Aidspan - independent watchdog of the Global Fund and publisher of Global Fund Observer
Aidspan is a non-governmental Kenya-based organization whose mission is to reinforce the effectiveness of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. Aidspan does so by serving as an independent watchdog of the Fund, and by providing services that can benefit all countries wishing to obtain and make effective use of Global Fund financing. Aidspan finances its work primarily through grants from foundations. Aidspan does not accept Global Fund money, perform paid consulting work, or charge for any of its products.
Aidspan provides the following services:
1. Watchdog services
- Watch for and constructively comment on ways in which the Global Fund's leadership, Secretariat or grant recipients may not be living up to the Fund's founding principles.
- Communicate findings publicly (via Global Fund Observer) or privately, as appropriate.
2. Publication services
- Global Fund Observer (GFO), a free email newsletter providing news, analysis and commentary to over 7,000 subscribers in 170 countries.
- Aidspan Guides, a series of free publications providing detailed practical advice to those applying for, overseeing or implementing Global Fund grants.
3. Web services
- The Grant Details, Analysis and Evaluation pages on Aidspan's web site, a comprehensive on-line resource for comparing the performance of Global Fund grants.
- More web services (forthcoming).
4. Facilitation services
- Global Fund Round Tables for global health leaders and advocates (under the direction of a multi-sectoral steering committee).
- More facilitation services (forthcoming).
Aidspan Spotlight
Aidspan's facilitation services are provided in both developing and developed countries. In developing countries, Aidspan works with others to increase the number of viable grant applications that are submitted to the Global Fund, to strengthen the effectiveness of Country Coordinating Mechanisms (CCMs), and to improve the chances that grants are effectively implemented. In developed countries, it works with others to improve the chances that more money will be given to the Global Fund.
Aidspan's Grant Details, Analysis and Evaluation pages show how well each Global Fund grant is performing against its own goals and in relation to other grants. Based on in-depth data automatically downloaded from the Global Fund's website on a regular basis, the system offers both a graphical and a tabular assessment of the performance of each grant.
Global Fund Observer (GFO) is a widely-read, authoritative and free email-based newsletter, produced by Aidspan, that provides an independent platform for news, analysis and commentary about the Global Fund to over 7,000 subscribers in 170 countries.
Global AIDS and the Global Fund
Since its inception, the Global Fund has approved 526 grants, of which 301 have been extended to Phase 2 (Years 3 and beyond).
The most recent agreement for a new grant was signed on 11 September 2008, providing an initial amount of $4,118,449 for a Malaria project in Sao Tome and Principe.
The most recent agreement to extend a grant beyond its initial 2-year period was signed on 11 September 2008, providing $5,003,911 for a Malaria project in Niger.
Funding has been distributed by disease component and by region as follows:
| Approved funding by disease component | |
|---|---|
| HIV/AIDS | $6.73 billion |
| Malaria | $2.74 billion |
| TB | $1.62 billion |
| Mixed | $0.29 billion |
| Approved funding by region | |
| East Africa | $3.25 billion |
| Southern Africa | $2.02 billion |
| East Asia and the Pacific | $1.49 billion |
| West and Central Africa | $1.32 billion |
| Eastern Europe and Central Asia | $0.91 billion |
| Latin America and the Caribbean | $0.86 billion |
| South Asia | $0.83 billion |
| North Africa and the Middle East | $0.69 billion |
For details of individual grants, country-by-country information, indications of which grants are ahead of or behind schedule, and more, visit the Grant Details, Analysis and Evaluation pages on this site.
Recent News
The TRP has recommended that the Global Fund Board approve Round 8 grants that will cost in excess of three billion dollars. This makes Round 8 nearly three times the size, in dollar terms, of any previous round of Global Fund grants.
The Fund has released reports on participation by faith-based organizations (FBOs), on operational research, and on involvement by the private sector.
Until recently, there was no publicly available data regarding how many people within each country need ARV treatment, or regarding how many of those people are receiving it. However, this information, with much other health data, is now available at www.GlobalHealthFacts.org.
Recent News
The TRP has recommended that the Global Fund Board approve Round 8 grants that will cost in excess of three billion dollars. This makes Round 8 nearly three times the size, in dollar terms, of any previous round of Global Fund grants.
The Fund has released reports on participation by faith-based organizations (FBOs), on operational research, and on involvement by the private sector.
Until recently, there was no publicly available data regarding how many people within each country need ARV treatment, or regarding how many of those people are receiving it. However, this information, with much other health data, is now available at www.GlobalHealthFacts.org.
Recent GFO Highlights
David Garmaise says “The forty case studies highlight what is and is not working well in CCMs. However, it is important not to assume that the findings of the report can be generalised across all CCMs. While [some of] the case studies paint a very rosy picture of partnership, ... anecdotal evidence suggests that in many CCMs the public-private partnership is not working well and civil society does not have an equal voice at the table.”
An analysis conducted by GFO shows that half of all countries that are eligible to receive Global Fund grants currently provide ARV treatment to less than 25% of those that need it, and/or have at least 25,000 people who need ARV treatment but are not receiving it.
"The Global Fund says 'GF-supported programs have provided millions of people with lifesaving services. As a result, at least 2.5 million lives have been saved.' Well, yes and no..."
Over the past year, the Global Fund has invited CCMs to apply for “Rolling Continuation Channel” continuation of 30 grants that were approaching the end of their first five years. Of these, 19 have been approved for over $1 billion in additional funding. A full analysis is provided of this little-known procedure for extending grants.
