Transcript Round 8 Guidelines and Proposal Form Presentation

Global Fund and
Round 8 Guidelines and
Proposal Form
26 February 2008
Agenda
1. Introduction
 Key Actors and Roles in the funding process
 Global Fund principles
 What the Global Fund will support
 The Round 8 'Call for Proposals' timeline
2. CCM Overview
3. Changes from Round 7 and selected topics for Round 8
 Health systems strengthening
 Gender awareness
 Community systems strengthening
4. Planning for success
2
1.1
Key Actors and Roles
Key Actor
Primary Role
Portfolio
• Approval of documents
Committee
EACH is
key to
our
'Raise it,
spend it,
prove it'
model
• Prepare funding documents
Secretariat • Call new rounds
• Manage screening services
Technical
Partners
• Input in to policy & documents
• Support proposal development
• Develop eligible proposals
Applicants
Board
(where relevant  consistent with the 6
minimum eligibility requirements for CCMs)
• Set new policies
• Make funding decisions
There is much inter-linking between each of the key
actors at the various stages of a 'Call for Proposals'
1.2
Global Fund Key Principles
• Country driven
• Inclusive and collaborative
• Harmonized and aligned with country systems
• Performance-based
• Impact on disease morbidity and mortality
• Routine reporting to measure performance
1.3
What the Global Fund Will Support
• Continuation and scale-up of proven interventions
• Innovative evidenced based approaches to increase delivery of, and
access to prevention, treatment, care and/or support services –
especially for key affected populations historically excluded
• No 'list' of what should be included – opening up broad opportunity
• Annex 3: examples of areas of support (modified from Round 7)
NEW IN ROUND 8 
Interventions related to interactions between the three diseases,
including providing access to prevention services through integrated
health services, especially for women and adolescents through
reproductive health care
1.4 Round 8 Timeline
Launch of new Round 8: 1 March 2008
'Call for Proposals' released on Website
Submission deadline: 1 July 2008
Screening for eligibility: 6 weeks after closing
TRP review: Last week August/1st week September
Board Consideration: 18th Board Meeting
6
2.1
CCM membership – who and why
One of the many supporting reasons for a 'CCM' model 
…Proposals that come from country-level partnerships, and have
been developed through transparent mechanisms are expected
to more effectively respond to in-country needs of key population
groups
Role of the CCM 
Equates to 'custodian' of the proposal's outputs & impact, i.e:
•
It is the CCM which transparently selects the PR based on criteria
•
Invited to apply for Yrs 3-5 (Phase 2) funding
•
Also the 'invitee' for our new Rolling Continuation channel
For this reason 
Required to have – representation of each in-country sector
Do not need CCM membership to be an implementing partner
2.2. Practicalities of applying for funding
CCM must demonstrate that:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Proposal was developed through transparent call & evaluation
More than just 'CCM members' were involved
Technical partners help to 'write' – but call process is important
They will nominate a Principal Recipient and sub-recipients
For SRH - propose to CCM for inclusion as one of the
Round 8 priority areas where SRH interventions will
support improved HIV (especially) outcomes
Full list of requirements is in the 'Annex' to this presentation
Now – a short focus on a few
2.3 CCM minimum eligibility requirement 3
• CCMs are required to put in place and maintain a
transparent, documented process to solicit and review
submissions for possible integration into the proposal.
Messages to take back to the CCM
– What kind of public outreach will the CCM use?
– Will it be sufficiently broad?
– If only small number of sub-recipients are 'capable' why is this so,
and how can implementation capacity be expanded through the
Round 8 proposal interventions?
– How many submissions did the CCM receive and review and what
is their process going to be to do this transparently
2.4
CCM minimum eligibility requirement 4
• CCMs are required to put in place and maintain a transparent,
documented process to nominate the Principal Recipients
(and oversee program implementation)
Principal Recipient capacities (relevant to this meetings goals)
–
–
–
–
–
Receiving and managing funds
Accounting for funds;
Implementing and overseeing implementation;
Efficient disbursement of funds to sub-recipients
Reporting on program performance (Attachment A to the Proposal Form);
and
– Phase 2 request
Messages to take back to the CCM:
PR selection to be criteria-based; and reasonably competitive
2.5 CCM minimum eligibility requirement 5
• CCMs are required to put in place and maintain a transparent,
documented process which ensures the input of a broad range of
stakeholders, including CCM members and non-CCM members,
in proposal development and grant oversight process.
