Subscribe To Our Newsletter
Abonnez-vous à notre bulletin
More Information on the Global Fund’s New CCM Performance Assessments
GFO Issue 232

More Information on the Global Fund’s New CCM Performance Assessments


David Garmaise

Article Type:

Article Number: 3

ABSTRACT GFO recently reported that country coordinating mechanisms will be required to conduct self-assessments annually starting in 2014. This article provides more information on the process.

CCMs will from 2014 be required to conduct an annual self-assessment using a new Eligibility and Performance Assessment Tool to determine whether they are compliant with the Global Fund’s minimum requirements and minimum standards and to assess how well they are functioning.

As reported in GFO, technical assistance to conduct the self-assessments will be required.

The assessment tool is available (in English) on the Fund’s website here, with other-language versions of the tool available soon.

There are three components of the assessment: (1) the self-assessment, for which the CCM is responsible; (2) the stakeholder interviews, for which the TA provider is responsible; and (3) the preparation of an improvement plan (for certain CCMs), for which the CCM and the TA provider have joint responsibility.

The Global Fund Secretariat told GFO that the details for some parts of the assessment process are still under review.


CCMs are expected to conduct an annual self-assessment and send a copy to the Secretariat. The TA provider may furnish support to the CCM for the self-assessment.

The CCM Performance Assessment Tool consists of a spreadsheet in Excel format with four tabs or sections: (1) instructions; (2) performance assessment; (3) summary of results related to eligibility requirements (formerly called “minimum requirements”); and (4) summary of results related to minimum standards. The last two sections are generated automatically based on information entered in the performance assessment section.

The tool is designed to assess performance against four of the six CCM eligibility requirements – specifically, the ones that relate to the functioning of the CCM (known as Requirements 3–6). Requirements 1 and 2 concern the process of preparing proposals and will be assessed whenever the proposals are submitted.

For each of the four requirements in the tool, one or more elements and one or more minimum standards are listed. “Elements” are aspects of the minimum requirement that the Global Fund believes are inherent in the requirement. “Minimum standards” are additional requirements that the CCM will have to meet from 2015 to be able to apply for funding.

Among the elements listed for Requirement 3, which calls for CCMs to have an oversight plan are:

  • The CCM has an oversight plan which details specific activities, individual and/or constituency responsibilities, timeline and oversight budget as part of CCM budget.
  • The CCM has established a permanent oversight body with adequate set of skills and expertise to ensure periodic oversight.
  • The oversight body (OB) or CCM seeks feedback from non-members of the CCM and from people living with and/or affected by the diseases.

For each element the tool provides an indicator and “examples” of the criteria used to assess compliance. For the element above concerning feedback, the indicator reads:

“Documentary evidence of consultations including oversight visits carried out by the oversight body or CCM, at least once every 6 months, to obtain feedback from non-CCM members and people living with and/or affected by the diseases or key affected populations.”

The examples of the criteria for assessing performance against this indicator are as follows:

  • Non-compliant (NC) – No documentation on feedback requests or stakeholder consultations in the past 6 months.
  • Indeterminate compliant (IC) –  OB or CCM has actively requested feedback but held no stakeholder consultations in the past 6 months.
  • Fully compliant (FC) – OB or CCM has proactively held stakeholder consultations in the past 6 months.

Performance ratings are then converted to a numerical value – 1 for NC, 2 for IC and 3 for FC – and results entered into the results sections of the tool.

The Secretariat told GFO that the CCM may use additional or other criteria to arrive at a rating as long as they are reasonable.

For each eligibility requirement, one or more minimum standards are shown. (For a list of the minimum standards, see GFO article). As is the case with the elements, each standard has an indicator and examples of criteria for assessing performance.

Requirement 4 includes an assessment of representation on CCMs from key affected populations. The indicator explains that representation can be from organised groups or networks, or from individuals. In countries where some key populations are criminalised, the CCM may have “advocates” instead of direct representation.

One of the minimum standards attached to Requirement 4 calls for CCMs to have balanced gender representation. The examples suggest that Full Compliance includes 30% female representation. Under 30% but above 15% is Indeterminate Compliance; however, IC can also be awarded if “there is clear evidence of efforts being made by the CCM to ensure an active voice for women, through a designated female representative with expertise in gender issues who represents women’s organizations and participates regularly in meetings.”

Anything under 15% female representation, or if there is no designated representative with expertise in gender issues and no evidence of efforts to ensure an active voice for women’s issues, earns an NC rating.

Stakeholder interviews

Interviews conducted by the TA provider with CCM members and non-members comprise the second pillar in the assessment process. The interviews aim to generate additional feedback on the performance of the CCM in a less formal manner than the assessment tool. The interview process remains under review.

Certificates and improvement plans

The Global Fund Secretariat will review the self-assessments and the results of the interviews, and make a final determination of the CCM’s rating. CCMs assessed as FC will be granted “CCM Eligibility Clearance” for one year from the assessment, which will allow them to submit a concept note without having to go through a CCM eligibility screening process for Requirements 3–6.

CCMs assessed as IC or NC will be required to prepare a milestone-driven improvement plan. The Secretariat told GFO that the plan should contain actions that can be taken fairly quickly. The Global Fund Secretariat must approve each plan.

Should a CCM assessed as IC or NC submit a concept note before the improvement plan is fully implemented, the Secretariat will review what progress has been achieved. If activities have generally been implemented on time, the Secretariat will declare that the concept note can proceed. If there has not been sufficient progress, the Secretariat will indicate that the CCM does not currently meet the eligibility requirements, and will tell the CCM that the outstanding issues need to be resolved before the concept note can proceed.

According to the Fund, “non-adherence to the improvement plan will impact current and future funding.” The Secretariat told GFO that non-adherence to the plan will be interpreted as meaning that the CCM does not meet the eligibility requirements. Consequently, the CCM would not be eligible for new funding and could even see current funding reduced, delayed or suspended. The same is true for the funding that the CCM accesses to support the operations of the CCM itself. Note, however, that CCMs are not required to meet the new minimum standards attached to the eligibility requirements until 2015.

Funding the TA

Funds to pay for the TA for the self-assessments and the interviews will come from the TA providers themselves, if they already have a budget for this type of work, or from the Global Fund.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.