Publisher: Malaria Journal (2016) 15:118 DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1171-3
The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria (GFATM) has been the largest financial supporter of malaria since 2002. In 2011, the GFATM transitioned to a new funding model (NFM), which prioritizes grants to high burden, lower income countries. This shift raises concerns that some low endemic countries, dependent on GFATM financing to achieve their malaria elimination goals, would receive less funding under the NFM. This study aims to understand the projected increase or decrease in national and regional funding from the GFATM’s NFM to the 34 malaria-eliminating countries.
Many malaria-eliminating countries have projected national declines in funding from the GFATM under the NFM. While regional grants enhance funding for eliminating countries, they may not be able to fill country-level funding gaps for local commodities and implementat...
This report addresses the how of next generation financing models—that is, the concrete steps needed to change the basis of payment from expenses to something else: outputs, outcomes, or impact.
Part I offers a conceptual framework that explains why traditional grantmaking often gets the incentives wrong, why that matters, and how next generation financing models might offer a way for the Global Fund and other health funders to increase the value for money of their investments. It also describes the growing use of incentives at the Global Fund and elsewhere, including the current incentives embedded within Global Fund grants.
Part II discusses contexts where a move to next generation grant models could drive faster impact or other benefits for the Global Fund and describes the technical elements and design choices required to bring them to life.
In advance to the 34th meeting of the Global Fund Board, on behalf of organizations representing civil society including key affected populations from different Eastern Europe and Central Asia (EECA) countries and their partner organizations from other regions, this letter signed by 33 international, regional and national organizations focuses on such high priority issues as allocation methodology and sustainability and transition.
This report shares the results of a survey, carried out by AMSHeR in 13 African countries in February 2015, on inclusion of people living with HIV (PLHIV), men-having-sex-with men (MSM), and sex workers in the first year for the Global Fund’s New Funding Model.
The results show that while representatives of these groups participated in Global Fund discussion in their countries, in most cases, critical health needs as well as human rights challenges were not fully reflected in specific activities or budgets in the finished Global Fund requests.
Various consortia around the world were engaged in developing regional concept notes through 2014 into 2015 for submission in January 2015 to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (Global Fund). This paper synthesizes lessons from the first set of regional program proposals since the full launch of the funding model in 2014.
Available in English , French , Russian and Spanish
Publisher: Mondes en Développement , Vol.43-2015/2-n°170
This paper proposes a sociopolitical analysis of the Country Coordinating Mechanism (CCM) of the Global Fund against AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (GFATM). It is based on the history of the Global Fund established in 2002 and the break which represents the emergence of the “New Funding Model” proposed by the Global Fund since 2014.
From a diachronic approach (the historicity of the institutional answer to the AIDS in Africa from the intervention of the Global Fund) and synchronic (the analysis of the elaboration of the Concept Notes from countries to obtain the financing of the Global Fund), this paper aims to show the global institutional matrix within which the public action is making in Africa.