The New Funding Model

The New Funding Model Key features and implementation Mohammed Yassin MD, MSc, PhD Technical Advisor, TB Regional Meeting of NTP Managers and Partners, Bangkok, 23-27 Sep 2013 NFM: Key features and implementation

Content 1 Introducing the new funding model 2 M 3 Concept Note and Modular template Update and preparing for NFM NFM: Key features and implementation

1 Principles of the new funding model The new funding model changes the way applicants apply for funding, get approval of their proposals and then manage their grants Greater alignment with country schedules, context, and priorities Principles of the new funding model Focus on countries with the highest disease burden and lowest ability to pay, while keeping the portfolio global Simplicity for both implementers and the Global Fund Predictability of process and financing levels Ability to elicit full expressions of demand and reward ambition NFM: Key features and implementation

1 Key features Predictable funding Timing of requests Length of grants Applicants are given an indicative funding range over a 3-year period The Secretariat will hold indicative amounts for applicants until they apply Applicants apply for funding when they want Applicants can submit different disease or HCSS requests at different times Applicants can use in-country planning cycles Three years Early feedback Applicants submit a funding request through a Concept Note Early feedback from the Secretariat and the TRP = higher success rate Incentive funding Grantmaking Competitive funding in addition to indicative range Rewards high impact, well-performing programs Encourages full expression of demand Upfront risk and capacity assessments Differentiated processes to ensure disbursement-ready grants Funding requests negotiated before Board approval NFM: Key features and implementation

1 How does the new model differ from the previous model? From previous model Passive role by the Secretariat in influencing investments Timelines largely defined by the Global Fund Hands-off Secretariat role prior to Board approval Low predictability: timing of Rounds, success rates and available funds Cumbersome undifferentiated process to grant signing with different delays To new funding model More active portfolio management to optimize impact Timelines largely defined by each country Ongoing engagement by Secretariat High predictability: timing, success rates, indicative funding range Disbursement-ready grants with differentiated approach NFM: Key features and implementation

Overview of the new funding model NSP support Determination of split between diseases & HCSS TRP review Grant Approval Committee Unfunded quality demand Board approval NSP Country dialogue Concept Note Determine / approve adjusted funding amount Grant-making Indicative funding Band allocation Incentive funding Allocation formula NFM: Key features and implementation

Purpose of the transition phase of the NFM 7 This enabled... Board approves immediate launch of the transition to the new funding model Investment of available funds, for early impact Focus on those most in need (e.g. underfunded or facing disruption) Implementing elements of the new model NFM: Key features and implementation

1 8 Participation in the transition phase of the NFM Countries positioned to achieve rapid impact Who was invited to participate? Countries at risk of service interruptions Countries receiving less than they would under the new funding model principles NFM: Key features and implementation

Implementation Timelines 2013 2014 2015 1 Early Selection of early applicants Application plus real time earning New grants signed 2 Interim Selection of interim applicants Interim funding through renewals, grant extensions and redesigned programs 3 Standard In-country preparation and national strategy development New grants signed Application, review and grant-making NFM: Key features and implementation

Overview on early applicant and interim countries selected for the transition period Early applicant Interim applicant 7 6 20 Eastern Europe and Central Asia Latin America and the Caribbean Asia-Pacific HIV 28 Malaria 19 TB Eurasian Harm Reduction Network, Russia, Moldova, Albania, Kosovo El Salvador, Jamaica Myanmar, Philippines, India, Thailand, Nepal, Mongolia, Multicountry Western Pacific Regional Elimination Initiative in Mesoamerica and Hispaniola, Suriname Myanmar, Regional Artemisinin Resistance Initiative, Indonesia Kazakhstan, Belarus Nicaragua, Dominican Republic Myanmar, Philippines, Cambodia, Viet Nam, Bangladesh, Solomon Islands, Indonesia, Pakistan, PNG, Sri Lanka 23 11 Francophone Africa DRC, Cameroon, Niger, Togo Chad, DRC, Niger, Côte d'ivoire, Burundi, Rwanda Benin 26 Africa and Middle East Zimbabwe, Kenya, Lesotho, Ghana, Malawi, South Africa, Nigeria, Uganda, Tanzania, Mozambique Yemen, Malawi, Mozambique, Nigeria Swaziland, Zambia, Tanzania, Sudan Zimbabwe, Ethiopia, Kenya, Mozambique, South Africa, Tanzania, Zambia, Egypt For early applicants, this is the 2014-2016 amount. For interim applicants, this covers the allocation from the $1.9B. NFM: Key features and implementation

