Communities and NGO Delegations Seek More Information on Funding Allocations for the Transition Phase of the NFM
David GarmaiseArticle Type:
Article Number: 4
ABSTRACT The Communities and NGO delegations on the Global Fund Board have written to Executive Director Mark Dybul seeking additional information regarding funding allocations for the transition phase for both the indicative and incentive streams.
The Communities and NGO delegations on the Global Fund Board have written to Executive Director Mark Dybul seeking clarification and additional information on how funding was allocated to early and interim applicants in the transition phase of the new funding model (NFM).
The delegations requested information on how the funding allocations were made for both the indicative and incentive funding streams. The delegations said that they had requested this information several times but that they had not received it and so are “unable to communicate to our constituencies how the Global Fund’s criteria and principles have been weighted and translated into concrete funding amounts.”
The delegations said that there is confusion concerning how the funds allocated during the transition phase relate to the funds that will be allocated for 2014–2016 under the full rollout of the NFM. The delegations said that they have received conflicting information regarding whether funding for interim applicants will be deducted from their 2014–2016 envelopes.
The delegations asked for information on the composite index of disease burden and income level used to calculate allocations for applicants in the transition phase; and on the how qualitative factors – such as minimum required level of funding, performance and willingness to pay – were used to help determine the final allocations. In addition, the delegations asked for a list of countries invited to apply during the transition phase, showing both (a) their initial allocation based solely on disease burden and income level; and (b) their final recommended allocation.
The delegations asked for more detailed information in several other areas, including how the Secretariat decided which countries would not be able to achieve rapid impact; and how the Secretariat identified which interim applicants would be told not to use their funds for scale-up.
In their letter to Dr Dybul, the delegations also asked for more information on the assumptions the Global Fund used to develop the needs assessment for 2014–2015. The needs assessment was made public at the time of the pre-replenishment meeting in Brussels on 9–10 April (see GFO article).
A copy of the letter from the Communities and NGO delegations is available on our website here.