Aidspan - independent watchdog of the Global Fund and publisher of Global Fund Observer
Aidspan is a non-governmental Kenya-based organization whose mission is to reinforce the effectiveness of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. Aidspan does so by serving as an independent watchdog of the Fund, and by providing services that can benefit all countries wishing to obtain and make effective use of Global Fund financing. Aidspan finances its work primarily through grants from foundations. Aidspan does not accept Global Fund money, perform paid consulting work, or charge for any of its products.
Aidspan provides the following services:
1. Watchdog services
- Watch for and constructively comment on ways in which the Global Fund's leadership, Secretariat or grant recipients may not be living up to the Fund's founding principles.
- Communicate findings publicly (via Global Fund Observer) or privately, as appropriate.
2. Publication services
- Global Fund Observer (GFO), a free email newsletter providing news, analysis and commentary to over 7,000 subscribers in 170 countries.
- Aidspan Guides, a series of free publications providing detailed practical advice to those applying for, overseeing or implementing Global Fund grants.
3. Web services
- The Grant Details, Analysis and Evaluation pages on Aidspan's web site, a comprehensive on-line resource for comparing the performance of Global Fund grants.
- More web services (forthcoming).
4. Facilitation services
- Global Fund Round Tables for global health leaders and advocates (under the direction of a multi-sectoral steering committee).
- More facilitation services (forthcoming).
Aidspan Spotlight
Aidspan's facilitation services are provided in both developing and developed countries. In developing countries, Aidspan works with others to increase the number of viable grant applications that are submitted to the Global Fund, to strengthen the effectiveness of Country Coordinating Mechanisms (CCMs), and to improve the chances that grants are effectively implemented. In developed countries, it works with others to improve the chances that more money will be given to the Global Fund.
Aidspan's Grant Details, Analysis and Evaluation pages show how well each Global Fund grant is performing against its own goals and in relation to other grants. Based on in-depth data automatically downloaded from the Global Fund's website on a regular basis, the system offers both a graphical and a tabular assessment of the performance of each grant.
Global Fund Observer (GFO) is a widely-read, authoritative and free email-based newsletter, produced by Aidspan, that provides an independent platform for news, analysis and commentary about the Global Fund to over 7,000 subscribers in 170 countries.
Global AIDS and the Global Fund
Since its inception, the Global Fund has approved 526 grants, of which 309 have been extended to Phase 2 (Years 3 and beyond).
The most recent agreement for a new grant was signed on 27 October 2008, providing an initial amount of $3,760,839 for an HIV/AIDS project in Afghanistan.
The most recent agreement to extend a grant beyond its initial 2-year period was signed on 19 October 2008, providing $8,537,857 for an HIV/AIDS project in Mauritania.
Funding has been distributed by disease component and by region as follows:
| Approved funding by disease component | |
|---|---|
| HIV/AIDS | $6.78 billion |
| Malaria | $2.82 billion |
| TB | $1.63 billion |
| Mixed | $0.29 billion |
| Approved funding by region | |
| East Africa | $3.34 billion |
| Southern Africa | $2.03 billion |
| East Asia and the Pacific | $1.52 billion |
| West and Central Africa | $1.33 billion |
| Eastern Europe and Central Asia | $0.90 billion |
| Latin America and the Caribbean | $0.89 billion |
| South Asia | $0.84 billion |
| North Africa and the Middle East | $0.69 billion |
For details of individual grants, country-by-country information, indications of which grants are ahead of or behind schedule, and more, visit the Grant Details, Analysis and Evaluation pages on this site.
Recent News
The Board has endorsed in principle the idea that the Fund will implement a “new architecture” in which Rounds-based grants and RCC grants will be replaced by a “single stream of funding.” One feature of this is that starting with Round 10, the Fund will have a new round every six months rather than every twelve months.
The Global Fund Board has approved Round 8 grants that will cost up to $2.75 billion over the first two years - a record amount. However, because of financial shortfalls, the Board insisted on some cuts to the budgets in the Round 8 grants, and also delayed by six months the date at which Round 9 grants will be approved.
Recent News
The Board has endorsed in principle the idea that the Fund will implement a “new architecture” in which Rounds-based grants and RCC grants will be replaced by a “single stream of funding.” One feature of this is that starting with Round 10, the Fund will have a new round every six months rather than every twelve months.
The Global Fund Board has approved Round 8 grants that will cost up to $2.75 billion over the first two years - a record amount. However, because of financial shortfalls, the Board insisted on some cuts to the budgets in the Round 8 grants, and also delayed by six months the date at which Round 9 grants will be approved.
Recent GFO Highlights
“The Global Fund is a remarkable creature, because although it has a budget regarding operating costs, it has no budget specifying how much it will give in grants each year. This has inevitably led to a roller-coaster ride for the Fund; and never was that more apparent than at the board meeting that ended on Saturday.”
Aidspan today published a report entitled "An Analysis of Global Fund Grant Ratings". The key finding of the report is:
"Global Fund grants have shown distinct improvements in performance over the past three years. Each year, International NGOs have performed significantly better, on average, than any other PR type. Non-international NGOs have performed slightly less well, on average, than Ministries of Health, but they have steadily improved, from being the least well-performing PR type (out of ten) in 2006, to being the second best in 2008. Overall, Ministries of Finance have been the least well-performing PR type, and UNDP the second least well-performing."
The report can be downloaded, in English only, from www.aidspan.org/aidspanpublications.