Funding during the transition Early applicants 1 2 Interim applicants Concept Note Above indicative Indicative funding Renewals Strategic Reprogramming Indicative funding only Grant extensions NFM: Key features and implementation

2 Country dialogue concept note Country dialogue is countryspecific, countryled, and countrydefined 13 What do we mean by country dialogue? Term used by the Global Fund to refer to the ongoing process that occurs at country level to fight the three diseases and strengthen health and community systems Who is involved? Multi-stakeholder: occurs between implementers, the government (including national ministries of health and planning), the private sector, the public sector, civil society, academia, key affected populations and networks, and bilateral, multilateral and technical partners Key outcomes specific to the Global Fund Strengthened multistakholder involvement in development of NSPs Development of a CN from this dialogue Processes used to identify and address weaknesses/gaps NFM: Key features and implementation

2 Concept Note As a result of the Country Dialogue, applicants will submit a Concept Note. CN will capture country context and response Concept Note (prioritized/ budget) CN will capture Full expression of demand (e.g. costed national strategy or investment case) CN will capture Global Fund funding request: prioritizing activities between indicative funding & incentive funding stream CCM will submit Concept Note in most cases NFM: Key features and implementation

19 Concept note: full expression of demand In the Concept Note: Full expression of demand captured at a higher level based on a costed national strategy; Applicant will determine which program elements of their full expression of demand should be in their above indicative funding request. Applicants encouraged to apply for their full expression of demand NFM: Key features and implementation

2 Structure of the concept note Section 1 Summary information of the applicant and disease split-1 The CCM will submit the Concept Note in most cases 2 CCM eligibility: How the application development process complies with CCM Eligibility Requirements and dual-track financing- 31/2 3 Country context: An explanation of the country s epidemiological situation and the current legal and policy environment, and how the National Strategic Plan responds to the country disease context- 10 + Mandatory attachments Supporting documents 4 5 6 Funding request: How existing and anticipated programmatic gaps of the National Disease Strategic Plan have been identified. How the funds requested will be strategically invested to maximize the impact of the response- 131/2 Implementation arrangements: How the program will be implemented - 7 List of abbreviations and acronyms and list of annexes Instructions & Information Notes Provide guidance to applicant on how to integrate key issues such as human rights, gender, SOGI, operational risk NFM: Key features and implementation

The modular approach The modular approach is a framework used to structure the information that defines a grant It runs throughout a grant's lifecycle, providing consistency at each stage During the concept note stage, a funding request is defined by selecting a set of interventions per module to align with national strategy During the grant making stage, each approved intervention is further defined by identifying and describing the required sets of activities During grant implementation, progress of each intervention is monitored as laid out in the prior stages Program level Module Intervention Activity 20130205_ModularApproachMtg3_v1.pptx 16

1 Draft For discussion only Modular approach process Concept note Grant-making TRP GAC Grant signing Modules / interventions & performance info Selected modules & interventions Program goals & objectives Impact, outcome, and coverage / output indicators with associated information High level budget GAC approved funding ceiling 1 2 Detailed list of products & PSM costs by intervention 3 GIM Selection Detailed budget & assumptions 4 Integrated summary view of performance indicators, budget, & GIMs for grant agreement 17 20130705_MAGMKO_vF.pptx

