The following sections look into the funding request development, technical review, and grant-making.
Funding Requests Development
Funding Request Development begins once the country receives the allocation letter from The Global Fund. Global Fund Country Teams will need to register in advance of which Window Scheme do they intend to submit their Funding Request. For the 2020-2022 Funding Cycle, three Review Windows have been designated: Window 1 (23 March 2020), Window 2 (25 May 2020), and Window 3 (31 August 2020). Countries can submit different Fund Requests in different Window periods.
“Transition Readiness”
Applicants are now required to submit Transition Preparedness Assessments along with all their Funding Requests if available. Countries who are applying under the Tailored for Transition Approach will also need to submit a Transition Workplan along with the Transition Preparedness Assessments.
“Prioritized Above Allocation Request (PAAR)”
The Prioritized Above Allocation Request (PAAR) are prioritized and costed interventions are requests that are approved under the Register of Unfunded Quality Demand. For the 2020-2022 Cycle, pre-approved interventions must be submitted with the Funding Request for all Application Approaches and not as a separate funding request. PAAR requests from the previous 2017-2019 Funding Cycle, however, will not be carried over to this new Funding Cycle.
“Resilient and Sustainable Systems for Health (RSSH)”
For this Cycle, RSSH interventions need to be applied through cross-cutting approaches in one application, either within a disease funding request for a separate RSSH funding request but covering all eligible diseases response for funding. Should an RSSH request cover more than one disease, an RSSH Funding Request needs to be submitted as the first funding request to The Global Fund. On the other hand, if a standalone request is preferred, a program split revision should be requested from The Global Fund.
Under RSSH, special attention will be paid to opportunities for integration within health systems, as well as ways to coordinate and align interventions across eligible diseases and as part of the broader health response.
“CCM eligibility”
Six eligibility requirements for CCM have remained the same for this Funding Cycle. Two additional minimum standard indicators have also been added, as well as the applicability of the Conflict of Interest Policy of the respective CCM throughout the implementation of the grants. It is important that CCM are eligible before and that their eligibility will be reviewed as part of the TRP review. Countries are expected to perform a ‘light Eligibility and Performance Assessment’ (self-assessment) as part of their review.
Countries that are part of the ‘CCM Evolution Strategic Initiative’ will not be assessed as part of their Funding Request reviews.
“Human Rights, Gender, and Key Populations”
A critical requirement of the Funding Requests for this Cycle is the inclusion of strategic investments to program interventions addressing gender-related issues, human rights barriers to healthcare access, and engagement of key populations and affected communities. Funding requests are encouraged to include, as appropriate, programs that reduce human rights and gender-related barriers, reduce inequities, and reduce vulnerabilities in access to services regardless of income levels. Funding Requests are also expected to comply with five minimum human rights standards as part of the grant agreements. These are:
- grant non-discriminatory access to services for all, including people in detention;
- employ only scientifically-sound and approved medicines or medical practices;
- not employ methods that constitute torture or cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment;
- respect and protect informed consent, confidentiality and the right to privacy concerning medical testing, treatment or health services rendered, and;
- avoid medical detention and involuntary isolation, which, consistent with WHO guidance, are to be used only as a last resort.
A Global Fund Human Rights Complaints Mechanism have also been institutionalized should any of these are violated during the grant implementation process.
“Sustainability, Transition, and Co-financing”
The Global Fund Strategy places a strong emphasis on the need to support sustainable national disease responses and resilient and sustainable systems for health. To do this, it emphasizes the need to:
- support countries to successfully prepare for transition away from external financing and towards full domestic financing of the disease response;
- use existing resources more efficiently; and
- strengthen domestic resource mobilization.
A Global Fund Guidance Note has been developed to support countries in preparing their Transition Workplans and Assessments as part of their Funding Requests.
“Matching Funds”
Matching Funds belong to a list of Catalytic Investments of The Global Fund to support and ensure that the country grants respond through strategic, prioritized, and multi-faceted approaches. These are grants that are designed to inspire ambitious programming approaches driven by evidence, and to maximize impact in specific strategic priority areas. Eligible countries will be informed in their allocation letters if they have been designated with any Matching Fund, as well as specific conditions required to access these funds.
