Netherlands – Multilateral Scorecard ReviewOctober 2017 read more
Publisher: Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Het Global Fund heeft een helder mandaat en speelt een belangrijke rol in het behalen van de gezondheid gerelateerde SDG’s. De nieuwe strategie (2017-2022), waarin beleidsprioriteiten helder zijn geformuleerd, sluit hierbij aan. Bestuurs- en beheersorganen, het evaluatiesysteem, het financieel beheer en corruptiebestrijding zijn goed opgezet. Het Global Fund is een lerende en vernieuwende organisatie, wat onder andere blijkt uit het toepassen van bevindingen uit evaluaties. De organisatie is een bijzonder wereldwijd partnerschap en werkt nauw samen met multilaterale en bilaterale instellingen, overheden, NGO’s, private sector en de doelgroep.
(The Global Fund scored 3s & 4s on a scale of 1-4)
Raising the standard: the Multilateral Development Review 2016October 2017 read more
Publisher: UK Department for International Development
The Multilateral Development Review is a detailed assessment of how the multilateral system performs. It examined every agency which receives more than £1 million of annual core funding from DFID, asked how their work aligns with UK development and humanitarian objectives, and assessed the quality of their organisational performance.
Organisations including the World Bank, the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria (the Global Fund) and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance (known as Gavi), are achieving exceptional results. The successful performance of the Global Fund in this Multilateral Development Review fed directly into the UK’s decision to increase funding from £800 million to £1.1 billion for 2017-2019.
The Global Fund needs to constantly keep improving efficiency and impact and strengthening wider health partnerships. The Global Fund’s performance depends on in-country partners, particularly for strengthening health systems, so getting these relationships right is crucial. Future success requires the Global Fund to further prioritise resources for greatest impact in lower income countries with a high disease burden, transition out of funding higher income countries and take forward new approaches in fragile states. Management of programmatic risk is another important reform priority. Attention to girls and women has improved since the 2013 MAR Update and programming now needs to drive impact on the ground.
Progress in Peril? The Changing Landscape of Global Health FinancingSeptember 2017 read more
The global health landscape changed dramatically after the adoption of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in 2000. New financing mechanisms were created to channel funding from high-income governments and philanthropists towards the most solvable global health challenges, resulting in dramatically improved health outcomes around the world. That success has made a new level of ambition possible—the Sustainable Development Goals’ (SDGs) commitment to health for all—and new approaches to health finance are possible as well, including scaled-up domestic investments by middle-income countries. Our review of the new global health financing landscape suggests that at least 24 countries are likely to face significant changes in their ability to access external funding to priority health areas in the next 5 years, and that unless those changes are proactively managed and coordinated, the human toll could be dramatic. Our ability to maintain the health gains of the MDG era and expand them to all people depends on how global health stakeholders manage this wave of simultaneous transitions.
The Global Fund and PEPFAR: Complementary, Successful, and Under ThreatSeptember 2017 read more
By working closely together, the Global Fund and PEPFAR have supported nearly 20 million people to access life-sustaining antiretroviral treatment, reducing dramatically a runaway infectious killer that was destabilizing communities and imperiling economic growth. Both programs have consistently drawn strong bipartisan praise and support, even in tough budget environments. Yet today, their continued success is imperiled by potential retrenchment of U.S. political and financial support, even as experts report that controlling HIV epidemics is within reach. The administration has requested a more than $1 billion cut to these programs in its FY 2018 budget request to Congress and is also moving to scale back U.S. diplomatic leadership more generally. Budget numbers from the House and Senate look more promising, but without administration support for increases considerable risk remains.
Successes of LGBT Involvement in National HIV Decision Making Processes:Studies from Six Countries of Eastern Europe and Central AsiaJune 2017 read more
Publisher: Eurasian Coalition on Male Health
The participation of LGBT community both in services delivery and strategy development within national HIV responses demonstrated to improve the quality of projects funded by the Global Fund and national HIV/AIDS programs in general. Case studies of participation of LGBT representatives in the Global Fund supported projects, collected by ECOM, show what helps and what hinders meaningful community engagement and how coordination between community organizations and governmental officials could be developed and strengthened.
A Quarter for Prevention? Global Fund Investments in HIV Prevention Interventions in Generalized African EpidemicsJune 2017 read more
Publisher: Universal Journal of Public Health 5(5): 231-241, 2017
The Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS estimates that ending AIDS by 2030 will cost $25 billion a year. About a quarter (26%) of this amount is required for HIV prevention. The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria is a major financier of African HIV responses and a vital source of prevention investments. A search was performed for Global Fund funding requests and signed grants from a sample of African countries over the 2014-2016 funding cycle to see if the Global Fund is investing “a quarter for prevention”. Funding requests were accessed for 23 countries and signed grants were accessed for 15 countries. Some documents were not publicly available. Among the funding requests examined, an average of 16% was dedicated to HIV prevention. Wealthier countries requested more money for HIV prevention, as did countries with greater numbers of annual new infections. Of the grant agreements examined, an average of 15% of the total funding invested was dedicated to HIV prevention. For the Global Fund to achieve its HIV prevention targets in its new strategy (2017-2022) it must increase its investments in HIV prevention in Africa from current levels towards the UNAIDS benchmark of 26%.
HIV, Human Rights and Gender Equality: Technical Brief
Publisher: The Global Fund
This Global Fund technical brief supports grant applicants to include programmes to remove human rights and gender-related barriers to HIV services. It also gives advice on implementing human rights-based and gender-responsive approaches to HIV.
This document informs the development of Global Fund concept notes, national Fast-Track plans and other work to accelerate the response to HIV. It provides practical guidance to national policy-makers, HIV programme implementers, communities, civil society organizations, the United Nations and donors as they design, oversee, fund, monitor and implement efforts to Fast-Track HIV programmes.
Fast-Track and human rights: Advancing human rights in efforts to accelerate the response to HIV
This UNAIDS guidance document offers practical advice on why and how efforts to Fast-Track HIV services should be grounded in human rights principles and approaches. It includes three checklists to support and guide the design, monitoring and evaluation of HIV services in order to realize human rights and equity in the AIDS response.
The document informs the development of Global Fund concept notes, national Fast-Track plans and other work to accelerate the response to HIV. It provides practical guidance to national policy-makers, HIV programme implementers, communities, civil society organizations, the United Nations and donors as they design, oversee, fund, monitor and implement efforts to Fast-Track HIV programmes.
Performance of Australian Aid 2015-16
This Performance of Australian Aid report assesses the performance and results of the Australian aid program in 2015-16.
This includes a positive review of the multilateral aid provided to The Global Fund.
Operational and implementation research within Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria grants: a situation analysis in six countriesMarch 2017 read more
Publisher: Globalization and Health (2017 13:22)
The Global Fund provides substantial resources for malaria and TB surveys, and supports OR/IR if such support is requested and the application is well justified. We observed considerable variations from one country to another and between programmes with regards to need, demand, absorption capacity and funding for OR/IR related to malaria and TB. Important determinants for the extent of such funding are the involvement of national research coordination bodies, established research agendas and priorities, human and technical research capacity, and involvement of relevant stakeholders in concept note development. Efforts to disseminate OR/IR findings were generally weak, and the Global Fund does not maintain a central OR/IR database. When faced with a need to choose between procurement of commodities for disease control and supporting research, countries tend to seek research funding from other donors. The Global Fund is expected to issue more specific guidance on the conditions under which it supports OR/IR, and to adapt administrative procedures to facilitate research.