David Garmaise writes, "The report [on the screening process] says that in the current era of trying to rapidly scale up the response to the three diseases, the 'non-CCM window of opportunity' may be too narrow. This is a significant observation, yet this aspect of the report seems to have garnered little attention."
Recent GFO Highlights
David Garmaise says “The forty case studies highlight what is and is not working well in CCMs. However, it is important not to assume that the findings of the report can be generalised across all CCMs. While [some of] the case studies paint a very rosy picture of partnership, ... anecdotal evidence suggests that in many CCMs the public-private partnership is not working well and civil society does not have an equal voice at the table.”
An analysis conducted by GFO shows that half of all countries that are eligible to receive Global Fund grants currently provide ARV treatment to less than 25% of those that need it, and/or have at least 25,000 people who need ARV treatment but are not receiving it.
"The Global Fund says 'GF-supported programs have provided millions of people with lifesaving services. As a result, at least 2.5 million lives have been saved.' Well, yes and no..."
Over the past year, the Global Fund has invited CCMs to apply for “Rolling Continuation Channel” continuation of 30 grants that were approaching the end of their first five years. Of these, 19 have been approved for over $1 billion in additional funding. A full analysis is provided of this little-known procedure for extending grants.
David Garmaise writes, "The report [on the screening process] says that in the current era of trying to rapidly scale up the response to the three diseases, the 'non-CCM window of opportunity' may be too narrow. This is a significant observation, yet this aspect of the report seems to have garnered little attention."
Recent Publications
Description:
This Aidspan report examines the extent to which proposals to the Global Fund that were submitted by countries in sub-Saharan Africa in Rounds 1-7, and that were accepted for funding, included services and activities that were gender-responsive. (Programmes are said to be gender-responsive when they provide services specifically for women, promote equal access for women to services provided to both men and women, or include activities addressing other factors that contribute to gender inequality.)
The document also reports on what results have been achieved for gender-related services and activities in Global Fund grants in five focus countries - Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia. Finally, the report examines (a) how the lack of sex-disaggregated data hampers efforts to measure the impact of programmes on women; and (b) the role of the Global Fund in promoting gender-responsiveness.
The findings of this report should be useful to CCMs, PRs, the Global Fund, women's groups, providers of technical support, and others with an interest in promoting the gender-responsiveness of programmes addressing HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria.
This report is available in English only.
Download options:
| English |  333KB |
 881KB |
Description:
If the Global Fund is to achieve the continued rapid growth that it is planning for, it has to examine closely, and address, some significant growing pains that are becoming increasingly apparent. Some of these growing pains exist within developing countries; others exist within the Fund itself.
Accordingly, this white paper tackles three linked questions:
- What problems at the country level are preventing adequate scale-up to meet the need? (Example: Many implementing countries have weak health systems, limited capacity, and insufficient health workers.)
- What problems at the Global Fund level are preventing adequate scale-up by the countries? (Example: Some of the GF's rules for grant implementers are too burdensome, or they are enforced in too rigid a manner. The transaction costs of dealing with the GF are too high.)
- What should be done about these problems? (Example: On an open-ended basis, the GF should have just one "single-stream grant" for each country/disease/PR combination, extendable and expandable as and when agreed.)
In the five years since Aidspan was founded, this is easily the most substantive report we have published on problems affecting the Global Fund and on recommendations to address those problems.
Download options:
| English | 387KB |
544KB |
Recent Publications
Description:
This Aidspan report examines the extent to which proposals to the Global Fund that were submitted by countries in sub-Saharan Africa in Rounds 1-7, and that were accepted for funding, included services and activities that were gender-responsive. (Programmes are said to be gender-responsive when they provide services specifically for women, promote equal access for women to services provided to both men and women, or include activities addressing other factors that contribute to gender inequality.)
The document also reports on what results have been achieved for gender-related services and activities in Global Fund grants in five focus countries - Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia. Finally, the report examines (a) how the lack of sex-disaggregated data hampers efforts to measure the impact of programmes on women; and (b) the role of the Global Fund in promoting gender-responsiveness.
The findings of this report should be useful to CCMs, PRs, the Global Fund, women's groups, providers of technical support, and others with an interest in promoting the gender-responsiveness of programmes addressing HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria.
This report is available in English only.
Download options:
| English | 333KB |
881KB |
Description:
If the Global Fund is to achieve the continued rapid growth that it is planning for, it has to examine closely, and address, some significant growing pains that are becoming increasingly apparent. Some of these growing pains exist within developing countries; others exist within the Fund itself.
Accordingly, this white paper tackles three linked questions:
- What problems at the country level are preventing adequate scale-up to meet the need? (Example: Many implementing countries have weak health systems, limited capacity, and insufficient health workers.)
- What problems at the Global Fund level are preventing adequate scale-up by the countries? (Example: Some of the GF's rules for grant implementers are too burdensome, or they are enforced in too rigid a manner. The transaction costs of dealing with the GF are too high.)
- What should be done about these problems? (Example: On an open-ended basis, the GF should have just one "single-stream grant" for each country/disease/PR combination, extendable and expandable as and when agreed.)
In the five years since Aidspan was founded, this is easily the most substantive report we have published on problems affecting the Global Fund and on recommendations to address those problems.
Download options:
| English | 387KB |
544KB |