Global Fund New
Developments
Global Fund Reforms
Transformation Funding Mechanism, Bridge
Funding, 2 stage funding process,
Principle Results (2004-2011)
0
Source: Global Fund Grant Data
January 2012
GP/021209/9
Evolution of Funding (2002-2010)
2002-2013
# of
grants
12
Annual disbursement
$ US billion
10
Projected annual
disbursement
Number of signed grants
8
$11.7
billion
pledged
$9.4 billion
contributed
800
600
6
$6.2 billion
contributed
4
2
400
$3.4 billion
$3.4 billion
contribute
contributed
d
2002 - 2004
200
2005 - 2007
2008 - 2010
2011 - 2013
Reforming The Global Fund
• Shift from emergency response to sustainability and
fiduciary responsibility
• Status quo insufficient
• Maintain donor confidence
• All want better risk management ; safeguarding of
resources; more efficient operations; value for
money
Donors are linking commitments to concrete results on reforms
2
Overview TFM
•
Targeted funding opportunity to focus limited resources on critical protection of
gains achieved in the fight against the three diseases as a transition to the new
Strategy
Eligibility
Proposal scope
Review and
approval
process
•
In principle ECFP applies (e.g. Counterpart Financing, Targeted Pool,
prioritization etc.)
•
2-year funding request
•
Limited to continuation, and no scale-up
•
Essential/critical services
•
Request of relevant HSS support- only through embedding in disease
proposals (no separate HSS component)
•
NSA funding requests based on same scope
•
Materials available 12 December 2011
•
Submission deadline 31 March 2012
•
TRP meeting during second quarter 2012 and intermediate Board endorsement
•
Grant negotiation schedule determined by program needs/prioritization measures
•
Rolling Board approval and grant start dates
1
Access to new funding over time
2011
2012
2013
2014
“New Funding Model/Opportunity”
“The new
strategy”
Development of the new funding
model/opportunity as part of
Strategy implementation
Application & Review
(including iteration)
Global demand/gap
assessment
(work with countries)
Mid-term
replenishment
Alternative to
Round 11:
“Transitional
Funding”
“Transitional Funding Mechanism (TFM)”
Application & Review
Funding
Funding
Transformation Funding Mechanism
• Replace Round 11 with a new “Transitional Funding
Mechanism” - to provide continuation of essential
prevention, treatment and/or care services to existing
grantees
• Process will involve a tailored application and an iterative
review process to ensure high impact and strategic
investments
• Develop new business model to enable funding from 2014,
based on principles of the new GF 2012-2016 Strategy
Transitional Funding Mechanism
• The Global Fund Board decided to replace Round 11
with the Transitional Funding Mechanism due to
inadequate resources
– protect the gains achieved (e.g. interventions whose
interruption would mean a significant rebound in
transmission); and
– save lives; and
– are high impact, evidence-based, targeted to most
appropriate populations and represent good value for
money in a resource-constrained environment
Eg. Essential Services –HIV and AIDS
•
•
•
•
antiretroviral therapy
TB screening and treatment among PLWHA
PMTCT
Prevention and treatment targeted at key populations
with high levels of incidence (including evidence-based
programs reaching men who have sex with men,
people who inject drugs, prisoners and sex workers)
• Male circumcision where indicated (i.e. in settings with
high prevalence and low rates of male circumcision).
Eg Not Likely to be Funded in TFM
• scale up of antiretroviral therapy,
• untargeted population approaches to HIV prevention
(including mass media campaigns), general population
HIV testing in concentrated epidemics, generalized
nutritional support, blood safety, universal
precautions, pre-exposure prophylaxis, infrastructure
development, procurement of vehicles, and
generalized/untargeted trainings.
2
Review and approval process
Revised
guidance to
applicants
Application
Screening
TRP
review
Endorsed
by
Board/SIIC
and initial
assessment
of supply +
demand
Grant negotiation
Rolling Board Approval
(finalize negotiation +
grant signing)
More iterative
clarification phase
When
12 Dec
2011
31 Mar
2012
May
2012
June
2012
July
2012
From Aug 2012/2013
on a rolling basis
TRP review to:
•
Assess the technical merit in accordance with existing review criteria
•
Determine whether applicants have demonstrated a risk of disruption of
essential prevention, treatment and/or care services; and
•
Assess whether the activities for which funding is sought cannot be funded by
alternate sources of funding.
