On 7–8 November 2013, the Global Fund Board held its 30th meeting in Geneva, Switzerland. GFO was present, with observer status. The main decisions made at the meeting, in chronological order, were as follows. (For precise wording of what the Board agreed, see the decision points document that has been posted here.
The Global Fund is expecting a rush of applications in 2014 for the full roll-out of the new funding model. In his report for the Board meeting held on 7–8 November, Executive Director Mark Dybul said that in 2014 the Secretariat expects to sign grants for about half of the disease components for the entire 2014–2016 allocation period.
As of 19 September 2013, $118 million in losses had been identified by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG), of which $23.8 million (20%) had been recovered. Written commitments to repay a further $10.4 million had been obtained.
This information was contained in a Losses and Recoveries Report prepared for the Global Fund Board meeting on 7–8 November in Geneva.
The Strategy, Investment and Impact Committee (SIIC) has determined the parameters to be used for the allocations formula for 2014–2016. The SIIC approved indicators for disease burden and ability to pay; the methodology for determining Band 4 allocations; and maximum and minimum shares for apportioning indicative funding. This article provides details.
Editor’s Note: We invited several observers of the Global Fund to prepare a short commentary on what they see as the main challenges facing the Fund at this time. Here are contributions from Owen Ryan; Victoria Fan and Amanda Glassman; Jorge Saavedra; and Jason Wright.
With only six months to go before the expected full rollout of the new funding model (NFM), several aspects of the model have not yet been finalised. Decisions still have to be made on the following:
A draft of a new Corporate Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Framework 2013–2016 was presented to the Global Fund Board for review and discussion at the 29th Board meeting just concluded in Sri Lanka.
In what it describes as a “sea-change,” the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) said that it is moving away from its historical emphasis on country level grants towards “consulting engagements” focusing more on reviewing internal Secretariat processes and the work of other assurance providers.
Executive Director Mark Dybul’s first formal report to the Global Fund Board covered a lot of ground.
Gabriel Jaramillo, who was a member of the High-Level Panel and who served as the Global Fund’s General Manager from February 2012 to January 2013, has provided the Board with some reflections on his time working with the Fund.