CCM Eligibility Requirements and Country Dialogue Expectations Geneva, Switzerland

Contents Country Dialogue expectations Country Coordinating Mechanism (CCM) Eligibility Requirements Background Differentiated screening approach 1 2 1

Overarching Principles: Country Dialogue Country Dialogue is a key feature of the Global Fund’s funding model and should be open, inclusive and participatory, and include key stakeholders, including key populations and civil society in the country. The program split (considering eligible diseases and resilient and sustainable systems for health) and the funding request must be discussed and elaborated through an inclusive dialogue. Applicants must conduct consultations and discussions with all relevant stakeholders, including civil society and key populations, and in-country technical partners, on the proposed funding request (capitalizing on the gains from the previous country dialogue processes).

Who plays a role in country dialogue? Academia Country government Other donors Global Fund Private sector Country dialogue Technical partners Civil society / key populations These groups meet in the CCM; however, the dialogue should expand beyond the CCM

Some good practices on country dialogue from the 2014-2016 allocation period Volunteers working with malaria affected populations were invited to country dialogue meetings. - El Salvador M Nomadic and rural populations scattered over the vast Mongolian territory (key populations) were represented in the country dialogue discussions by health volunteers.​ - Mongolia TB In addition to inclusive workshops and concept note development meetings, focus group discussions were conducted with rural refugees to involve the views of key populations in the concept note development process.​ - Gambia M CCM maintained a website, where CCM decisions, agenda points and meeting minutes are published.​ - Armenia HIV​ CCM set up Twitter and Facebook pages to inform of concept note development stages. - Mauritania HIV, TB, M

Some good practices on country dialogue from the 2014-2016 allocation period Multiple drafts of the concept note were shared on the CCM's website, making the document available to the public and giving people within and outside the CCM the opportunity to review and provide comments. ​- Peru HIV The concept note writing team used input from the consultations to identify priority geographical coverage, review the evidence for the best set of interventions, identify costing information, and choose indicators.​ - South Africa TB/HIV In addition to inclusive workshops and concept note development meetings, focus group discussions were conducted with pregnant women, lactating women, internally displaced persons and migrant populations (comprised of religious leaders, pregnant and lactating women) to assess key populations access to malaria services.​ - Haiti M CCM opened its working group and CCM meetings to the public to incorporate more views into the concept note. - Georgia HIV​

CCM Eligibility Requirements Transparent and inclusive funding request development process 1 and 2 assessed at funding request submission 1 Open and transparent Principal Recipient selection process 2 Overseeing program implementation and having an oversight plan 3 3 to 6 assessed annually and monitored on going basis Document the representation of affected communities 4 Ensure representation of non-governmental members through transparent and documented processes 5 Develop, publish and follow a policy to manage conflict of interest that applies to all CCM members, across all CCM functions 6

For requirements 3, 4, 5, 6 Annual performance assessment tool: Eligibility and Performance Assessment (EPA) Facilitates annual CCM performance assessment (Requirements 3, 4, 5 and 6) + minimum standards Information captured by the Eligibility and Performance Assessment allows CCM self-reflection about its performance Must be completed in 2016 for funding requests to be submitted in 2017 The EPA...

Differentiating the Eligibility and Performance Assessment An annual portfolio analysis to identify components for standard review. CCM categorization will be updated at the end of every year, based on the last available Eligibility and Performance Assessment and new Community, Rights and Gender information. Approach based on EPA results: Complete diagnostic with technical assistance support (standard) Demonstrate compliance with eligibility requirements and minimum standards: no technical assistance support required (light) Demonstrate compliance with eligibility requirements only: no technical assistance support required (superlight) Human rights and gender considerations: Countries where there may be challenges to engage key populations Countries where relevant human rights/gender related activities are not appropriately addressed in the current program Countries which will have scaled-up gender, human rights, key populations and community response programming Standard review where Secretariat will focus efforts and incentivize CCMs to improve performance and adhere to the eligibility criteria. CCMs classified under “standard” review will be informed to, where possible, to 1) involve KPs and CSOs in funding request development and 2) ensure transparent and documented PR selection process.

CCM Eligibility Requirements 1 & 2 are assessed at the time of funding request submission Requirement 1: Country dialogue is a key feature of the Global Fund’s funding model and should be open, inclusive and participatory. Requirement 2: The PR(s) must be selected following a transparent and documented process, whereby any conflicts of interest are appropriately managed. Coordinate the development of all funding applications through transparent and documented processes that engage a broad range of stakeholders, including CCM members and non-members – in the solicitation and the review of activities to be included in the application. Clearly document efforts to engage key population groups in the development of funding applications, including most-at-risk populations. Nominate one or more Principal Recipient(s) at the time of submission of their application for funding.  Document a transparent process for the nomination of all new and continuing PRs based on clearly defined and objective criteria. Document the management of any potential conflicts of interest that may affect the Principal Recipient nomination process.

