Global Fund Assessments Part II: Understanding Assessment Results Geneva – December 2005.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Grant Life Cycle TGF/LOG/150804/1.
Advertisements

Financing of OAS Activities Sources of cooperation Cooperation modalities Cooperation actors Specific Funds management models and resources mobilization.
ERF and EIF Information Meeting Key Messages in Preparing an Application 5 th September 2013 F2 Rialto Dublin.
New Uniform Guidance Combines the requirements of OMB Circulars A-21, A-87, A-110, A-122, A-89, A-102, A-133, and A-50 into a streamlined format. *NOTE:
Subrecipient Monitoring CCIA Spring Conference Sheena Tran, Rancho Santiago CCD Tania Walden, Los Rios CCD Tracy Young, Coast CCD May 2013.
 Capacity Development; National Systems / Global Fund Summary of the implementation capacities for National Programs and Global Fund Grants For HIV /TB.
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Veterans Health Administration Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF) Program SSVF Grantee Uniform Monitoring.
Global Fund Proposal Development in Guinea: Round 10 Malaria Sarah Weber Catholic Relief Services 23 March 2011.
Ukraine Grant Making Mission Debrief. Purpose of the mission Agree on reinvestment of savings; Clarify TRP recommendations; Agree on implementation arrangements;
Grant implementation STOP TB workshop December 2005.
The CCM.
An Approach for Capacity Development & Transition
Capacity Development and Transition UNDPs Commitment to Capacity Development and Transition Capacity Development Assessment & Planning Capacity Development.
Access to HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Medicines. WHO/UNICEF Technical Briefing Seminar on Essential Medicines Policies. Geneva, 18 – 22 September.
Essentials of Grant Management Communication!. Keys to Award Management What documents make up your award package Reporting – taking responsibility for.
AF Project Cycle and Approval Process Panama City, Panama Nov, 2011.
1 Capacity Building: Strategy and Action Plan GEF-UNDP Strategic Partnership Capacity Development Initiative.
The Global Fund- structure, function and evolution February 18, 2008.
Overview of New Funding Model May 17, 2013 Astana, Kazakhstan.
Operationalizing the workplan and budget STOP TB workshop 14 December 2005.
Open Society Institute, Public Health Program Proposal Development and Advocacy Seminar for Eastern and Southern Africa Cape Town, South Africa 18 February.
Risk and Subaward Management under the Uniform Guidance U.S. Department of Education.
Project Appraisal: Overview March 28, Country Level Rapid Assessments: Key Areas A. Status of Plans and Activities Current status of AI in the country.
Strategic Plan th October Management and Governance “GeSCI’s corporate structures and management arrangements were appropriate for.
RHSC Meeting Kampala, May 2010 Quality for Medicines The Global Fund approach Sophie Logez Manager, QA and Data Quality Pharmaceutical Management.
The Global Fund - Proposal Process & Round 8 February 19, 2008.
TFM Progress Update Malaria Tobgyel, Dy. Chief Programme Officer Vector-borne Disease Control 31st CCM meting, 28th August, 2015.
Kyrgyzstan Global Fund/UNDP Cooperation in the Kyrgyz Republic.
Kashif Rasheed Manager Finance. Office of inspector General (OIG) Global Fund Secretariat Country Coordination Mechanism (CCM ) Principal Recipients (PR)
Global Fund Assessments Part I: Processes and Tools Geneva – December 2005.
Overcoming HIV/AIDS Epidemic in Ukraine National programme supported by GFATM Presentation by Alvaro Bermejo and Andriy Klepikov at the Stakeholders Meeting.
Grant Agreement Documents (between Global Fund and Principal Recipient) Workshop for TB Experts Hosted by WHO Stop TB and the Global Fund December 2005.
Overview of the Global Fund Procurement and Supply Management Issues Workshop for LAC Consultants th July 2009 Pharmaceutical Management Advisory.
M ODULE 5 PART 1: Introduction to Consolidation of Pharmaceutical and Health Product Management (PHPM) in the SSF Context GLOBAL FUND GRANT CONSOLIDATION.
