Ukraine NFM Grant Implementation arrangements

1. Ukraine NFM Grant Implementation arrangements

2. Sub-granting functional unit • Expected benefits of sub-granting functional unit are better coordination and efficiency: • joint CfP, • tripartite grant agreement, • joint workplan and budget and PF, • harmonised operations manual, • harmonised reporting of SRs, • common monitoring visits, • joint audits. • Practical arrangements: • 20 staff; 100 SRs; budget holder outside functional unit; • Principal decisions are made by budget holders, but potentially 1-2 team leaders within functional unit to guide work; • Although authority not fully delegated to functional unit, certain amount of authority delegated (up to certain threshold) to make decisions; • Initially not fully co-located, but idea remains valid; Given shift in way of doing business, plan to move slowly; • Full management support. Senior Management committed to coordination ; if budget holders had difficult cases, SMT group would respond to difficult issues together.

3. Procurement functional unit Vision: • No need for a procurement functional unit as product categories are clearly delineated between PRs; • Need for improved coordination amongst 3 PRs; • Better linkage between programmatic aspects and PSM; Way forward: UCDC will act as secretariat of an operational PSM group; • Coordinating and facilitating the work of the group; • Agenda setting; • Circulation of materials; • Minute-taking and follow-up; Grant-specific, but taking into account co-financed products; By 31 Dec., approved joint procurement plan and concept note/TOR of the group.

4. Questions • How will functional unit work if/until not co-located? What are plans for eventual co-location (when, where)? • What milestones do you foresee in establishing functional unit? What is the entity that we will assess capacity of? • Are the staffing numbers real, given that number of SRs are hypothical? What efficiency savings does functional unit yield? • UCDC not part of discussions to date. • How does joint call for proposals extend to UCDC SRs? What will happen to UCDC SRs? • How can you guarantee better coordination and continuum of care without UCDC? • How will functional unit staff be proportioned among PRs? Are the shared SRs under AU/Network functional teams?

5. Four Ones • One PF – key indicators and targets are shared between 3 PRs. • Impact and outcome indicators • IDU: prevention package, VCT, syringes distributed, OST, OST retention, IDUs on medical care • SW: prevention package, VCT • MSM: prevention package, VCT • ART: ART treatment, C&S, prisoners on ART • TB/HIV: HIV screening for TB, TB patients on ART, TB screening for HIV+, IPT • Workplan tracking measures: legal barriers, CSS, policy and governance. • One strategy describing how SRs in a given region with a given epidemic profile will contribute to each target; key strategies in each region to improve services. • One PU to the Global Fund, with one performance rating and common set of MAs (though distinguishing responsibilities). • One coordination – functional unit remains valid, with all benefits described; plus improved PR-level coordination of implementation. Rationale: • Common targets facilitate continuum of care, integration of services, and improved quality of care. • Weak performance against an indicator enables three PRs to jointly address the problems; strong performance allows learning from each other.