Since its inception, the Global Fund has played an increasingly significant role in providing funding for TB control programs in Fund- eligible countries. By 2012, this contribution made up 80% of all international spending on TB.
David Garmaise opens his commentary with an accurate observation: He had a misperception. But he arrives at a conclusion that is wrong. The consequences of the new funding model were not, in fact, unanticipated.
Georgia's National Center for Disease Control and Public Health (NCDC) has officially assumed responsibility as principal recipient of Global Fund resources, signing an agreement with the Fund in early May to extend grant GEO-H-GPIC.
In late February, members of Côte d'Ivoire's country coordinating mechanism (CCM) met with some 60 representatives of government, non-governmental organizations and civil society for a four-day workshop on how best to implement the Global Fund's new funding model in their country.
A Georgia-based NGO has launched an online petition it hopes will attract regional support for a greater push by governments to fill the anticipated vacuum that will be left once the Global Fund no longer commits significant financial support to a majority of EECA countries.
Until recently, the Global Fund was providing erroneous data for grant agreement amounts and related fields on the grant pages of its website and in the grant data spreadsheets it made available via its website. This problem had apparently persisted for several years. This is the conclusion Aidspan has drawn from an analysis of the Global Fund’s grant data.
The Foreign Minister of France, Laurent Fabius, has told civil society representatives that France will not reduce its future contributions to the Global Fund. Mr Fabius met with representatives of AIDES, Coalition Plus, Sidaction and Act-Up Paris on 30 April.
“If we don’t seize this moment, we will be dealing with these diseases for generations,” Global Fund Executive Director Mark Dybul told his audience at the Preparatory Meeting of the Global Fund Fourth Replenishment.
As of 31 December of 2012, donors had pledged $10.4 billion for the 2011–2013 replenishment period. This is a 13% increase over the $9.2 billion pledged at the actual replenishment conference in October 2010.
The difference comes primarily from pledges made following the New York conference. A group of donors, including Belgium, Netherlands, Saudi Arabia and Sweden, announced their pledges after the conference.
From now on, annual disbursement decisions and semi-annual reporting will be adopted for all Global Fund grants. The only exception will be for grants whose risk profile requires shorter disbursement decisions or more frequent reporting.
These are part of the changes introduced in February 2013 as part of the Global Fund’s Better Grants for Improved Impact Project.