Global Fund Observer

Global Fund Observer is the leading independent voice providing insight, analysis and opinion about the Global Fund. For authoritative and credible explanations about the policies, practices and procedures at the Secretariat, to insider information about Global Fund Board meetings, to real stories capturing the impact and role of the Global Fund at the country level, subscribe to our free twice-monthly newsletter.

To avoid the risk of your email system treating incoming issues of Global Fund Observer as spam, you should add to your list of approved email senders. If you are not sure how to do this, speak to your system administrator or technical support person.

Latest GFO Live articles

GFO Current Issue


Both watchdogs and the OIG are having trouble accessing useful and complete country-level data to track and verify grant budgeting, expenditure and results data. There are also significant obstacles keeping implementers from meeting requirements for reporting to national oversight structures. These two conclusions drove two days of strategic discussions at an Aidspan roundtable in early August drawing participants from 10 countries.


During an Aidspan regional roundtable held in early August, watchdogs representing more than 30 organizations spoke candidly about their struggles in securing funding – making their engagement in the Global Fund system a lifeline for their futures. How to manage conflicts of interest now that there is that engagement, however, remains relatively unclear. 


Etienne Michaud is a senior strategy and policy manager at the Office of the Inspector General for the Global Fund. According to him, there are links to be made between watchdogs at local level as part of the OIG effort to consolidate its network of front-line advocates for transparency and accountability.


After the recent Partnership Forum in Bangkok, the second in the series of consultations to support the development of the Global Fund’s new strategy, Anna Maalsen reflects on how the principles of community leadership and country ownership that are at the heart of the Fund’s culture actually translate on the ground.


A new report released by the Eastern Africa National Networks of AIDS Service Organizations (EANNASO) measures the impact of civil society consultations on the final concept notes submitted. Notes submitted by Kenya, Malawi, Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zanzibar and Zimbabwe were examined for how responsive they were to priorities identified by civil society during country dialogue.


A workshop jointly run by the Global Fund and Eurasian Harm Reduction Network aimed to provide more nuanced guidance to EECA countries on sustainability as they prepare to transition some or all of their programming to domestic funding sources.


AIDS advocates warn that given its low disease burden and relatively high GDP, Malaysia may become ineligible for Global Fund support after 2017, imperiling prevention efforts. Especially vulnerable, they say, are those that target MSM. 


Devolution in Kenya has since 2013 caused some interruptions in the supply chain, stockouts at health facilities and has prevented consistent monitoring and evaluation of programs: all of which could have an impact on interventions supported by the Global Fund.


In developing its new national strategic plan for HIV/AIDS, Moldova is preparing for a transition away from Global Fund support to prevention, treatment and care interventions.


This is my final issue at the helm of Global Fund Observer. It’s been an extraordinary two years of watching, and listening, as the Global Fund evolves and matures into a dynamic and responsive financing mechanism. I hope that GFO has, equally, evolved and matured to respond to and document the concerns and vision of grant implementers, partners and the people who benefit from Fund-supported programs.