ROUND 9 APPROVED GRANTS WILL EXCEED TWO BILLION DOLLARS

Author:

Bernard Rivers

Article Type:

Article Number: 3

ABSTRACT The TRP has recommended that the Global Fund Board approve Round 9 grants that, over their first two years, will cost $2.21 billion dollars. This makes Round 9 the second largest round ever of Global Fund grants.

After conducting its detailed review of Round 9 proposals, the Global Fund’s Technical Review Panel (TRP) has recommended that the Global Fund Board approve grants that, over their first two years, will cost $2.21 billion dollars. This makes Round 9 the second largest round ever of Global Fund grants.

GFO has no information on which specific proposals the TRP has recommended for Board approval. But Board members have been informed by the Secretariat of some overall data. Highlights from what Board members were told, and from GFO’s analysis of that information and of comparisons with earlier rounds, are as follows:

• Ninety-six Round 9 proposals have been recommended for approval, with a total two-year cost of $2.21 billion (at current exchange rates), down from $3.06 billion in Round 8, the largest Round, but well up from $1.12 billion in Round 7, the previous second largest.
• The average Round 9 proposal recommended for approval has a two-year cost of $23 million, down from $33 million in Round 8, but again well up from Round 7, the previous second highest.
• The number of proposals recommended for approved in Round 9 (96) is almost identical to that in Round 8 (94). The main difference between Rounds 9 and 8 lies in the average proposal size.
• Fifty-one percent of proposals considered by the TRP in Round 9 have been recommended for approval, slightly down from 54% in Round 8, the Round with the highest percentage.
• Proposals for TB were the most successful in Round 9, at 60%, compared with 55% for malaria and only 41% for HIV. But the recommended malaria proposals were the largest, averaging $35 million, compared with $25 million for HIV and $16 million for TB.
• The TRP completed its review of proposals earlier this month. Individual applicants should be informed shortly, if they have not already been, of what the TRP has recommended regarding their specific proposals. Then on 9-11 November the Board will make a final decision regarding each proposal.
• Further details regarding some of these points are provided in the following two tables.

Notes:

• Proposals submitted by applicants to the Global Fund are first checked for eligibility. A few are “screened out”; the remainder are then forwarded to the TRP for consideration.
• Proposals listed do not include those submitted under the First Learning Wave of National Strategy Applications; nor do they include those under the “Rolling Continuation Channel” option.
• “HSS” represents the Health Systems Strengthening parts that were attached to HIV, malaria or TB proposal components.
• “Cost” means the upper ceiling for the budget for Years 1 and 2 (i.e. for Phase 1).
• n/a = not available.
• An article in GFO Issue 105, entitled “Demand for Round 9 Is Significant,” inadvertently inverted data for TB and malaria proposals, based on an error in a Secretariat communication to the board. The error is corrected in the above table.

Note: Approved proposals do not include those initially rejected but eventually approved after appeal.