. Ingrit Maria Van Den Neucher 

32

Appendix 2 

INCLEN Inc, and INCLEN Trust International, Inc. 

Proposed Budget FY06-07 

Strategy/Objective 

A Strengthen Global, Regional, National R&CB 

B 

C 

D 

E 

F 

1) Research (IPHIDE/SAPNA/GAVI) $ 640,000 

2) Capacity development (IPHIDE) 150,000 

3) Regionalization (India$25K IPHIDE; Africa, SEA, Latin, China $5K each) 45,000 

4) Regional meetings (Africa, SEA, Latin, China $15K each) 60,000 

Financial Sustainability for Infrastructure 

5) Fundraising (Global Forum 10 and other) 95,000 

6) Marketing and public relations 10,000 

Programs in Priority Health Problems 

7) Best prospects (Obesity, Neuro Disabilities, Governance, Trad Med) 600,000 

Virtual Campus 

8) Epidemiology and related disciplines 100,000 

Governance Functions 

9) BOT/BOG * 55,000 

Network Coordination 

10) Coordinate global and interregional activities $ 550,000 

Less OH funding currently available: 

USAID IPHIDE (180,000) 

Non-INCLEN (170,000) 

ADIP/GAVI (25,000) 

Interest Income (25,000) 

Total cash requirement for Network Coordination 150,000 

Budget Total $ 1,905,000 

Direct Project Funding current and projected 1,305,000 

Projected Cash Requirement FY06-07 $ 600,000 

* includes $7,500 for Office of the Chair 

Combined Net Audited Assets 

Projected 

Balance Expenses Revenue Balance 

6/30/2005 actual/proj actual/proj 6/30/2006 

Restricted $ 12/31/2005 767,258 $ 767,258 

Unrestricted $ 1,172,702 $ 731,742 $ 750,000 $ 1,190,960 

$ 1,939,960 $ 1,499,000 $ 750,000 $ 1,190,960 

33

Minutes of the Board of Trustees - The INCLEN Trust

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?