The Global Fund continues to make progress – slowly – in recovering amounts owing due to fraud or improper use of grant monies based on reports by the Office of the Inspector General. From the inception of the Fund to 30 June 2015, $39.9 million has been recovered, compared to $34.4 million six months ago and $29.2 million a year ago.
You are here
The Global Fund should be more open about what options are being considered for the allocations methodology for the next period, 2017-2019.
By March 2016, the allocations methodology for 2017-2019 will have been adopted by the Board. That’s six months from now. It doesn’t look like there will be much public discussion of the methodology before it is approved.
Meaningful change or more of the same rhetoric? The Global Fund’s new funding model and the politics of HIV scale-up
This week’s full roll-out of the new funding model provides an opportunity to review independent assessments at the country level that recommend a significant transformation in the way the Global Fund structures its operations.
DECISION POINTS: GF/B31/DP08 and GF/B31/DP10
The Global Fund has approved $14.82 billion in indicative funding for grant-eligible countries assigned to each of the four bands for the next funding cycle, as well as the allocations for each band.
Composition of the bands
The four bands are depicted below:
The Global Fund is expecting a rush of applications in 2014 for the full roll-out of the new funding model. In his report for the Board meeting held on 7–8 November, Executive Director Mark Dybul said that in 2014 the Secretariat expects to sign grants for about half of the disease components for the entire 2014–2016 allocation period.
Global Fund Executive Director Mark Dybul says that the disease split for the funding allocated to early and interim applicants in the transition phase of the new funding model (NFM) should not be viewed in isolation, but rather in the context of all funding for 2013–2014.
The Global Fund reports that it is well on its way towards achieving its target of 10% "efficiency gains" for Round 8. When the Global Fund Board approved Round 8 proposals, it instituted some cost-cutting measures because the Board feared there were not enough funds on hand or in the pipeline to pay for the entire first two year costs of recommended proposals. Round 8 is the largest round of funding to date.