• The TRP reviewed 150 proposals, of which 78 were for HIV/AIDS, 48 for TB, and 24 for malaria.
• The average Round 10 approved proposal has a two-year cost of $22 million, down from $26 million in Round 9 and $33 million in Round 8, but still double the $11 million average cost of the prior seven rounds.
• Fifty-three percent of eligible proposals submitted in Round 10 were approved, about the same as in Rounds 8 and 9. Malaria proposals were by far the most successful in Round 10, with 79% approved (as against 54% for TB proposals and 44% for HIV/AIDS). Over the last three rounds, malaria and TB proposal success rates have always been above 50%, but HIV/AIDS proposal success rates have always been below 50%.
• However, HIV/AIDS had more proposals approved (34) than either TB (26) or malaria (19). In dollar terms, approved HIV/AIDS proposals accounted for 47% of the total cost, with malaria at 34% and TB at 20%.
• From Round 8 to Round 9 to Round 10, the percentage of eligible proposals from Africa that was approved steadily fell from 58% to 54% to 45%. In the Middle East and Northern Africa region, the percentage approved dipped and then rebounded dramatically, from 57% to 28% to 64%. In Latin America and the Caribbean, the percentage approved did the opposite, going from 34% to 57% to 38%. Easily the best-performing region each time was East Asia and the Pacific, with approval rates of 75%, 65% and 78% in Rounds 8, 9 and 10, respectively.
• Fifty-six percent of Round 10 proposals from non-Francophone countries were approved, as against only 48% of proposals from Francophone countries. These rates were almost identical to those that applied in Round 9.
• Fifty-five percent of the total two-year cost of approved Round 10 proposals was for proposals from low-income countries, down from 70% in Round 9. The success rate of Round 10 proposals from low-income countries was 52%, about five percent less than the success rate of proposals from lower-middle and upper-middle income countries.
• Twenty-five of the 78 HIV proposals requested funding from the dedicated funding stream for most-at-risk-populations (MARPs), which was newly created for Round 10. The total two-year funding request under this stream was $99 million. The TRP recommended 12 of these proposals, with a two-year cost of $47 million. Two of the successful MARPs proposals were from Malaysia and Uruguay; this will be the first time that these countries will receive money from the Global Fund.
• Of the 150 eligible proposals, 52 (35%) planned to implement dual-track financing, with principal recipients from both the governmental and non-governmental sectors.

Table 1: Global Fund proposals, submitted and approved, by Round

Table 2: Number of proposals submitted and approved, by disease, Rounds 8-10

Table 3: Costs of approved proposals, by disease, Rounds 8-10

Table 4: Regional breakout, Rounds 9 and 10

Table 5: Francophone/Non-Francophone breakout, Rounds 9 and 10

Table 6: Breakout by national income level, Rounds 9 and 10

• Each member of each CCM that applied in Round 10 will shortly be sent formal notification of the Board's decision, together with a TRP Review Form in which the TRP will provide detailed explanations for the decision, together with a list of any major and minor weaknesses that the TRP found in the proposal. In the case of Category 1, 2 and 2B proposals, weaknesses will include issues that must be addressed during the clarification process. In the case of Category 3 proposals, weaknesses will include issues that would have to be addressed in any re-submission in a future round.
• In Round 10, four approved proposals had five-year requested amounts in excess of $250 million, up from two in Round 9 and down from seven in Round 8. The four proposals, all for HIV, were from Kenya ($345 m.), Ukraine ($306 m.), South Africa ($303 m.) and Zambia $259 m.).
• Among non-approved Round 10 proposals, Ghana had a five-year request amounting to $1.4 billion for an HIV proposal with a cross-cutting health systems strengthening (HSS) request attached (it was rated Category 4 by the TRP). Four other countries had five-year requested amounts in excess of $250 million: Democratic Republic of Congo, Malawi, Nigeria and Zimbabwe, all for HIV proposals.)
• None of the three eligible proposals submitted by regional coordinating mechanisms (RCMs) were approved. Of the 12 proposals submitted by regional organisations, five were approved.
• There were two eligible proposals from Non-CCMs. Both were from one applicant in Somalia and both were approved. One was for TB, and the other was for malaria, with a cross-cutting HSS component attached. Six Non-CCM applicants submitted proposals, but five were deemed ineligible.
• Of the 28 cross-cutting HSS requests that were attached to eligible proposals, 11 were approved, with a two-year cost of $128 million. This is down considerably from Round 9 (17 proposals approved, with a two-year cost of $363 million).
• Of the 150 proposals reviewed by the TRP, 12 were consolidated proposals, of which eight were approved for funding.
• Of the 150 proposals reviewed by the TRP, 64 were re-submissions of proposals that were unsuccessful in Round 9. Of these, the success rate for disease proposals was 64% and for cross-cutting HSS requests was 55%. Thus, a significant percentage of re-submissions still did not succeed this second time.
• In five of the six regions that submitted MARPs proposals in Round 10, the average two-year cost of all approved HIV proposals in these regions was down from Round 9 – down significantly in some regions (e.g., Latin America and the Caribbean, from $14 million to $4 million; East Asia and Pacific, from $29 million to $14 million; and Middle East and Northern Africa, from $27 million to $10 million). Round 10 applicants were allowed to submit a regular HIV proposal or a MARPs proposal, but not both. Given that the MARPs proposals were each capped at $5 million for the first two years, it is reasonable to conclude that the use of MARPs proposals has lowered the average cost of HIV proposals in many regions.
• Interventions to strengthen community systems (CSS) were included in 65 of the 150 eligible disease proposals (43%) and in six of the 28 cross-cutting HSS requests (21%). (The Board approved funding 27 of the 65 disease proposals, and one of the six HSS requests.)

Table 7: Budget breakdown, Rounds 8, 9 and 10