Enhanced Direct Access – The approach of the Global Fund.

Enhanced Direct Access – The approach of the Global Fund. Katja Roll  External Relations and Partnerships

OverviewKey Themes • The Model of the Global Fund • Governance at the country – CCM • Grant Implementation arrangements – PR • Experience with Multi-Stakeholder Engagement

The Global FundMandate and Model • Created in 2002 to finance the scale up of prevention, treatment and care programs against the threediseases • Global Fund model is based on country ownership, multi-stakeholder engagement and performance-based funding • Total pledges available = US$ 30.6 billion • To date, USD22.4 billion approved, USD 14 billion disbursed • Grants in 150 countries of which 90% are low and low-middle income countries • Approximately 1/3 of grantedresourcesisbeingchannelledthrough civil society organisations

The Global FundEvolution of Funding (2002-2010)

The Global FundContributions Top 10 Public Donors (2002-2010) • Total contributions from public donors (2002-2010):US$ 18.1 billion (95% of the total)

The Global FundKey Actors • The Global Fund Board • The Global Fund Secretariat • The Country Coordinating Mechanism (CCM) • The Technical Review Panel • The Principal Recipient (PR) • Sub Recipients • The Local Fund Agent (LFA) • The Global Fund Trustee • The Office of Inspector General (OIG) • Technical Partners

Governance at the global level Composition of the international Board • Donor Voting Block: • Germany, Canada, Switzerland • European Commission (Belgium, Portugal, Finland) • France, Spain • Italy • Japan • Point Seven • United Kingdom, Australia • United States of America • Private Foundations • Private Sector • Implementing Voting Block: • Eastern Europe • Eastern Mediterranean • Eastern and Southern Africa • Latin America and the Caribbean • South East Asia • Western and Central Africa • Western Pacific • Developed Country NGO • Developing Country NGO • NGO rep of communities living with the diseases 10 10 Non-voting Board Members • World Health Organization • World Bank • UNAIDS • Global Fund • Partners (RBM, Stop TB, UNITAID) • Board Designated Non-Voting Swiss Member

Governance at the country levelThe Country Coordinating Mechanism Why a (new) mechanism? • Kofi Annan 2000: Need new mechanism because no other funding model existed that: • Could move resources fast and efficiently (i.e. NOT UN, not WB) • Was unencumbered by excessive politics (i.e. bilateral efforts) • Integrated both public and private efforts (i.e. donors either funded NGOs directly or government directly, but couldn’t seem to bring the two together)

Governance at the country levelThe CCM: Roles and Responsibilities • Coordinate the development and submission of national proposals • Nominate the Principal Recipient • Oversee implementation of approved grants including assessment of Principal Recipient’s performance • Approve any reprogramming and submit requests for continuation of funding • Ensure linkages and consistency between Global Fund grants and other national health and development programs

Governance at the country levelThe CCM: Eligibility Criteria • Transparent selection process for non-government sector • Membership of affected communities • Transparent proposal solicitation and review • Transparent process for PR nomination • Broad stakeholder input in proposal and oversight plan • Conflict of interest policy

Governance at the country levelThe CCM: Composition – Global Perspective Composition by Sector Strong recommendation that CCMs have 40%representation of non-governmental bodies.

Governance at the country levelThe CCM: Leadership by sector Chair Distribution Vice Chair Distribution

Grant ImplementationThe Principle Recipient = Lead Implementer • Signs a grant agreement with the Global Fund • Is legallyresponsible for the implementation of the approvedproposal • Receivesdisbursementfrom the Global Fund’s Trustee • Is responsible for disbursedfunds – includingfundingdisbursed to/throughSub-Recipients • Reports on results to the Global Fund (through Local Fund Agent) • Reports on progress to the CCM

Requirements and Assessment and Scrutiny of PRs 1) Capacity Description in the proposal 2) PR Assessment (after proposal approval) • Is done by the Local Fund Agent (LFA) • Looks into the following areas: • Financial Management and Systems • Program Management • Sub-recipient Management • Pharmaceutical and Health Product Management and • Monitoring and Evaluation. 3) Conditions Precedent and management actions 4) Progress against agreed programmatic targets and conditions precedents decides upon disbursement

Multiple ImplementerDual-Track Financing (DTF) Recommendation that each proposal includes a government Principal Recipient (PR) and a non government Principal Recipient. If a proposal does not include both government and non-government PRs, it should contain an explanation of the reason Globally approximately 35% of GF resources are implemented by PRs from the non-government sector - Round 8: 48% of proposals with DTF - Round 9: 41% of proposals with DTF - Round 10: 32% of proposals with DTF  Engagement of local civil society PRs is increasing across all the regions

Performance ExperiencePrincipal Recipient Rating by Sector Civil Society PRs show very good results!

Thank you very much. Especially for questions and comments.

Enhanced Direct Access – The approach of the Global Fund.