Global Fund: Progress Report 2010 - unaids

1. The Global Fund is committed to remaining responsive
to countries and to continuing to improve the
efficiency of its operations and the effectiveness of its
investments. It learns through grant and Secretariat
operations; evaluations; from studies undertaken by the
Office of the Inspector General and through its partnerships.
Each of these areas is discussed below.
4.1 Learning
through grant
and Secretariat
operations
2. Learning throughout the grant life cycle. The
Global Fund grant-making process has built-in feedback
mechanisms that allow for ongoing learning
and improvements. The grant-making process starts
with the preparation of proposals by countries,
supported by technical partners. Next, the Technical
Review Panel 10 evaluates proposals on technical
merit. This is follow-ed by a clarification process based
on the panel review before recommendations are
made to the Global Fund Board for approval for funding.
Once approved, the grants are implemented by the
Principal Recip ients (see Figure 4.1). Implementation
is carefully monitored using the performance-based
funding approach, with a major review after 18 to 24
months (Phase 2 assessment), where decisions are
made to approve funding for an additional three years.
Each stage of the grant life cycle process provides
an opportunity for the Global Fund Partnership to learn
and innovate. (For a more complete explanation of
the grant process, see Annex 2.)
FIGURE 4.1 THE GLOBAL FUND GRANT PROCESS
3. Proposal development. CCMs are responsible
for preparing and delivering grant proposals and this
process presents learning opportunities for both the
countries and the Global Fund. For example, countries
learn by reviewing their national disease programs
to identify the progress, gaps and constraints that will
form the basis for preparing grant proposals. They
also learn from the engagement with civil society, the
private sector and affected communities that is
required as part of the proposal development. Technical
partners such as the STOP TB Partnership, the Roll
Back Malaria Partnership and UNAIDS have mobilized
their resources to support countries to prepare
technically sound proposals.
4. The Global Fund Secretariat refines its policies
and guidelines in response to lessons emerging from
the proposals and recommendations made by the
Technical Review Panel. Some of the important contributions
and learning emerging from proposal
development include the introduction of dual-track
financing in 2008 (see section 4.5) and the inclusion
of cross-cutting health systems strengthening components
in grant proposals. To reflect Board policies
and guidance from the Technical Review Panel, the
Secretariat has also continuously improved the
guidelines for proposal development.
5. Proposal review. The large number of grant
proposals reviewed by the Technical Review Panel
provides a rich source of comparative information
to identify strengths and weaknesses of the proposals
submitted. The Technical Review Panel provides
written feedback to applicants that can be used to
improve the technical merit of subsequent proposals
and programs. At the same time, country needs are
identified – for example, the need to further simplify
the proposal submission process, which over time has
become too onerous for some countries. Recommendations
from Technical Review Panel reports have
informed several major innovations and reforms in
the Global Fund (see Table 4.1).
COUNTRY COORDINATING
MECHANISMS
OVERSIGHT
PRINCIPAL
RECIPIENT
5 DISBURSEMENT
4 INSTRUCTIONS
OF GRANT FUNDS
1 REQUEST FOR
DISBURSEMENT WITH
DOCUMENTED RESULTS
GLOBAL FUND TRUSTEE
THE WORLD BANK
5 REPORTING
SUB-RECIPIENTS
LOCAL FUND AGENTS
3 INSTRUCTIONS
TO DISBURSE
2 DATA VERIFICATION
AND ADVICE OF
RELEASE OF
FUNDS
SECRETARIAT
10 The Technical Review Panel is an independent group of international experts in health and
development, established by the Global Fund Board to review grant proposals for technical
merit and then make funding recommendations to the Board.