Modular approach addresses limitations of the past 1 2 3 Aligns terminology with normative guidance from technical partners Incorporates terminology already being used by countries and partners Replaces the former SDAs whose terminology differed from technical partners and was applied inconsistently, presenting challenges for portfolio level analysis Bring together activities, funding, and performance tracking into a single view through the module / intervention framework Allows for comparison between funding and performance at intervention level Minimizes the use of separate documents which are developed & reviewed in parallel without clear links Streamline existing documents across the grant lifecycle with all information organized by the module / intervention framework Enables the content developed in one stage (e.g., concept note) to follow into the next stage (e.g., grant making) Lessens the use of successive tools throughout the grant lifecycle and avoids the repackaging of similar information in different ways 20130205_ModularApproachMtg3_v1.pptx 18

Disease components: TB Six TB modules: 3 Core packages & 3 supportive DOTS-based package MDR-TB package TB/HIV package Human rights Monitoring and Evaluation Program Management 19

Country type (mutually exclusive) Country types and associated interventions Core packages Endemic countries High and medium TB burden settings DOTS-based package + Critical enablers Supportive + TB/HIV package for high risk groups + MDR-TB package for high-risk groups + Other High-risk group interventions High TB/HIV countries 1 High MDR-TB countries 2 DOTS-based package + Critical enablers/supportive + TB/HIV package DOTS-based package + Critical enablers/supportive + MDR-TB package + MDR-TB package for high-risk groups + Other High-risk group interventions + TB/HIV package for high risk groups + Other High-risk group interventions Countries with high TB/HIV and high MDR-TB DOTS-based package incl. enablers + TB/HIV package + MDR-TB package + Other High-risk group interventions 1. > 5% HIV in TB, or >1% in general population; 2. As defined by WHO high rate and absolute burden countries 20

TB interventions List of interventions DOTS-based package TB/HIV package (high burden countries or high risk groups in all countries) MDR-TB (in high MDR-TB burden countries or high risk groups in all countries) Human Rights Monitoring and Evaluation Program Management Case detection & diagnosis Treatment Prevention Engaging all care providers Engaging communities and civil society (includes social mobilization) TB screening and treatment among high risk groups Collaborative activities with other sector TB/HIV collaborative interventions Engaging all care providers Engaging communities and civil society (includes social mobilization) TB/HIV screening and treatment among high risk groups Collaborative activities with other sector Case detection and diagnosis Treatment Engaging all care providers Engaging communities and civil society (includes social mobilization) MDR-TB screening and treatment among high risk groups Collaborative activities with other sector Law and policy reforms Training and capacity building Access to justice Human rights and monitoring reports Routine reporting Analysis, review and transparency Surveys Administrative and finance data source Vital registration Planning, coordination and management Grant management Supporting procurement and supply management for TB 21

Modular template Disease/HSS Modules Interventions Activities Cost Inputs TB DOTS package Case detection& diagnosis Purchase microscopy Product cost Malaria TB/HIV Treatment Commodities Transportation Prevention Transport samples Storage HIV HSS MDR-TB Human rights M&E Program Management Engaging all care providers Communities TB screening Other sectors... Training Procurement agent fee Quality assurance Modules, interventions and activities will replace current heterogeneous Service Delivery Areas (SDAs) Some current SDAs refer to interventions some are at activity level SDAs are not harmonized across the various documents preventing the linking of targets to budget Consultation Orientation on the NFM Geneva, 9-11 July 2013

Core TB indicators: Impact and outcome Disease trends Case notification rate MDR prevalence among new TB patients TB prevalence rate TB incidence rate TB mortality rate Lives saved based on latest epidemiological data DOTS based package Treatment success rate a) all forms and b) bacteriologically confirmed (disaggregated by age and sex) Case notification rate (per 100,000 population), bacteriologically- confirmed TB*, disaggregated by age and sex Case notification rate (per 100,000 population), all forms of TB (i.e. bacteriologically confirmed + clinically diagnosed) *, disaggregated by age and sex MDR-TB Notification of MDR-TB cases Notified cases of bacteriologically confirmed, drug resistant TB (RR-TB and/or MDR-TB) as a proportion of the estimated number of MDR-TB cases among notified TB cases Treatment success rate MDR-TB Routine reporting Surveys Modeled 20130205_ModularApproachMtg3_v1.pptx 23