Green Climate Fund TC Geneva, 9 September 2011 Enhanced Direct Access – The approach of the Global Fund. Katja Roll External Relations and Partnerships.
The Global Fund and Southern Africa A review of the structures and grants in southern Africa.
Overcoming HIV/AIDS Epidemic in Ukraine National programme supported by GFATM.
“Progress Update / Disbursement Request” (PU/DR) PSM Section PSM section, R-7 Malaria Sept 17,2011.
M&E System Strengthening Tool Workshop on effective Global Fund Grant negotiation and implementation planning January 2008 Manila, Philippines Monitoring.
15 step process for developing an inclusive and widely supported integrated RH/HIV Proposal R8 Richard Matikanya International HIV/AIDS Alliance.
The Global Fund December JulyG8 endorse new AIDS, TB and malaria targets in Okinawa 2001April June July African leaders commit to greater response.
M ODULE 6 PART 1: Planning and Stakeholder Management GLOBAL FUND GRANT CONSOLIDATION WORKSHOP DATE.
Consultant Advance Research Team. Outline UNDERSTANDING M&E DATA NEEDS PEOPLE, PARTNERSHIP AND PLANNING 1.Organizational structures with HIV M&E functions.
1 Phase 2 Grant Renewals - March A- Overview A.1- Performance-based Funding Y1Y2Y3Y4Y5 Proposal Initial Grant Agreement(s)Extension of Grant.
Early Alert and Response System (EARS): Accelerating implementation through prompt identification of bottlenecks and facilitating technical support to.
External Relations and Partnerships Harmonization and Coordination Experiences of the Global Fund.
TBS Meeting Geneva, November 2010 Procurement and Supply Management Policies WHO/UNICEF Technical Briefing Seminar on Essential Medicines Policies, November.
EVALUATION OF THE SEE SARMa Project. Content Project management structure Internal evaluation External evaluation Evaluation report.
1 January 2005 Introduction to Phase 2 and General Update Lesotho CCM.
NFM: Modular Template Measurement Framework: Modules, Interventions and Indicators LFA M&E Training February
Capacity Assessment of Implementers LFA PSM expert workshop January 2014.
Audits of Global Fund grants LFA Finance Training Workshop October-November 2013.
Updated PU/DR Guidelines and Annual Funding Decision LFA Finance Training October – November 2013.
CHAZ GF Partnership Forum GF Partnership Forum New Funding Model (NFM) Experiences 5 th to 8 th May 2015 Presented by: Michael M. Kachumi – Director Grants,
Annual Disbursement and Commitment Decisions LFA Finance Training 2013.
1 Technical Evaluation Reference Group (TERG) of the Global Fund TERG Update and CCM Assessment Results Prof Rolf Korte, Chair of TERG Prof Rose Leke,
FUSE TEMPUS Project Coordination Meeting Belgrade University, 27 and 28 November, 2014 INTERMEDIATE REPORT (IR) PREPARATION (+ Statement of the Costs Incurred.
Twelfth Board Meeting Marrakech, December 2005 Portfolio Committee: Report to the Board.
1 Programmatic and M&E Risk Identification, Management, and Mitigation LFA M&E Training February 2014.
Capacity Assessment of Implementers February 2014.
Technical Evaluation Reference Group (TERG) of the Global Fund TERG Update Prof Rolf Korte, Chair of TERG Prof Rose Leke, Vice-Chair of TERG Fifteenth.
Sharing solutions for better regional policies European Union | European Regional Development Fund Erika Fulgenzi Policy Officer | Interreg Europe JS
Stages of Research and Development
Harmonized Approach to Cash Transfers (HACT) to Implementing Partners
Subrecipient Monitoring
Daily group exercise (areas for TA at GA preparation and phase 1) Bottlenecks encountered Proposed solutions (entry points for TA, identification and.
An Overview of the Global Fund and its Architecture
PROCUREMENT FIDUCIARY ARRANGEMENTS IN SECTOR-WIDE APPROACHES (SWAps)
Access to Medicines for HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.
Review of integrated PSM resources and tools and introduction to group work Upjeet Chandan ICCM FTT 17th February 2016.
Presentation transcript:

