Under the revised Eligibility Policy adopted by the Board, the core provisions remain largely intact. Most of the changes are on the periphery. The revised policy was adopted by the Board at its recent meeting in Skopje, Macedonia. The Board was acting on the recommendations of its Strategy Committee.
An Equitable Access Initiative report presents alternatives to the use of income level classification in decisions on eligibility and resource prioritization
From the perspective of the Global Fund, the main takeaway from the final report of the Equitable Access Initiative (EAI) is that decisions on eligibility and prioritization of resources should be based on more than just income level and disease burden. The EAI recommends that a multi-criteria framework be used instead.
Last June, when the Strategy Committee approved the qualitative adjustment process for 2017-2019 allocations (see GFO article), it also approved the parameters that are being used to make the adjustments in Stage 1 (epidemiological considerations) and Stage 2 (holistic adjustment – primarily absorption and impact).
At first glance, it may appear that the qualitative adjustment process for the 2017-2019 allocations is simpler than the process used for the 2014-2016 allocations. But, in the final analysis, it is probably every bit as complicated.
The Global Fund should align its catalytic investments with global targets for malaria elimination and eradication
In 2015, the World Health Organization (WHO) reported that among the 106 countries with malaria transmission in 2000, more than half had achieved at least a 75% reduction in new cases. The Global Fund’s investments have been, and continue to be, a key driver of this success. Dedicated funding for malaria has dramatically reduced the malaria burden and sustained these reductions.
The impact on upper-middle-income (UMI) countries of the decision to shift more resources to low-income countries remains the subject of heated and passionate discussions within the Global Fund ecology.
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.