Core TB indicators: Coverage and output DOTS based package Number of notified cases of bacteriologically confirmed TB Number of notified cases of all forms of TB (i.e. bacteriologically confirmed + clinically diagnosed) DOTS based package Treatment Number success of notified rate cases of bacteriologically for TB patients confirmed TB with bacteriologically confirmed TB (# & % ) Number of notified cases of all forms of TB (i.e. bacteriologically confirmed + clinically diagnosed) Laboratories performing smear microscopy that show adequate performance on EQA (# & % ) Treatment success rate for TB patients with bacteriologically confirmed TB (# & % ) Reporting units Laboratories reporting performing smear microscopy no stock-outs that show adequate performance of anti-tb on EQA (# & % drugs ) on the last day of the quarter (# & %) Reporting units reporting no stock-outs of anti-tb drugs on the last day of the quarter (# & %) Number of children <5 in contact with TB patients who began IPT Number of children < 5 in contact with TB patients who began IPT Additional indicators that will apply to some grants Number of TB cases (all forms) notified among high risk groups Number of TB cases (all notified among high risk groups Notified TB Notified cases TB cases (all forms) contributed contributed by non -NTP providers (# & %) by non-ntp providers (# & %) {specify if these providers are (a) private/non-governmental facilities (b) public sector such as general hospitals, social security, health insurance, educational institutions etc. or (c) community referrals} MDR-TB Number of cases of bacteriologically confirmed, drug resistant TB (RR-TB and/or MDR-TB) notified MDR-TB Number of cases with bacteriologically confirmed, drug resistant TB (RR-TB and/or MDR-TB) that began second-line treatment Number of presumptive cases of drug-resistant TB (RR-TB and/or MDR-TB) that began second-line treatment Number of DST cases laboratories of showing bacteriologically adequate performance on External confirmed, Quality Assurance (# & %) drug resistant TB (RR-TB and/or MDR-TB) notified Number of cases with bacteriologically confirmed, drug resistant TB (RR-TB and/or MDR-TB) that began second- TB/HIV line treatment TB patients with documented HIV status at the time of TB diagnosis (# & %) HIV-positiv e TB patients given anti-retroviral therapy during TB treatment (# & %) Number of presumptive cases of drug-resistant TB (RR-TB and/or MDR-TB) that began second-line treatment People enrolled in HIV care who had their TB status assessed and recorded (# & %) People newly enrolled HIV care treated for latent TB infection (# & %) DST laboratories showing adequate performance on External Quality Assurance (# & %) M&E TB/HIV Reporting units submitting timely reports according to national guidelines TB patients with documented HIV status at the time of TB diagnosis (# & %) HIV-positive TB patients given anti-retroviral therapy during TB treatment (# & %) People enrolled in HIV care who had their TB status assessed and recorded (# & %) People newly enrolled in HIV care treated for latent TB infection (# & %) M&E Reporting units submitting timely reports according to national guidelines 20130205_ModularApproachMtg3_v1.pptx 24

2 Attachment 2: Modular Template the modules For HSS, a separate modular template should be used. To add more modules, applicants must copy & paste the measurement framework and budget below the existing tables. These will be reflected in the summary budget tab. Consultation Orientation on the NFM Geneva, 9-11 July 2013

Preparing for the New Funding Model 26

5 areas for you to prepare for the new funding model 1 Plan ahead 2 Strengthen national strategies 3 Involve key constituencies 4 Improve data 5 Ensure CCM and PR capacity 27