“Multicountry Grants”
Strategic multicountry or regionally focused programs will be funded through a limited amount of catalytic investment funds. Countries preparing their country grants will either be approached or will be informed about any upcoming multicountry grants in order to align and complement any planned interventions between these grants.
Community guide:
- Know which approach the disease component will follow. Meaningful participation of key and vulnerable populations is required in funding request development, regardless of the approach.
- Under the current Funding Model, civil society organisations, community groups and key population networks may be part of the funding request technical writing team, or be designated as an implementer of the program. These create more spaces to push for or implement CRG-related interventions. Consider these opportunities in developing your advocacy strategy.
- The country response does not only refer to the Global Fund-supported programmes, but also to programmes financed by the country and are leveraged as the country’s counterpart for Global Fund support. Check out how the funding request responds to the co-financing requirement, and whether it is inclusive of key populations and addresses barriers related to human rights and gender equality.
- Funding requests need to be approved by the entire CCM. It is important to engage all stakeholders in the CCM to get their support. In contexts where funding requests are integrated (for example, HIV-TB), look into the possibility of CRG priorities that could benefit more than one or all disease responses, or the over-all health systems.
- Reach out to your country team and get their support to ensure that CRG priorities are included in the funding request. They can provide guidance to the CCM to ensure that the funding requests are compliant with requirements on key populations, human rights, and gender equality. Consulting with in-country community and civil society groups is part of the roles of country teams; communities and civil society would benefit from knowing and building productive relationships with the Country Team.
- The inclusion of community systems strengthening interventions in the funding request is critical to improve the capacity of communities in taking part in the disease response. CRG priorities have to be part of the funding request, and not just identified as a priority unfunded demand.
- In the implementation design, the roles of community groups and KP networks have to explicitly laid down. If they are identified as implementers, their capacity building and their work should be provided with the appropriate level of funding.
Technical Review Panel
Once approved by the CCM and submitted to the Global Fund, a panel of technical experts (TRP) assesses the funding request based on technical merit, quality, alignment with technical guidance as well as additional factors such as: if it is responsive to country priorities and to critical gaps, if the strategies are evidence-based and appropriate to specific populations; if the grant implementation, as designed, is feasible; if the outcomes are aligned with or complement country strategies; and if the invested resources are optimised and maximised (value-for-money).
Depending on the results of the evaluation, a funding request may be sent back to the CCM for revisions, or the TRP may recommend to proceed to grant-making. The Global Fund country team may also recommend for a Grant Approval Committee (GAC) assessment first before grant-making. The GAC will also determine and review the grant-making process of the Funding Requests before these are deemed “Implementation-Ready”.
Community Guide:
- The TRP (or GAC, if the funding request is submitted to it for initial assessment) may have questions in relation to CRG issues or the CRG priorities included in the funding request. Be ready to answer their questions.
- Prepare for the next steps of the funding process. If you are vying to include community groups as implementers, check out their organisational capacity and see if they meet the requirements for principal recipients or sub-recipients. You can access technical support to ensure that they meet these criteria.
- Monitor how the CCM responds to the TRP feedback. Make sure that CRG interventions are not de-prioritised. Regularly reach out to your country team, CCM secretariat, and CCM representatives for updates and to ensure that CRG priorities are retained. You may also reach out to APCRG and other CRG regional platforms, including the CRG unit of the Global Fund secretariat (email here), for inquiries and support.
Grant-making
At this point, the Principal Recipient identified in the funding request, the CCM, and the Global Fund Country Team (led by the Fund Portfolio Manager) will work out the details of the grant and thresh out key milestones and timelines of the grant, including the detailed budget and performance framework. For focused countries and multi-country programmes, the number of indicators and work plan tracking measures. During grant-making, they will also conduct capacity assessment for the implementing organisations and recommend actions to address gaps in the implementation design of the grant. Depending on the need of the countries, the GAC may be engaged to review the progress of the portfolios during the grant-making process.
Community guide:
- During the grant-making phase, changes to the grant design or component can still happen. Following through with your engagements is critical to guarantee that the CRG priorities and focus on key populations are retained and operationalised.
- Ensure that CRG-related capacity development is part of the assessment process for the implementers of the grant.
Engaging in Global Fund processes can be challenging for civil society organisations, community groups, and key population networks. Here are some resources and tools to help you get ready.