Global Fund Assessments Part II: Understanding Assessment Results Geneva – December 2005

1 Reminder: Purpose of LFA Assessments The aim is to maximize speed to implementation and efficient and effective use of funds. Accordingly, the Global Fund together with assistance from all actors must: 1.determine if the nominated Principal Recipient’s existing systems and capacities are sufficient to implement successfully the approved proposal; and 2. identify critical capacity gaps (if any) that need to be addressed in the short- and/or long-term. It is important to remember that what is being assessed is the capacity of the nominated PR to implement successfully the program described in the proposal. Approval of the proposal by the Board is approval of the technical merit of the proposal (based on the TRP’s recommendation) and is not approval of the PR, implementation arrangements etc.

2 Key Elements of Assessments Overall Assessment Conclusion (A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, C2) Ratings in each functional area Identification of: (i) critical capacity gaps in each functional area (i) lack of critical information or implementation plans Recommendations for addressing critical gaps (capacity, information, planning etc.)

3 Translating assessment results into better implementation arrangements Most PRs are assessed in the “B” category (even an “A” rating for overall capacity may have a “B” rating in one functional area) The question is how and when to address the capacity issues identified How? –LFA makes recommendation –PR has self-assessed and has plans and suggestions –CCM involvement –Partners offer assistance → Collaborative process When? –A “B1” rating generally suggest that capacity issues can be addressed concurrently with implementation –A “B2” rating generally suggests that capacity issues need to be addressed before implementation begins (if they are not addressed in time, another entity may need to be brought in as an additional or replacement PR) → Aim is to ensure that PR can move to effective program implementation as soon as possible

4 Common capacity gaps Program Management: Lack of structure and clear lines of responsibility and terms of reference for key positions Lack of qualified staff and lack of training Lack of systems for assessing, selecting, managing and monitoring Sub-recipients Financial Management and Systems: Lack of qualified staff and lack of training Lack of systems for monitoring financial reporting of Sub-recipients Monitoring and Evaluation: Lack of qualified staff and lack of training Lack of systems for monitoring programmatic reporting of Sub-recipients M&E plan is unworkable in context No systems for verifying results Procurement and Supply Management Systems: Lack of qualified staff and lack of training In case of government PRs, over-cumbersome and slow procedures Weak capacity for forecasting and quantification

5 Other Common Weaknesses No M&E Plan No PSM Plan Unclear funding streams (Global Fund and other donors) Inconsistencies between workplan, budget, M&E Plan, PSM Plan etc.

6 Technical Assistance Areas where partner support and technical assistance can be critical to successful future implementation: Good advance planning, including workable M&E and procurement plans Systems in place to manage sub-recipients and ensure correct and complete reporting (including by ensuring rapid progress to signing agreements between PR and each SR) Identifying problems early on and seeking assistance Good communication with the FPM, including alerting the FPM early on if problems are identified

7 What is a Condition Precedent? Two key considerations: –The primary aim of the Global Fund is to make sure that grant funds reach the people who need them most as efficiently as possible. –The Global Fund’s guiding principle is that funding is conditional upon evidence of performance. If the Global Fund has identified capacity weaknesses of the PR, then there is a risk that the PR will not be able to implement the program and that: –Grant funds will not reach the target beneficiaries –There is no way for the Global Fund to assess performance Conditions precedent to disbursement are a way of managing that risk and keeping the PR focused on building capacity and improving program management.

8 The Proposal The proposal is developed by the country’s CCM and represents the CCM’s commitment as to goals, activities and targets for the program. The Global Fund Board makes a decision to grant funds on the basis of the goals, activities and targets set out in the proposal and on the basis of the TRP’s recommendation to the Board that the proposal has technical merit. The proposal is therefore the starting point for negotiations of the program documents, including the workplan, budget and attachment. Note that the TRP may require that the CCM provide clarification for certain aspects of the proposal and that, if acceptable to the TRP, such clarifications will amend the proposal.

9 Consistency General Principle: The program documents must be consistent with the proposal (as may have been adjusted during the TRP clarification process). Exceptions: In some cases, the PR may request deviations from the proposal. This is a re-programming. –Minor deviations from the proposal are usually permitted, provided that the PR provides written justification that is acceptable to the Global Fund. –Major deviations from the proposal require more in-depth analysis. The re- programming policy and procedure must be followed.

10 Material Re-programming What is material re-programming? A change which is so substantial that it questions whether the TRP would have approved the proposal as revised. Examples: substantial changes in targets, dropping or adding an activity (depending on the scale), introducing a new medical intervention (normally not dependent on scale).

11 Material Re-programming Procedure The CCM and PR must provide a written justification for the change, explaining the technical reasons that justify or necessitate the change (including supporting evidence e.g. recent survey results). The CCM and PR must also provide revised program documents (workplan, budget, attachment) highlighting the changes. If the change would result in a saving, then the CCM must also explain how such savings will be used (e.g. target for people treated with ARVs is reduced – how will the savings from reduced procurement be used?)

12 Material Re-programming Procedure (Cont.) The Global Fund will determine, on the basis of the documents provided by the CCM and PR, whether the changes requested are acceptable. The LFA will provide support to the Global Fund. The TRP will review the technical merit of the proposed changes.