The Global Fund and HMNInvesting in country health systems

Daniel Low-Beer, Geneva

September 2006

Contents

1. Why the Global Fund model needs HMN?

2. Challenges in 2007

3. Discussion

The Global Fund Model

• Performance based funding– Active use of data at all stages– Strong incentives related to funding

• Investing in country systems– Nominal 5-10% of funds (US$ 100 million p.a.)– Can we jointly invest these funds?

• Limited mandate: needs to work through HMN– Disease initiatives: link to health systems

Global scope of grant funds in countries

Financial Status Grants signed

US$

Money disbursed

US$

Mean time elapsed in grants

Mean funds disbursed

Disbursed/ time

Global Fund financing (US$), 15th May 2006

4 billion 2.26 billion 69% 64% 93%

Financing 333 grants in 127 countriesFinancing 333 grants in 127 countries

Country owned funds: 3 diseases central to health systems

Funding follows demonstrated performance

29

76

29

6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

A B1 B2 C

Grant Peformance Rating at Phase 2

Nu

mb

er o

f G

ran

ts75% of grants succeeding

21% show potential

Challenges in 2007

• Investing in country data systems– Programmatic and impact data– Health systems and three diseases

• Implementing Joint Tools– Joint Partner M&E toolkit (includes HSS)– M&E self assessment checklist– 5 year evaluation

• Flexibility in GF grant process?

Conclusion: the Global Fund needs HMN

• Does HMN need the Global Fund ?– Making M&E investments materialise

• What can we show by the end of 2007?– M&E checklist and costed plans– Concrete areas of work