Messages to take back to the CCM:
• CCM should not be a club of familiars
• A strong and appropriate gap analysis requires broad participation
• Prevention is just as important as scaling up treatment
• Multi-stakeholder drafting committees are recommended
(these should not just have 'technical disease experts')
3.0
Introduction - Changes From Round 7
• Shorter. Removal of duplication.
• Simpler. Language is less complex.
• Streamlined. Most 'instructions' removed to
Guidelines.
12
Key Adjustments from Round 7
Eligibility criteria for upper-middle income applicants
(no impact for countries in attendance today)
Cost sharing principle – How much the Global Fund can support
CCM composition & funding
Health systems strengthening
3.1 Round 8 Revised Eligibility Criteria
Low-income
country
Lower-middle
income country
Upper-middle
income country
Eligible
Focus on
poor and/or
vulnerable
populations
May focus
on BOTH but
must focus
on 1
List of eligible
countries by income
level category will be
provided in Annex 1 to
the Round 8 Guidelines
for Proposals
Demonstrate Global
Fund country support
does not exceed 65% of
overall disease program
need
Demonstrate Global
Fund country support
does not exceed 35% of
overall disease program
need
Eligible
High disease
burden in
general
population or
identified
vulnerable
population
Multi-country proposals
can include other
ineligible UMI countries if
less than 50% of total
country number
Eligible
3.2
CCM Composition and Funding
•
CCMs recommended (not required) to include
key affected populations in their membership
(as defined by UNAIDS)
Round 8 website will provide resources on this group
•
CCM operating costs not be included in a proposal
•
Instead  Global Fund Secretariat has dedicated a
separate budget to assist – largely for infrastructure to help
the CCM communicate and operate more effectively
3.3
HSS - Round 8 'Flexible' Approach
Applicants may apply for support for HSS interventions within:
1. A disease specific program:
• Both for disease specific interventions that respond to
health system weaknesses or gaps; and/or
• Cross-cutting HSS interventions which benefit more than
one of the three diseases;
and/or
2. s.4B – the distinct 'HSS cross-cutting part' only for interventions
that are cross-cutting – included in one disease only
Recognized not without some degree of complexity
Only exceptions – large infrastructure and vaccine research
SRH – can be disease specific (s.4.5.1) or cross-disease (s.4B)
3.4
Round 8 HSS worked example
Option A
Disease specific
response only
needed
s.4.5.1 –
HIV description of
disease
specific
response
TB
s.4.5.1 –
description of
disease
specific
response
s.4.5.1 –
Mal description of
disease
specific
response
Option B
Some disease specific +
some cross-cutting
Option C
Some disease specific +
some cross-cutting
HSS split b/w the diseases
HSS included in s.4B distinct part
HIV
Still s.4.5.1 only
HIV specific + X%
of cross-cutting
response
TB
Still s.4.5.1 only
TB specific
+ Y% of crosscutting response
Mal
Still s.4.5.1 only
Malaria specific +
Z% of cross-cutting
response
HIV
s.4.5.1
HIV specific
response
only
TB
s.4.5.1
TB specific
response
only
Mal
s.4.5.1
Malaria
specific
response
only
+ s.4B
HSS
crosscutting
part to
ensure
crossdisease
response
when
relevant
WITHIN
ONE
DISEASE
ONLY
3.5
TRP Flexibility When Reviewing Proposals
• Historically – TRP required to review 'disease proposal' as a whole
• Recognized this may have acted as a disincentive to cross-cutting work
Round 8
• TRP will be mandated to review and recommend:
• The whole 'disease proposal' including the cross-disease part (s.4B); or
• The disease interventions (s.4.5.1) but not the cross-disease part (s.4B); or
• The cross-disease part (s.4B) but not the disease interventions (s.4.5.1).
Intent: To remove unintended barriers to cross-disease responses
New Topics in Round 8
Dual-track financing
Community systems strengthening
Encouraging gender sensitive responses
Grant consolidation (not a focus of today's discussion)
3.6 Dual-track financing
Implement's our full commitment to multi-sectoral approaches
•
Recommended routine inclusion of government and nongovernment Principal Recipients for each disease proposal.
•
Goal – expand service delivery potential + increase access
 Will be achieved by elevating capable civil society and private
sector applicants to a lead implementer role
•
Recommended in Round 8
Explanation required if not implemented.
Round 8 encourages significant sub-recipient capacity building
Supports a stronger Round 9 approach
3.7 Community Systems Strengthening
• Intent: Strengthen capacity of community based organizations to be
service delivery partners and build sustainable systems.