Time available before funding request submission Guidance on country dialogue in light of timing available before funding request submission Key guiding questions/ principles to inform discussions with constituencies through civil society organizations, key populations and community groups representatives on the CCM. Set of consultations to be agreed, taking into consideration disease component, overall country context & feasibility of timing. Comprehensive discussions with CCM and non-CCM members, involving all relevant stakeholders (to be tailored in challenging operating environments and transition contexts), including civil society organizations, key populations and partners. 2 months 4 months + 6 months End of March End of May End of Aug Time available before funding request submission Mainly for country components under the program continuation stream of funding + early submissions Mainly for country components with grant end dates beyond December 2017 which will come through the full or tailored reviews. Mainly for country components with grant end dates in December 2017 which will come through the full or tailored reviews. Submission dates Window 1 - 20 March Window 2 - 23 May Window 3 - 28 August

Aligning country dialogue approaches to the differentiated application process 1 2 3 PROGRAM CONTINUATION TAILORED Applications** FULL Applications CCM-level discussion with all CCM representatives of civil society, key populations, partners and communities CCM representatives of civil society, key populations and partners should inform/ consult with their constituencies*** Transition: tailored to the objective of the Global Fund in this context Discussion expected with CCM and non-CCM members Involving transition experts and relevant civil society, key populations and partners COE: Tailored to the objective of the GF in this context Discussion expected with CCM and non-CCM members Involving COE experts and relevant civil society, key populations and partners Comprehensive discussions with CCM and non-CCM members Involving all relevant stakeholders, including civil society, key populations and partners Ongoing community, key & vulnerable populations engagement throughout grant cycle **Tailored approaches also include material reprogramming, National Strategic Plan and results-based financing applications ***CRG will provide key guiding questions/principles which CCM representatives should rely when reaching out to their constituencies. The outcomes of the discussions should be reflected in the meeting minutes.

Sample questions for CCM representatives to use when reaching out to their constituencies for program continuation dialogue • Please describe how key and vulnerable populations who are the targeted populations of your program are included in the process of reviewing and developing a request for program continuation. Are all the populations targeted in the current program represented in the CCMs? If not, how do you ensure their meaningful engagement in the continuation of the program? • During the previous implementation period, has there been any formal/informal feedback from key and vulnerable populations on the quality and the content of the program? If so, has it been taken into account for program improvement, please explain how? • Are there any major changes in the implementation environment/context that may negatively impact engagement of key and vulnerable populations in the program? – if so, please describe measures to mitigate the risks • Are there human rights and/or gender-related barriers impacting the grant implementation to achieve maximum outcomes? If so, is any intervention to address those barriers included in your request for program continuation?

Aligning screening for eligibility requirements 1 + 2 with the differentiated application process 3 PROGRAM CONTINUATION TAILORED REVIEWS FULL REVIEW Criteria 1: CCM discussion meeting minutes*** & list of participants Criteria 2: N/A if same Principal Recipient Supporting documentation if Principal Recipient change Criteria 1: light or standard screening Criteria 2: light or standard screening ***Meeting minutes will need to reflect outcomes of discussions with broader constituencies, based on the guiding questions/principles given to CCM representatives

CCM Eligibility Criteria 1: Differentiated screening 1. Standard screening requires: CCM Eligibility Narrative Supporting documents 2. Light screening requires: Statement of Compliance 3. Program continuation screening requires: CCM meeting minutes and list of participants reflecting outcome of discussions with constituencies, based on guiding questions/ principles

CCM Eligibility Criteria 2: Differentiated screening During the 2014-2016 allocation period, very few applicants proposed to reselect a poor performing Principal Recipient (B2 rating or lower), and about 20% proposed new Principal Recipients. 3 possible scenarios: Re-selection of a well-performing Principal Recipient Re-selecting Principal Recipient with rating of B2 or lower New Principal Recipient proposed For requirement 2, the screening will depend on the type of Principal Recipient selected. Light review if a well-performing Principal Recipient is selected; Standard review if a poor performing or new Principal Recipient is selected. In the event the re-selected Principal Recipient has rating of B2 or lower, this will be flagged to the Risk team to allow for mitigation measures where relevant. Risk team will focus on high risk countries, including High Impact and challenging operating environment countries

Summary: Differentiated screening of CCM Eligibility Requirements 1 and 2 Requirement 1 - inclusive funding request development process Light review: CCM eligibility narrative Statement of compliance with CCM Eligibility Requirement 1 Standard review: Key supporting documents Requirement 2 – transparent and documented Principal Recipient selection process Light review if re-selection of PR: CCM eligibility narrative Statement of compliance with CCM Eligibility Requirement 2 Standard review if new Principal Recipient or poor performing Principal Recipient is selected: Key supporting documents To note: A country component (ex. Madagascar malaria) could undergo light review for requirement 1 and standard review for requirement 2. In such a case, the CCM would complete the eligibility narrative and submit the statement of compliance for requirement 1 and supporting documentation for requirement 2.

Key messages Country Dialogue is a key feature of the Global Fund’s funding model and should be open, inclusive and participatory, and include key stakeholders, including key populations and civil society in the country. This remains true even when there is a short window for development of the program continuation request or funding request. Depending on previous assessments, applicants will submit different documentation for assessment of compliance with Eligibility Requirements 1 and 2. The specific requirements will be communicated in the allocation letter.