Global Fund Board to discuss ongoing piloting of country-specific performance on several Key Performance Indicators

Author:

Download PDF Responding to constituency requests, the Global Fund Secretariat began piloting reporting on some country-specific results on several Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) in early 2019. After a positive response from several constituencies to the pilot, the issue of continuing the reporting of country-specific results under specific criteria was raised during the October Strategy Committee meeting and is expected to be…

Article Type:

Article Number:

Pilot began in early 2019 in response to constituency calls for country-specific information, to better understand challenges and performance

ABSTRACT The Global Fund Board is expected to discuss the continuation of a pilot initiative reporting on country-specific results on Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). Previously, the KPIs were reported in aggregate and, when it was relevant, at the regional level, and the Secretariat did not report any country-specific results to the Board or to Committees. The change came earlier this year in response to requests from constituencies for country-specific analysis at the country and grant level to better understand challenges and performance.

Responding to constituency requests, the Global Fund Secretariat began piloting reporting on some country-specific results on several Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) in early 2019.

After a positive response from several constituencies to the pilot, the issue of continuing the reporting of country-specific results under specific criteria was raised during the October Strategy Committee meeting and is expected to be addressed at the upcoming Board meeting. The criteria considered include that the country-level data is or will be publicly sourced, is available and is relevant to understanding KPI performance.

Among the KPIs that will not be publicly reported are those involving service coverage for key populations and reducing human-rights barriers to service — a decision that has drawn criticism from some constituencies.

There are currently 12 Strategic KPIs, including several sub-indicators, which were laid out at the 35th Board Meeting in the 2017-2022 Strategic Key Performance Indicator Framework. The KPIs chart performance on a continuum from funding to program design through implementation and into impact/results.

Previously, the KPIs were reported in aggregate and, when it was relevant, at the regional level, and the Secretariat did not report any country-specific results to the Board or to Committees. That changed this year when the Secretariat began sharing Country Results Profiles with the Board, according to the report on Strategic Performance Reporting presented at the 41st Board Meeting in May 2019. That led to calls from constituencies for country-specific analysis both at the country and the grant level “to understand the variance, challenges and performance of our operations,” according to the Strategic Performance Reporting document.

In its input ahead of the Global Fund’s 42nd Board Meeting to be held later this month, the Private Sector Delegation expressed that country-specific KPIs are “helpful in framing the specific impact of Global Fund investments and key challenges to inform future interventions, as well as inform the deliberations around the next Global Fund strategy.”

According to the Strategic Performance Reporting document from May, the Global Fund Secretariat is currently making some country-specific results available on:

• Performance against impact targets (KPI 1);
• Performance against service delivery targets (KPI 2);
• Alignment of investment and need (KPI 3)
• Disaggregated results in support of the Global Fund’s Strategic Objective of building Resilient & Sustainable Systems for Health (KPI 6e);
• Absorptive capacity of funds (KPI 7b);
• Gender and age equality (KPI 8)

 

Information on KPIs 1, 2 and 8 is sourced from partner or national data. Data on KPI 7b and 6e come from grant reports. And KPI 3 details come from corporate public data.

The Strategic Performance Reporting document indicates that there will potentially be more reporting in 2020 (or later) available on some KPIs that are already covered:

• Alignment of investment and need (KPI 3)
• Disaggregated results in support of the Global Fund’s Strategic Objective of building Resilient & Sustainable Systems for Health (KPI 6e);
• Absorptive capacity of funds (KPI 7b);

 

There might also be country-specific reporting available in 2020 or later on:

• Investment efficiency (KPI 4);
• Supply chains (KPI 6b);
• Financial management (KPI 6c);
• Health management information systems coverage (KPI 6d);
• Results disaggregation
• Allocation utilization (KPI 7a);
• Domestic investments (KPI 11).

 

The information for KPIs 4, 6b, 6c, 6d and 11 is not currently publicly available, according to the Strategic Performance Reporting document. The document also notes that KPI 7a might be better discussed at a portfolio, rather than country, level.

The authors of the Strategic Performance Reporting document emphasized that this information was being released to enable a clearer understanding of Global Fund results in line with reporting from the World Health Organization and other development actors. It is also designed to increase transparency and provide the Board with a better understanding of how the Secretariat is dealing with underperformance and to contextualize KPI results and offer examples of countries driving performance.

The Strategic Performance Reporting from the end of 2018 took pains to caution that the country-specific data should not be used to identify and shame countries or to criticize constituencies or individuals at the Board or on committees. It should also not shift Board-level discussions from the strategic to the country-specific or hinder objective discussions, particularly in instances where constituencies might be tied to certain countries. They also warned against greater micromanagement at the country level.

The Secretariat has not provided specific reasons as to why it would not release country-specific reports on several KPIs, though. Those KPIs include:

• Service coverage for key populations (KPI 5);
• National Strategic Plan alignment (KPI 6f);
• Reduce human rights barriers to service (KPI 9a);
• Key populations and human rights in middle-income countries (KPI 9b);
• Key populations and human rights in transition countries (KPI 9c).

 

This has prompted the Private Sector Constituency to “request greater clarity on the rationale for why country-level data will not be shared on several key-population and human-rights KPIs,” to be discussed at the upcoming Board meeting.

The Developing Country Delegation voiced the same concern in their input and, in the interim, has requested information on the number of countries with population size estimates for at least two key populations (KPs); the number of countries with defined service packages for KPs; and how many countries within the pilot are receiving matching funds on HIV human rights-related barriers.

The Strategic Performance Reporting document from the end of 2018 said there is not data available at the country level for:

• Resource mobilization (KPIs 10a and 10b);
• Availability of affordable health technologies (KPIs 12a and 12b).

 

The mid-2019 Strategic Performance Reporting results are expected to be discussed at the Global Fund Board meeting on 14-15 November in Geneva.

Further reading:

• From GFO Issue 290, 22 June 2016, “Explanation of The Global Fund’s new strategic KPIs“
• The Global Fund’s “2017-2022 Strategic Key Performance Indicator Framework“
• “Strategic Performance Reporting — end 2018” from 41st Board Meeting.