funding requests

ABSTRACT This article is the first of a series on the latest version of the Global Fund Operational Policy Manual. The manual comprises 18 Operational Policy Notes and 7 Operational Procedures relating to grant life cycle processes. It still makes for difficult reading and requires a lot more attention to detail. From the perspective of an outsider or even a new Global Fund staff member, it looks to be very user unfriendly and could do with professional reworking.

ABSTRACT This article is the second of the series that reviews and analyses the Global Fund Operational Policy Manual. It notes that the first article has already borne fruit before describing the different funding request and review approaches and then the processes that applicants must follow to develop and submit their funding requests. An important observation is that, since this section of the OPM is about how applicants should develop funding requests, it is surprising that there is no reference to the Applicant Handbook.

ABSTRACT This article is the first of a series that will review and analyse Global Fund policy and procedural manuals which will be used during implementation of the new Global Fund strategy. We kick off the process with the Operational Policy Manual. This article – and subsequent ones – may not be an easy read because, unless you are already familiar with the OPM, much of it is difficult to understand and of interest to a limited audience. However, it does provide some insights and suggestions which we hope will inform observers and contribute to improving future versions of the OPM. Global Fund critics may be more sympathetic when they see what Secretariat staff have to contend with.

ABSTRACT The Global Fund’s Technical Review Panel has presented a summary of lessons learned to the Board. This is based on a review of 120 funding requests submitted for Windows 1 and 2 of the 2020–2020 allocation cycle. The funding requests represent nearly 80% of the allocated amount for the funding cycle.

ABSTRACT Two-thirds of the expected funding requests for 2017–2019 have already been received, but almost 90% of the funding available to countries has been recommended by the Technical Review Panel. This article provides an update on the funding requests.

ABSTRACT Only three of six planned windows for the 2017-2019 allocations have passed, but already the Board has approved grants collectively valued at 83% of the total allocation. This front-end loading is not surprising, given that 70% of existing grants have an end date of 31 December 2017. We provide an update on the various funding modalities.

ABSTRACT In its second batch of approvals from the 2017-2019 allocations, the Global Fund Board has authorized funding of $1.25 billion for 32 grants to 15 countries. Included in this total were five matching funds requests valued at $22.9 million.

ABSTRACT Some components are currently transitioning from the Global Fund; others are in the “transition preparedness stage.” In this article, we provide a primer. We also discuss a report from ACTION on simultaneous transitions and the changing landscape of global health financing.

ABSTRACT In the first batch of approvals from the 2017-2019 allocations, the Global Fund Board has approved funding for 46 grants from 21 countries, having a total value of more than $2 billion. The funding requests were processed in less than seven months (from submission to Board approval). This is faster than the average processing time for grants in the last funding cycle (8.4 months).

ABSTRACT In the second of three articles based on the review of Window 1 funding requests by the Technical Review Panel, we provide information on the technical lessons learned for the three diseases. One such lesson was that TB funding requests did not convey a sense of boldness, innovation or ambition.