1 Reminder: new funding model cycle and timelines Ongoing Country Dialogue National Strategic Plan determined by country Concept Note 2-3 months TRP GAC Grant Making 1.5-3 months 2 nd GAC Board Grant Implementation 3 years Key funding events Secretariat communicates funding amounts to countries The pool of additional incentive funding is also available Secretariat s Grant Approval Committee sets budget ceiling TRP-approved funds above ceiling are put in queue in case new funds are available Country team and country finalize grant agreement documents - Workplan & budget - Performance framework - Procurement plan Countries can apply anytime in 2014-2016 Grant funds can be for 3 years beyond grant signature in 2017 & beyond 28

Long Average Accelerated 1 Each country is asked to estimate when they plan to access funds Time for new funding model stages depends on context Country can move more rapidly because it has: Up-to-date and costed national strategic plan or investment case with agreed priorities CCM is able to rapidly coordinate stakeholders PRs are well performing 2 months 1 month 1.5 months* 1 month 6 months Pre-CN development country dialogue Concept note writing TRP and GAC review Grant making From Board approval to 1 st disbursement Time from dialogue to 1 st disbursement Country may need moderate amount of time to: Conduct country dialogue to agree on priorities and consult stakeholders But has well performing CCM and PRs 4 months 2 months 1 month 2 months* 1 month 10 months Country may need significant time to: Develop clear strategy or viable extension plan through grant period Strengthen capacity for PR Reach agreement with the CCM 16 months NSP development 8 months 3 months 1 month 3 months* 1 month Note: TRP reviews will be scheduled to accommodate the most programs. If there is no TRP scheduled in the month the Concept Note is submitted, the TRP and GAC review stage may take longer, up to 3 months * This is the anticipated average scenario it may take longer in some countries. 29

1 Timelines for the full roll-out are tight, with a number of dependencies Timing will remain uncertain until the Replenishment and Board dates are set Timelines and dependencies for the full roll-out Board/Committee meetings & decisions Fourth Replenishment Conference outcome Board/Committee meetings & decisions 2014 Allocations to countries Donors confirm their financial support to the Global Fund The Global Fund will communicate as soon as timing is clearer 30

preparing for the new funding model 1 Plan ahead 2 Strengthen national strategies 3 Involve key constituencies 4 Improve data 5 Ensure CCM and PR capacity 31

Know the epidemic to target resources effectively Plan appropriate assessments and reviews to feed into NSPs and concept note submission Surveillance Systems and Data Quality assessment Epi analysis Program Review National Strategic Plan (NSP) Joint assessment of DQ & systems Identification of key data gaps Quantification of investment needs Strategic investment in data systems Review of epidemiology & impact for KAPs at subnational level Before the development of a Concept Note and as part of country dialogue Identifies data limitations and required actions Joint reviews with a particular focus on epidemiological impact & progress Recommendations to inform a revision or development of new NSP Map programmatic and financial gaps Ambitious yet realistic goals and SMART objectives Prioritizes gaps for funds available Costed plan Measurable indicators, clear sources of info and means of verification Global Fund application 32

National strategic plans (NSPs): The basis for Global Fund funding National strategic plan Before assessment Epi analysis & program review JANS, IHP+ or similar assessment Robust NSP Concept Note Identified prioritized programmatic gaps NSPs should be: developed through inclusive, multi-stakeholder efforts aligned with international normative guidance, national health sector strategies, and developed in coordination across the three diseases Assessed through a credible, independent, multistakeholder process that uses agreed frameworks (e.g., Joint Assessment of National Strategies tool) Secretariat supports the process by: encouraging governments to have broad engagement with civil society and Key Affected Populations (KAPs) participating in consultations at the country level providing feedback on the performance of Global Fund grants 33

2 The new funding model places increased focus on NSPs A robust NSP provides a greater prospect of incentive funding Robust NSP Concept Note Above indicative Incentive funding: Awarded to ambitious expressions of quality demand based on robust national strategies and high impact, well-performing programs Indicative funding Indicative funding: The Global Fund funds activities aligned to national priorities and identified needs 34

Today s focus: 5 areas for you to prepare for the new funding model 1 Plan ahead 2 Strengthen national strategies 3 Involve key constituencies 4 Improve data 5 Ensure CCM and PR capacity 35