David Garmaise writes, “The reporting relationships, and the chain of command, involving the CCM, the PR and the Global Fund are very unusual and not particularly intuitive, and are even more unusual when one adds the LFA into the mix. The Fund’s Guidance Paper on CCM Oversight discusses this in limited detail and in language that is bland, sometimes repetitive and sometimes confusing.”
David Garmaise says “The forty case studies highlight what is and is not working well in CCMs. However, it is important not to assume that the findings of the report can be generalised across all CCMs. While [some of] the case studies paint a very rosy picture of partnership, ... anecdotal evidence suggests that in many CCMs the public-private partnership is not working well and civil society does not have an equal voice at the table.”
An analysis conducted by GFO shows that half of all countries that are eligible to receive Global Fund grants currently provide ARV treatment to less than 25% of those that need it, and/or have at least 25,000 people who need ARV treatment but are not receiving it.
Recent GFO Highlights
“The Global Fund is a remarkable creature, because although it has a budget regarding operating costs, it has no budget specifying how much it will give in grants each year. This has inevitably led to a roller-coaster ride for the Fund; and never was that more apparent than at the board meeting that ended on Saturday.”
Aidspan today published a report entitled "An Analysis of Global Fund Grant Ratings". The key finding of the report is:
"Global Fund grants have shown distinct improvements in performance over the past three years. Each year, International NGOs have performed significantly better, on average, than any other PR type. Non-international NGOs have performed slightly less well, on average, than Ministries of Health, but they have steadily improved, from being the least well-performing PR type (out of ten) in 2006, to being the second best in 2008. Overall, Ministries of Finance have been the least well-performing PR type, and UNDP the second least well-performing."
The report can be downloaded, in English only, from www.aidspan.org/aidspanpublications.
David Garmaise writes, “The reporting relationships, and the chain of command, involving the CCM, the PR and the Global Fund are very unusual and not particularly intuitive, and are even more unusual when one adds the LFA into the mix. The Fund’s Guidance Paper on CCM Oversight discusses this in limited detail and in language that is bland, sometimes repetitive and sometimes confusing.”
David Garmaise says “The forty case studies highlight what is and is not working well in CCMs. However, it is important not to assume that the findings of the report can be generalised across all CCMs. While [some of] the case studies paint a very rosy picture of partnership, ... anecdotal evidence suggests that in many CCMs the public-private partnership is not working well and civil society does not have an equal voice at the table.”
An analysis conducted by GFO shows that half of all countries that are eligible to receive Global Fund grants currently provide ARV treatment to less than 25% of those that need it, and/or have at least 25,000 people who need ARV treatment but are not receiving it.
Recent Publications
Description:
This Aidspan report presents an analysis by Aidspan of Global Fund grant ratings. Its key finding is:
"Global Fund grants have shown distinct improvements in performance over the past three years. Each year, International NGOs have performed significantly better, on average, than any other PR type. Non-international NGOs have performed slightly less well, on average, than Ministries of Health, but they have steadily improved, from being the least well-performing PR type (out of ten) in 2006, to being the second best in 2008. Overall, Ministries of Finance have been the least well-performing PR type, and UNDP the second least well-performing."
This report is available in English only.
Download options:
| English |  845KB |
 1.3MB |
Description:
This Aidspan report examines the extent to which proposals to the Global Fund that were submitted by countries in sub-Saharan Africa in Rounds 1-7, and that were accepted for funding, included services and activities that were gender-responsive. (Programmes are said to be gender-responsive when they provide services specifically for women, promote equal access for women to services provided to both men and women, or include activities addressing other factors that contribute to gender inequality.)
The document also reports on what results have been achieved for gender-related services and activities in Global Fund grants in five focus countries - Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia. Finally, the report examines (a) how the lack of sex-disaggregated data hampers efforts to measure the impact of programmes on women; and (b) the role of the Global Fund in promoting gender-responsiveness.
The findings of this report should be useful to CCMs, PRs, the Global Fund, women's groups, providers of technical support, and others with an interest in promoting the gender-responsiveness of programmes addressing HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria.
This report is available in English only.
Download options:
| English | 333KB |
881KB |
Recent Publications
Description:
This Aidspan report presents an analysis by Aidspan of Global Fund grant ratings. Its key finding is:
"Global Fund grants have shown distinct improvements in performance over the past three years. Each year, International NGOs have performed significantly better, on average, than any other PR type. Non-international NGOs have performed slightly less well, on average, than Ministries of Health, but they have steadily improved, from being the least well-performing PR type (out of ten) in 2006, to being the second best in 2008. Overall, Ministries of Finance have been the least well-performing PR type, and UNDP the second least well-performing."
This report is available in English only.
Download options:
| English | 845KB |
1.3MB |
Description:
This Aidspan report examines the extent to which proposals to the Global Fund that were submitted by countries in sub-Saharan Africa in Rounds 1-7, and that were accepted for funding, included services and activities that were gender-responsive. (Programmes are said to be gender-responsive when they provide services specifically for women, promote equal access for women to services provided to both men and women, or include activities addressing other factors that contribute to gender inequality.)
The document also reports on what results have been achieved for gender-related services and activities in Global Fund grants in five focus countries - Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia. Finally, the report examines (a) how the lack of sex-disaggregated data hampers efforts to measure the impact of programmes on women; and (b) the role of the Global Fund in promoting gender-responsiveness.
The findings of this report should be useful to CCMs, PRs, the Global Fund, women's groups, providers of technical support, and others with an interest in promoting the gender-responsiveness of programmes addressing HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria.
This report is available in English only.
Download options:
| English | 333KB |
881KB |