Areas of Focus:
• Capacity building: of the core processes of CBOs
•
Physical infrastructure development
•
Organizational systems development
• Partnership building: at the local level to improve coordination,
enhance impact, avoid duplication, build upon one another’s skills
and abilities and to maximize coverage
• Sustainable financing: creating an environment for more
predictable resources over a longer period of time with which to
work
• Important for successful requests for funding – demonstrate
support is linked to improved service delivery and outcomes for the
three diseases.
3.8
Encouraging Gender Sensitive Responses
•
Recognition that gender sensitive programming (especially for HIV)
requires a different approach between women & men, and boys & girls.
•
Significant attention to 'know your epidemic' approach
•
Proposal Form – a step towards a stronger approach in Round 9
•
CCMs comment on overall capacity and expertise on gender
•
Consideration given to gender issues when undertaking analysis
on disease program and health systems weaknesses and gaps
•
Epidemiological information disaggregated by age and sex
•
Statement of how the proposal enhances gender equality
Focus – encouraging a meaningful dialogue on issues affecting women
22
4. Planning for success
Think beyond 'project approach'
Round 8
Existing Global Fund grants
Bilateral
Donors
(e.g. USAID,
ADB etc)
– Encourage broad gap
analysis to show overall
country position
– Identify if same 'key
services' are supported by
others
National Budget
(incl World Bank loans)
– Plan the proposal drafting
– Who? How?
– Who is going to 'read it all
through at the end?
Annex of supporting material
6 CCM minimum eligibility requirements
1.
Requirement (as referred to in the "CCM
Clarifications Document" for Round 6)
Membership of persons living with and/or
affected by HIV/AIDS, TB, and malaria
Transparent selection process for CCM
Membership of non-governmental members
Description of Requirement
3(b)
All CCMs are required to show evidence of membership of
people living with and/or affected by the diseases
CCM members representing the non-government sectors
must be selected by their own sector(s) based on a
documented, transparent process, developed within each
sector
CCMs are required to put in place and maintain a
transparent, documented process to solicit and review
submissions for possible integration into a national
proposal
(b) review proposal submissions
4(a) and Ensure the input of a broad range of
stakeholders including CCM members and
4(b).
non-members in proposal development and
implementation oversight process.
5(a) and Transparent and documented process for
nominating the PR and to oversee program
5(b).
implementation
When the PRs and Chair or Vice Chair(s) of
6.
the CCM are the same entity, CCMs must
have a conflict of interest plan.
CCMs are required to create a transparent, documented
process which ensures that CCM members and non-CCM
members have the opportunity to contribute to proposal
development and in conducting grant oversight.
CCMs are required to put in place and maintain a
transparent, documented process for nominating/electing a
PR and to oversee program implementation
CCMs must have a written plan in place to mitigate
conflicts of interests when the PR and Chair or Vice
Chair(s) are the same.
2.
3(a).
Transparent and documented process to:
(a) solicit proposal submission
HSS: Instructions for Applicants (s.4.5.1)
How to include health systems strengthening in Round 8 proposals
1.
The Global Fund acknowledges that the responses to identified health
systems weaknesses or gaps that constrain the achievement of outcomes
for the three diseases may differ substantially in different settings. The
Global Fund intends therefore to allow applicants maximum flexibility in
addressing these weaknesses and gaps. We provide this flexibility from
Round 8 by allowing applicants to apply for funding to respond to these
issues either through a program (by-disease) approach, or by a crossdisease approach.
2.
If the most appropriate response to a system weakness can be made
through a disease program, applicants are encouraged to include the
relevant response (activities/interventions) in the program description of the
disease proposal (s.4.5.1) as any other disease program activity.
HSS: Instructions Cont’d (s.4.5.1)
3.
However, part or all of the response to system weaknesses that affect
outcomes for the three diseases may be more appropriately undertaken on a
cross-cutting basis. If so, applicants may request support for these
activities/interventions by either:
a)
b)
4.
including the activities/interventions in the various disease proposals (if
appropriate), separated between the disease proposals as the applicant believes
most appropriate; or
including relevant activities/interventions in only one disease proposal as an
optional additional “cross-cutting” group of activities. If so, these activities are
included in s.4B (s.4B is available as a download from the Global Fund website).
The financial information relating to these interventions should then be included in
a corresponding s.5B of the same disease (s.5B is available as a download from
the Global Fund website).
HSS cross-cutting interventions included in a one disease proposal in s.4B
cannot be the only interventions included in that under a disease proposal.
That is, there must also be program activities described in s.4.5.1. This is
because there is no separate funding window for HSS.