3 Involve key constituencies now so that concept note development is smoother later What you can do now Desired outcomes A B Plan for the timing of key events Get the right people involved Grants include activities that address the needs of key affected populations to access services C D Engage them throughout national and Global Fund processes Ensure mechanisms are in place for stakeholders to provide input Inclusive country dialogue Country-ownership and strategic investment 36

3 Develop an engagement plan Some examples Who should be involved In what should they be involved How to engage them When key events will occur Government Epi analysis & program reviews Through caucuses Major meetings and consultations Civil society Key affected populations People living with the disease National strategic plan development Country dialogue At national conferences In safe spaces Draft concept note sent for TRP review Concept note submission (target date) Technical partners Concept note writing In writing group TRP / GAC input received Other funders Grant making Through lead representative Date when new funds are needed 37

3 Tailor participation to reflect the context and epidemic Consider whether input from these groups is necessary for an effective response In-country organizations CCM members Ministry of Health Ministry of Finance Ministry of Gender/Women Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Interior, Parliamentary committee on health National disease bodies, e.g., national AIDS council National human rights institutions Civil society, e.g., Aids Alliance, faith-based organizations, legal and human rights groups Global technical partners Stop TB partnership WHO UNDP, OHCHR, UNFPA, ILO, UNHCR, UNICEF, depending on country context Open Society Foundations Regional and international networks of KAPs Regional and international human rights groups Other funders and implementers PEPFAR,, USAID, CDC EU members (e.g., DfiD, GIZ, French) AusAid HIVOS European Commission, staff at embassy human rights/development programs Private foundations, such as Levi Strauss Foundation, Global Fund for Women, depending on context Non-public sector implementers (e.g., FBOs) World Bank TB People who work in settings that facilitate TB transmission Prisoners Migrants Refugees Indigenous peoples People living with HIV People who use drugs Other, such as labor unions, depending on country context 38

5 areas for you to prepare for the new funding model 1 Plan ahead 2 Strengthen national strategies 3 Involve key constituencies 4 Improve data 5 Ensure CCM and PR capacity 39

4 A country s funding amount comes from an allocation formula adjusted for qualitative factors 1 Allocation formula Disease burden 2 Qualitative factors Grant performance Parameters of allocation formula are still being decided by Global Fund's Strategy Committee 3 Impact Income level External financing 3 4 Increasing rates of infection Willingness to pay Global Fund funding for country Absorptive capacity Minimum required level Risk For discussion today 40

4 Ensure that data inputs are up-to-date Allocation formula Qualitative factors 1 2 3 4 Disease burden Grant performance Impact and increasing rates of infection Willingness to pay (WTP) Burden of TB in-country, measured by morbidity Past Global Fund grant performance over the past 2 years Achievement of impact against TB: increasing rates of TB/HIV or MDR- TB infection; Government contribution above current levels and minimum thresholds that supports the national disease program What countries can do: Make sure disease burden estimates provided by WHO are accurate Ensure that PRs submit PU/DRs in timely fashion Share data with FPMs that show evidence of impact or increasing rates of infection Provide FPM with information to create baseline for government contribution 41

4 Review disease burden data with WHO Data from technical partners is the sole source of disease burden Countries provide data to WHO/UNAIDS Data aggregated by technical partners Global Fund uses for key processes Countries need to engage now with WHO to ensure data is up-to-date and reflected in WHO reports Official disease burden estimates are the basis of key Global Fund processes... Global Fund eligibility New funding model allocation formula IMPORTANT NOTE Global Fund will use the data provided by WHO/UNAIDS Any changes must be agreed by countries with technical partners TB Disease Score = (1*HIV neg. TB incident cases) + (8*estimated MDR-TB incidence) + (1.2*HIV pos. TB incident cases) + (0.1 * 50% of estimated no of people with known HIV pos. status) 42

