Index of Paper Presentations for the Parallel Sessions - Academy of ...

arrived at a consensus. Independent coding and discussion by authors enhanced thetrustworthiness of findings. Codes helped us to understand the relationship between transactionparticulars associated with the HIV/AIDS pandemic, governance structure imbedded in eachNACP phase and NACO‘s capabilities to achieve its objectives.ResultsThe caseSeveral stakeholders participate in the fight against HIV/AIDS in India. There are fourbroad categories, first, the implementer of initiatives in the field (national and international SMOssuch as Population Foundation of India and DKT, respectively, and CBOs). Second categorybelongs to the funding organizations such as Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Hope, andPackard who channel financial resources for specific project during a set timeframe. In theinterface of the implementers and the funding organizations there are a group of organizationswho conduct research studies that guide policy and practices; and are consulted by implementers,funding organizations and the government. In this group we find both for-profit and not-for-profitorganizations such as International Centre for Research on Women, John Hopkins University, andQuantum. The final category is NACO, set up in 1992 under the Ministry of Health and FamilyWelfare, who forms policies and overlooks all programmes and initiatives.Three phases of NACO effortsTo address HIV/AIDS, NACO developed NACP and implemented it in three phases. Thefirst phase, covered the period from 1992 to 1999 and it was funded by World Bank‘s US$ 84million credit (Kartikeyan, Bharmal, Tiwari, & Bisen, 2007). This phase was dominated by twofactors: the ABC strategies (observe abstinence, be faithful, and use condoms) strongly advocatedby USAID; and by the perception, among government officials, that the prevalence of the diseasewas overestimated. Therefore, most of NACP-I efforts were focused on surveillance in the