ABSTRACT The Global Fund board has approved 73 Round 7 grants that will cost $1,119 million over the first two years and $2,762 m. over five years - a record dollar amount. Round 7 applicants to the Fund submitted fewer, but bigger and better, proposals than applicants in all previous rounds.
Today, during the first day of its sixteenth board meeting held in Kunming, China, the Global Fund board approved 73 Round 7 grants that will cost $1,119 million over the first two years and $2,762 m. over five years. (For a complete list of approved and non-approved proposals, see below.) As a result of recent new pledges, the Fund has sufficient money to pay for all grants that were recommended by the Technical Review Panel.
Round 7 applicants to the Global Fund submitted fewer, but bigger and better, proposals than applicants in all previous rounds.
The two-year cost of approved Round 7 grants - $1,119 million over two years - is a record amount. In the six previous rounds, the two-year cost of approved grants ranged from $571 million to $968 million.
The percentage of proposals recommended for approval was also a record - 49%, up from an average of 38% over the previous six rounds. On the other hand, this still means that just over half of all proposals submitted were not approved, despite the facts that there is an enormous need for scaled-up programmes to tackle the three diseases and that there is an increased availability of funding.
The average two-year cost of the proposals recommended for approval in Round 7 was $15 million - again a record, up from an average of $10 million over the previous rounds. On the other hand, the number of eligible proposals submitted in Round 7, at 150, was the lowest ever.
In Round 7, an unusually high 62% of malaria proposals were approved, up from 32% in Round 6. The percentages of HIV/AIDS and TB proposals approved were 41% and 46%, respectively. The success rates by region ranged from 36% in Eastern Europe to 59% in the Middle East, ending the supremacy of the Western Pacific region in the three previous Rounds.
The Board's decisions as to which proposals to approve was, as always, entirely based on the advice it received from the Technical Review Panel (TRP), an independent and non-political body of 34 experts from around the world who serve in their personal capacities. No board members or Secretariat employees are members of the TRP.
The following tables summarize Round 7 results.
Round |
Eligible proposals submitted |
Of which, approved by Board |
Average cost of approved proposals |
||||
Number |
Cost * |
Number(and % of total) |
Cost *(and % of total) |
||||
Round 1 |
204 | $1,500 m. | 58 | (28%) | $571 m. | (38%) | $10 m. |
Round 2 |
229 | $2,137 m. | 98 | (43%) | $860 m. | (40%) | $9 m. |
Round 3 |
180 | $1,853 m. | 71 | (39%) | $620 m. | (33%) | $9 m. |
Round 4 |
173 | $2,512 m. | 69 | (40%) | $968 m. | (39%) | $14 m. |
Round 5 |
202 | $3,298 m. | 63 | (31%) | $726 m. | (22%) | $12 m. |
Round 6 |
196 | $2,519 m. | 85 | (43%) | $847 m. | (34%) | $10 m. |
Round 7 |
150 | $2,397 m. | 73 | (49%) | $1,119 m. | (47%) | $15 m. |
* "Cost" means the upper ceiling for the budget for Years 1 to 2 (i.e. for Phase 1). Cost does not include proposals approved in Round 7 under the new "Rolling Continuation Channel" option.
No. of eligible proposals submitted,number approved, and% of submitted proposals approved |
Budget for Years 1-2 of approved proposals,and % split between disease components |
||||||||||||||
Round 5 |
Round 6 |
Round 7 |
Round 5 |
Round 6 |
Round 7 |
||||||||||
HIV/AIDS |
67 | 25 |
37% |
82 | 32 |
39% |
64 |
26 |
41% |
$288 m. |
40% |
$453 m. |
54% |
$537 m. |
48% |
Malaria |
57 | 13 |
23% |
59 | 19 |
32% |
45 |
28 |
62% |
$198 m. |
27% |
$203 m. |
24% |
$471 m. |
42% |
TB |
48 | 22 |
46% |
55 | 34 |
62% |
41 |
19 |
46% |
$197 m. |
27% |
$190 m. |
22% |
$111 m. |
10% |
Other |
30 | 3 |
10% |
n/a |
n/a |
$43 m. |
6% |
n/a |
n/a |
||||||
TOTAL |
202 | 63 |
31% |
196 | 85 | 43% |
150 |
73 |
49% |
$726 m. |
100% |
$847 m. |
100% |
$1,119 m. |
100% |
No. of eligible proposals submitted,number approved, and% of submitted proposals approved |
Budget for Years 1-2 of approved proposals,and % split between regions |
||||||||||||||
Round 5 |
Round 6 |
Round 7 |
Round 5 |
Round 6 |
Round 7 |
||||||||||
Africa |
105 | 32 | 30% | 93 | 32 | 34% | 63 |
32 |
51% |
$484 m. |
67% | $381m. |
45% | $735 m. |
66% |
Southeast Asia |
19 | 3 | 16% | 21 | 11 | 52% | 19 |
8 |
42% |
$33 m. |
5% | $165m. |
19% | $81 m. |
7% |
Western Pacific |
17 | 10 | 59% | 13 | 10 | 77% | 15 |
8 |
53% |
$91 m. |
13% | $72m. |
9% | $70 m. |
6% |
Middle East |
27 | 4 | 15% | 25 | 11 | 44% | 17 |
10 |
59% |
$28 m. |
4% | $62m. |
7% | $140 m. |
13% |
Eastern Europe |
21 | 9 | 43% | 27 | 17 | 63% | 14 |
5 |
36% |
$26 m. |
4% | $119m. |
14% | $38 m. |
3% |
Latin America and Caribbean |
13 | 5 | 38% | 17 | 4 | 24% | 22 |
10 |
45% |
$64 m. |
9% | $48m. |
6% | $54 m. |
5% |
TOTAL |
202 | 63 | 31% | 196 | 85 | 43% | 150 |
73 |
49% |
$726 m. |
100% |
$847 m. |
100% |
$1,119 m. |
100% |
Table 4: Outcome of Secretariat Screening Panel Review of Eligibility, by Round
Type of Applicant |
Round 6 |
Round 7 |
||||
Number of Applicants |
Of which: |
Number of Applicants |
Of which: |
|||
Eligible |
Not eligible |
Eligible |
Not eligible |
|||
| CCM | 96 | 93 | 3 | 80 | 77 | 3 |
| Sub-CCM | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Regional Organization | 10 | 9 | 1 | 5 | 5 | 0 |
| Regional Coordinating Mechanism | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Non-CCM | 36 | 4 | 32 | 21 | 3 | 18 |
Total |
144 |
108 (75%) |
36 (25%) |
110 |
88 (80%) |
22 (12%) |
Other highlights of Round 7 include the following:
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!