The data were obtained after CPI sued the U.S. State Department to gain access to the data. The data were analyzed by the HIV/AIDS Monitor team at the Center for Global Development, who also share the full dataset. Criticism Controversial requirements Some critics of PEPFAR feel that American political and social groups with moral rather than public health agendas are behind several requirements of PEPFAR, pointing to the mandates that one-third of prevention spending in 2006–2008 be directed towards abstinence-until-marriage programs and that all funded organizations sign an anti-prostitution pledge. This pledge requires all organizations that receive PEPFAR funding to have a policy that explicitly opposes prostitution and sex trafficking which some activists compared to a loyalty oath. A number of AIDS organizations felt such a policy would alienate their efforts to reduce HIV contraction rates among sex workers. In 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the requirement violated the First Amendment's prohibition against compelled speech in Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society International, Inc. According to a study presented at the 19th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections in 2015, the $1.3 billion that the U.S. government spent on programs to promote abstinence in sub-Saharan Africa had no significant impact. The requirement for prevention spending was lifted with the PEPFAR reauthorization in 2008, but some critics worry that some funds could still be spent on abstinence programs. The Center for Health and Gender Equity and Health GAP outline their criticism of PEPFAR on a website known as PEPFAR Watch. The previous 33% earmark has since been replaced by a requirement that if more than 50% of PEPFAR funds are allocated to non-abstinence promotion measures, the US Global AIDS Coordinator must report to Congress. However, the new reporting requirement continues to emphasize abstinence and fidelity to the exclusion of comprehensive approaches, such as those that include education about male and female condoms. This can cause a chilling effort for organizations receiving PEPFAR funding, who may censor their prevention activities and fall short of providing comprehensive HIV prevention services to women, men, and young people. PEPFAR also does not fund needle exchange programs, which are widely regarded as effective in preventing the spread of HIV. Conditions Many have argued that PEPFAR's emphasis on direct funding from the United States to African governments (bilateral programs) have been at the expense of full commitments to multilateral programs such as