Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Subscribe To Our Newsletter
<i>GFO</i> Report on New Eligibility Criteria
GFO Issue 149

GFO Report on New Eligibility Criteria

Author:

Aidspan

Article Type:
ERRATUM

Article Number: 7

ABSTRACT GFO corrects an error that appeared in an article in GFO 146 on the new eligibility criteria for Global Fund proposals adopted by the Board.

In GFO 146, we reported on the new eligibility criteria for Global Fund proposals adopted by the Board. One of the statements in the article was in error.

One of the new criteria requires that proposals from upper middle income countries for the general pool of funding focus 100% on key populations and/or “highest impact interventions.” The article provided two examples of highest impact interventions, as follows:

(a) interventions that address emerging threats to the disease; and (b) interventions that are not adequately funded at present. However, the latter is not an example, but rather a prerequisite.

The full definition of what the Global Fund means by “highest impact interventions” is as follows:

“Evidence-based interventions that:

1. address emerging threats to the broader disease response; and/or

2. lift barriers to the broader disease response and/or create conditions for improved service delivery; and/or

3. enable roll-out of new technologies that represent global best practice; and

4. are not funded adequately.”

Thus, to be considered “highest impact,” the interventions must meet at least one of the first three criteria and must not be funded adequately.

We regret any confusion that may have been caused by this error.

Tags :

Leave a reply

  • Anonymous comments (0)
  • Facebook Comments

Your email address will not be published.

Aidspan

Categories*

Loading
Aidspan

Categories*

Loading