First I have a couple of words on how the programs are designed. From the beginning, when the Global Fund was created, we said that this needs to be country-owned and country-driven. Regardless of gender, there needs to be a process at the country level that designs those programs. That's happening through what we call the country coordinating mechanisms. Every country applying to the Global Fund has to have such a mechanism, and that brings governments together in every single country, but also civil society, private sector, and so on.
We make sure that in every CCM, communities affected by the diseases are represented. It's a requirement. We wouldn't accept a proposal without that. There are always people living with HIV, people affected by TB, people affected by malaria in the CCMs. It often also means—and it is quite remarkable—that in many countries' CCMs, you would have representatives, let's say, of commercial sex workers at the table. I can tell you that is often surprising for politicians. Now, after 15 years, it's normal. They should be there, because our programs are designed to address their challenges. That's at the national level.
When you then go down one level to the actual programs, like the special programs we have in those 13 priority countries in eastern and central Africa, then it's even more of the case. We wouldn't design a program for young women and girls without them. It's their program, right? That absolutely is the case. We have a particular campaign called “HER: HIV Epidemic Response” that we launched recently, and that's exclusively for programs for women and girls in those countries.
At a national level and at a program level, we always involve the communities affected. That can sometimes, of course, be men as well. We want to have groups of men who have sex with men, the LGBTI community, at the table as well, where it's programs affecting them, but very specifically also women and girls.