The need for collective action against AIDS was not the driving force behind the founding GFATM. It was born rather of frustration, especially on the part of AIDS activists, that good ideas from the field were not receiving deserved support because of donor red tape [25] . The response was to be a funding agency which would not assess proposals itself, relying rather on an independent panel, and would use local accounting firms to monitor implementation. Its comparative advantage would be focusing resources quickly on 'best shot' programs in countries with greatest need, as well as raising the profile of the disease. The hands-off approach to program formulation and implementation, it was argued, would mean that the GFATM would have no agenda of its own; aidrecipient countries would be able (through their representation on the review panel) to set their own priorities. The absence of a programmatic/operational agenda would allow the Fund to concentrate on mobilising and disbursing resources [26] . In sum, the rationale for the GFATM was not so much that a GPG was being undersupplied, but that assistance was not being provided efficiently or in a way consistent with needs.