2
Bridge Funding Mechanism implications
Policy area
Changes
Scope
• Bridge Funding will continue existing program at the same scale
• “Essential treatment, prevention and care services” are not yet
clearly defined and will be determined by the TRP
Eligible Grants
• Grants to expire between 31 December 2011 and 31 December 2012
• If TFM funding becomes available prior to BFM end date, the bridge
funding amount will be adjusted to avoid duplicative financing
Reimbursement
• Relevant costs should be reimbursed if the corresponding request is
approved
• If not, reduced from the existing cash balance of the PR
Performance Based
Funding
• Performance of the grant should be factored in deciding the funding
amount of BFM
Priority of Funding
• Priority of bridge funding is the same with that of TFM
• Lower priority than CoS, Renewals, and Round 10 funding needs
12
Phase 2 review process
Phase 2 serves as a checkpoint to ensure that funding is performancebased and that programming is aligned with epidemiological evidence
Global Fund and
PR(s) sign Grant
Agreement(s)
Program month
PR implementation
and reporting; CCM
oversight; LFA
verifications; Global
Fund performancebased disbursements;
18
partner support
CCM
submits
Request for
Continued
Funding
21
LFA
Phase 2
Assessment
Report
due
22
Secretariat
Phase 2
recommendation to the
Board 1st day
Month 24
23
24
Negotiate and
sign extension to
the Grant
Agreement(s) by
Month 27
27
1
Board
approves
Proposals
PR(s) receives first
disbursement;
Program start date
CCM can
accelerate timing
CCM invited
to submit a
Request for
Continued
Funding on
the last day of
Month 18
Phase 2
Panel
meeting
Board
Phase 2
approval disbursement
10th of
Month 24
Phase 2 Renewal Process
* End of months
2
Key modifications to renewals
ECFP
Policy & Process
55% Rule
•
G-20 UMIs no longer eligible for renewals unless
have “extreme” disease burden
•
Grants made ineligible will receive transition funding
if renewal scheduled for 2012
•
Counterpart Financing and Focus of Proposal
requirements apply
•
Review of composition and role of Grant Renewals
Panel and involvement of TRP
•
Revisit reprogramming policy and processes
•
Revisit role of Country Team members and technical
partners in developing CCM Request for Renewal
•
Develop guidance for countries and CTs: defining an
‘iterative process’
•
Funding for LICs must be at least 55% of portfolio
distribution in any given funding opportunity
2
Impact of ECFP on countries by income levels
Income
Level
Low Income
Countries
Lower-Low
Income
Countries
Upper-Low
Income
Countries
Upper-Middle
Income
Countries (nonG20)
Upper-Middle
Income
Countries (G20)
Focus of
Renewal
Counterpart
Financing
Review + PBF
adjustments
No Restrictions
Not applicable
5% minimum
threshold
Incremental
Amount +
Staggered
Commitments
No Restrictions
50% focus on
special groups
and/or
interventions
20% minimum
threshold
Incremental
Amount +
Staggered
Commitments
No Restrictions
50% focus on
special groups
and/or
interventions
40% minimum
threshold
Incremental
Amount +
Staggered
Commitments
No Restrictions
100% focus on
special groups
and/or
interventions
60% minimum
threshold
Incremental
Amount +
Staggered
Commitments
Extreme disease
burden
100% focus on
special groups
and/or
interventions
60% minimum
threshold
Incremental
Amount +
Staggered
Commitments
Disease Burden
15
Challenges
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
TFM/Bridge Funding
Prioritizing country to support
Reduced Resources in certain regions
Tracking Co-financing
Global fund fatigue—too complicate, OIG
Evidence, value for money,
Reprogramming
Opportunities
• Risk Management framework
• Iterative funding process
– Regional proposals
– Role of CS
•
•
•
•
Country ownership consultation
Research to build the case—CSS, VfM, NSP
Development of Human Rights Framework
Emergency Donor conf—MTR