Subscribe To Our Newsletter
Abonnez-vous à notre bulletin
GFO Issue 309



David Garmaise

Article Type:

Article Number: 2

Large majority are for program continuation

ABSTRACT Of the 93 funding requests received in Window 1, 73 used a program continuation application, 13 a full review application, and seven a tailored review application. This information is provided by the Global Fund’s Funding Request Status Tracker.

The Secretariat has received 93 requests for funding in the first application window of the 2017-2019 funding cycle, according to the Global Fund’s Funding Request Status Tracker. Under the Global Fund’s differentiated application system, 73 requests used a program continuation application, 13 a full review application, and seven a tailored review application.

There are different types of tailored reviews. Four applicants filed a tailored-to-material-change request; two a tailored-to-national-strategy-based pilots request; and one a tailored-to-transition request. No applications were received using the fourth type of tailored review: tailored to challenging operating environments. (See GFO article for more information on the different types of request.)

See the table below for a list of components for which funding requests were received in Window 1.

The deadline for submitting funding requests for Window 1 was 20 March 2017. Deadlines have also been established for three more windows, as follows:

Window 2 – 23 May 2017
Window 3 – 28 August 2017
Window 4 – 31 January 2018

It is expected that additional windows will be added in 2018 and 2019.

Funding requests submitted in Window 1 will be reviewed by the Technical Review Panel (TRP) between 23 April and 2 May 2017. The Secretariat is expected to eventually post copies of the funding requests on its website, but only once agreements are signed for the grants emanating from the requests.

Table: Components for which funding requests were submitted in Window 1, by type of request
Full Review:
Bangladesh HIV, TB, malaria
Malawi malaria
Nigeria malaria
Philippines HIV, TB
RAI malaria
Uganda HIV, TB, malaria
Zimbabwe TB/HIV, malaria
Program Continuation:
Afghanistan HIV, malaria
Azerbaijan HIV, TB
Benin HIV, TB, malaria
Burkina Faso HIV, TB, malaria
Burundi HIV, TB, malaria
Cameroon malaria
Cape Verde TB/HIV, malaria
CAR malaria
Chad malaria
Congo DR malaria
Côte d’Ivoire TB, malaria
Eritrea malaria
Gambia, TB/HIV, malaria
Guinea HIV, malaria
Guinea-Bissau TB/HIV, malaria
Guyana HIV
Haiti TB/HIV, malaria
Honduras malaria
Indonesia malaria
Iran HIV
Kyrgyzstan HIV, TB
Lesotho TB/HIV
Liberia malaria
Madagascar HIV, TB, malaria
Moldova HIV, TB
Mongolia HIV
Mozambique malaria
Multi-C. W. Pacific TB/HIV, malaria
Nicaragua HIV
Niger HIV, malaria
Pakistan malaria
PNG malaria
Paraguay HIV
Philippines malaria
Sénégal HIV, malaria
S. Leone HIV, TB, malaria, RSSH
Solomon Islands TB, malaria
Somalia malaria
Sudan TB/HIV and malaria
Suriname malaria
Swaziland malaria
Timor Leste TB
Togo TB/HIV, malaria
Uzbekistan HIV, TB
Zanzibar TB/HIV, malaria
Tailored Review:
Congo DR TB/HIV (material change)
Lao TB (material change)
Malawi TB/HIV (material change)
Mauritius HIV (material change)
Rwanda TB/HIV, malaria (NSP pilot)
Cuba HIV (transition)


Program continuation is the simplest type of funding request. It involves submitting a letter (as opposed to a full application form) and completing a short template requesting funding for an additional three years under substantially the same goals and strategic objectives – and under similar interventions – as the current grant. Use of the program continuation approach is limited to applicants that meet certain criteria, such as strong programmatic performance and absorption, a low risk profile, and no need for a material change in programming.

All program continuation requests had to be submitted in Window 1 (for grants ending up to 30 June 2018) or Window 4 (for grants ending on or after 1 July 2018).

When it reviews a program continuation request, the TRP will recommend that it proceed to the grant-making stage provided it considers that the request does not involve any material change. The TRP may recommend that certain issues be addressed during grant-making. If the TRP believes that that the request involves material change, it may recommend that the applicant develop a tailored or full funding request instead.

For tailored and full review requests, the Global Fund estimates that the process from funding request to grant signing may take, on average, nine months. When the TRP assesses these requests, the outcome will be one of the following:

  • Proceed to grant-making: The funding request is determined to be strategically focused and technically sound, although the applicant might need to provide clarifications or make adjustments; or
  • Re-submit funding request iteration: The applicant should address the comments raised by the TRP in a revised funding request to be re-submitted for a second TRP review prior to advancing to grant-making.

Other developments

The information in this section is taken from the Global Fund’s 2017-2019 Funding Cycle: Frequently Asked Questions.

If an applicant chooses to go for a grant that is less than three years’ duration, the allocation is reduced proportionately. In other words, if an applicant submits a funding request covering just two years, it will receive just two-thirds of what it was originally allocated. This is a change from the previous funding cycle. Presumably, the Global Fund wants to avoid the problems created by shortened grants in the 2014-2016 funding cycle.

All applicants are required to prepare a prioritized above-allocation request (PAAR) that can be assessed for unfunded quality demand. For full- and tailored-review applications, the PAAR must be submitted with the funding request and may be updated during grant-making or grant implementation. For program continuation applications, the PAAR may be submitted with the program continuation request, during grant-making or during grant implementation, and may also be updated during grant-making or grant implementation.

In line with the differentiated approach the Global Fund has adopted for managing grants and other aspects of the funding model, the Fund has categorized countries as “core,” “focused” or “high impact.” GFO has written about this before here. The categorization is revised every allocation period. A list of countries in each category for the 2014-2016 allocation period is available in the Operational Policy Manual. See the “Overview of the Operational Policy Manual” section near the beginning of the manual.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.