Global Fund Launches Round 9, But With No Money to Pay For It
As planned, the Global Fund launched Round 9 on October 1, just seven months after the launch of Round 8. However, in marked contrast to when Round 8 was launched, the Fund currently does not have any money to pay for Round 9 grants.
This shortage of funds arises because the total two-year cost of Round 8 proposals that the Technical Review Panel (TRP) has recommended for Board approval is $3.15 billion, nearly three times the cost of any previous round. If, at its November meeting, the Board approves all of the TRP-recommended Round 8 proposals, there will be no money left to pay for Round 9 grants until donors pledge further money to the Fund.
Applicants must submit their Round 9 proposals by 21 January 2009, and the Board will decide which of those proposals to approve at its meeting on 7-8 May. If, by that time, the Fund has not received sufficient new pledges to pay for all the Round 9 proposals that are recommended by the TRP, the Board will approve proposals as and when the money become available. (See explanation at www.theglobalfund.org/en/rounds/9/dates.)
The Round 9 proposal form and various supporting documents are available in six languages at www.theglobalfund.org/en/rounds/9.
All Round 9 proposals submitted by 21 January will be reviewed by the Global Fund Secretariat to ensure that they meet the Fund's eligibility criteria. Those that do meet the criteria will then be sent to the TRP for review. When the TRP members review the proposals, they will do so in their personal capacities – they must not share the information with or accept any instructions from their employers or their national governments.
In deciding whether to recommend each proposal for approval, the TRP will take into consideration only technical factors, such as whether the project described in the proposal is technically sound, whether it is one that the specified organization(s) are capable of implementing, and whether it represents good use of the money. The TRP is required to ignore the question of whether it believes the Global Fund has enough money to pay for the proposals that it is recommending.
The Round 9 proposal form and its accompanying instructions are virtually identical to what was used in Round 8. Those who are interested may wish to refer to a “Memo by Aidspan regarding changes made by the Global Fund to its proposal documentation between Round 8 and Round 9,” accessible at www.aidspan.org/documents/other/round9-changes.doc.
The Fund has published an FAQ document at www.theglobalfund.org/en/rounds/9/round8 which provides detailed information for applicants that are re-submitting in Round 9 a proposal that was not approved (or only part of which was approved) in Round 8. The key points from this FAQ are explained in the Aidspan memo mentioned in the previous paragraph.
In light of the fact that the Round 9 application form and procedures have hardly changed since Round 8, Aidspan has not updated “The Aidspan Guide to Round 8 Applications to the Global Fund – Volume 1: Getting a Head Start” and “The Aidspan Guide to Round 8 Applications to the Global Fund – Volume 2: The Applications Process and the Proposal Form”. These are both accessible at www.aidspan.org/guides in English, French and Spanish, and both should be useful to Round 9 applicants.