In an email sent to Board members on 7 March, Global Fund Executive Director Mark Dybul provided additional information on the transition phase of the new funding model (NFM). The email was in response to questions posed to the Secretariat since the NFM was launched on 28 February.
The 7 March email covered several topics, including how projections of uncommitted funding for 2013–2014 were derived; how 2014–2016 allocations for early and interim applicants may be adjusted; how the Global Fund decided which applicants would be “early” and which “interim”; and what support will be provided to early applicants.
Uncommitted funding for 2013–2104
As reported in a separate GFO article on disease splits: In an earlier email sent to Board members, Dr Dybul said that total committed and uncommitted funding projections for 2013–2104 are $12.3 billion, of which the lion’s share – $10.3 billion – is for committed funding. In his email of 7 March, Dr Dybul explained how the $10.3 billion in commitments was calculated.
Essentially, the $10.3 billion figure was derived from adding together (a) grant disbursements already agreed to but not sent as of 31 December 2012; (b) agreements already signed but for which funding for 2013–2014 had not yet been committed; (c) funding approved by the Board for 2013–2014 but for which agreements had not yet been signed; and (d) expected grant renewals for 2013–2014 which had not yet been approved by the Board. The projections assume maximum amounts for each category; in some cases, actual amounts may be less.
Allocations for 2014–2016
As previously reported in GFO, any amounts interim or early applicants receive in 2014 will be deducted from their 2014–2016 allocations under the full rollout of the NFM. Dr Dybul said that this is to ensure that countries participating in the transition do not have an advantage over other countries.
Early vs. interim applicants
Dr Dybul said that to determine which countries would be suitable as early applicants and which as interim applicants, the Secretariat reviewed where in the grant lifecycle each potential applicant was and when it might make sense to create a new grant. Those for which it made sense to create a new grant sooner rather than later were selected as early applicants.
Support for early applicants
Dr Dybul explained that both the Secretariat and partners will be involved in the iterative country dialogue to help countries turn their national strategies into a request for funding. Partners will help strengthen the national strategies.
Support for CCMs will come from the country teams and specialists in the Secretariat, Dr Dybul said. The country teams will work with the CCM and with technical partners to identify (a) the key actors that should be involved in the country dialogue; (b) gaps in support for the implementation of the national strategies; and (c) the best approach to ensure that requested funding aligns with and supports national strategies.
Dr Dybul said that particular attention will be paid to engaging key affected populations and women’s organisations in the country dialogue. Meetings are happening now to discuss each of the early applicant countries and how they can be supported to engage these key populations. Participants in these meetings include (a) Global Fund partners that focus on human rights, gender issues, and sexual orientation and gender identity; and (b) the Board’s communities delegation. Dr Dybul indicated that the composition of “partners” will vary from country to country.
The engagement of key populations in the country dialogue is part of the Global Fund’s effort to encourage countries to identify human rights barriers and to include human rights interventions in their funding request.
As part of the country dialogue, Dr Dybul said, technical capacity gaps will be identified. To help address these gaps, the technical assistance team in the Secretariat is working with global and regional partners to identify sources of TA.
The 7 March email from Dr Dybul also explained how allocations to early and interim applicants could be adjusted for qualitative factors and other variables. See separate GFO article.