4 Provide information about impact to the Global Fund Suggested documents: Recent surveillance reports National health sector and/or disease program reports Annual demographic report or national statistical yearbook Survey reports Program budget review Inventory of health workforce and facilities National and program-specific DQA reports NSPs (health sector and/or disease) National M&E plans Others you believe are relevant Not all countries will have all data provide what exists in country Share documents with Global Fund country team If increasing rates of infection in a subpopulation drive the epidemic, provide documents to show it 43

4 How it works: willingness to pay bonus 1 Countries must first meet the Global Fund's counterpart financing (CPF) requirements Low income (LI): 5% Lower-lower-middle income (LLMI): 20% Upper-lower-middle income (ULMI): 40% Upper-middle income (UMI): 60% 2 Countries that meet CPF are eligible for an increase to their allocation based on additional government investment that is... Above current levels of government spending Committed to strategic areas of national disease program agreed during country dialogue Tracked through budgets or other official documents Embedded in grant agreements Not less than planned government spending commitments for next phase 3 Compliance will be monitored annually Funds will be adjusted in cases of non-compliance Ensure grant contains funds for national tracking methods if country has reporting problems 44

4 Provide government financing data to the Secretariat Government resources include: Budget Support from Government Revenues Loans Debt Relief Allocations Social Security Spending Funds contributed by Earmarked Taxation Each Disease Program: Funding need for the next 3 years Allocation of government and external resources for current fiscal year Expenditure of government and external resources for past 2 years Government and external resources committed for the next 3 years Health Sector: Current year allocation, spending in past 2 years and commitments for next 3 years from government resources If needed, an additional request will be sent to the CCM to provide the following: Completed Counterpart Financing and Gap Analysis Template Supporting documentation per guidance provided If data availability is an issue, use savings from grant funds now to support a expenditure tracking exercise to provide data in CN 45

1 Plan ahead 2 Strengthen national strategies 3 Involve key constituencies 4 Improve data 5 Ensure CCM and PR capacity 46

5 All CCM will be expected to meet minimum standards by January 2015 Minimum Standards will be compulsory at grant signing as of Jan 1, 2015 Minimum Standards express the Global Fund s expectations of CCM performance 2013 2014 Benchmarking January 1, 2015 Review CCM performance against the Minimum Standards to determine TA needs Conduct an annual selfassessment against the CCM Minimum Standards Choose a TA provider to support the assessment and develop an action plan Implement the action plan to meet the minimum standards Minimum Standards enforced at grant signing as of Jan. 1, 2015 47

5 Review CCM against minimum standards Minimum requirements for CCM eligibility 1 2 Transparent and inclusive concept note development process Open and transparent PR selection process assessed at CN submission 3 Overseeing program implementation and having an oversight plan 4 5 6 Document the representation of affected communities Ensure representation of non-governmental members through transparent and documented processes Develop, publish and follow a policy to manage conflict of interest that applies to all CCM members, across all CCM functions monitored ongoing basis 48

Conclusion: prepare now for the NFM 1 2 Plan ahead Strengthen national strategies Identify when funds are needed for each disease Estimate how long the application process will take Plan key milestones, like program review, over coming months Conduct national program reviews/assessments to determine strengths and weaknesses Prioritize programmatic gaps for which Global Fund funding will be requested Ensure costed and prioritized national strategic plan (NSP) or extension is valid through expected Global Fund grant implementation period 3 Involve key constituencies Develop an engagement plan, including how to involve KAPs)and civil society Work with technical assistance funders/ providers to strengthen KAP and civil society capacity Involve other donors and implementers in discussions to ensure harmonization of funding and activities 4 5 Improve data Ensure CCM and PR capacity Align on country disease burden data with UNAIDS and WHO as this is the basis of the funding allocation and eligibility Provide the Global Fund with data on impact and performance, and counterpart financing Strengthen epidemiological information, especially at subnational level and for key affected populations, to better target limited resources for impact Assess PRs against minimum standards and take steps to address implementation risks Ensure compliance with CCM Eligibility Requirements and minimum standards 49