-
Functional Areas
- Audit and Investigations
-
Capacity development and transition, strengthening systems for health
- A Strategic Approach to Capacity Development
- Capacity Development and Transition - Lessons Learned
- Capacity development and Transition Planning Process
- Capacity Development and Transition
- Capacity Development Objectives and Transition Milestones
- Capacity Development Results - Evidence From Country Experiences
- Functional Capacities
- Interim Principal Recipient of Global Fund Grants
- Legal and Policy Enabling Environment
- Overview
- Resilience and Sustainability
- Transition
-
Financial Management
- CCM Funding
- Grant Closure
- Grant Implementation
- Grant-Making and Signing
- Grant Reporting
- Overview
- Sub-recipient Management
-
Grant closure
- Overview
-
Steps of Grant Closure Process
- 1. Global Fund Notification Letter 'Guidance on Grant Closure'
- 2. Preparation and Submission of Grant Close-Out Plan and Budget
- 3. Global Fund Approval of Grant Close-Out Plan
- 4. Implementation of Close-Out Plan and Completion of Final Global Fund Requirements (Grant Closure Period)
- 5. Operational Closure of Project
- 6. Financial Closure of Project
- 7. Documentation of Grant Closure with Global Fund Grant Closure Letter
- Terminology and Scenarios for Grant Closure Process
- Human resources
- Human rights, key populations and gender
-
Legal Framework
- Agreements with Sub-sub-recipients
- Amending Legal Agreements
- Implementation Letters and Management Letters
- Language of the Grant Agreement and other Legal Instruments
- Legal Framework for Other UNDP Support Roles
- Other Legal and Implementation Considerations
- Overview
- Project Document
- Signing Legal Agreements and Requests for Disbursement
-
The Grant Agreement
- Grant Confirmation: Conditions Precedent (CP)
- Grant Confirmation: Conditions
- Grant Confirmation: Face Sheet
- Grant Confirmation: Limited Liability Clause
- Grant Confirmation: Schedule 1, Integrated Grant Description
- Grant Confirmation: Schedule 1, Performance Framework
- Grant Confirmation: Schedule 1, Summary Budget
- Grant Confirmation: Special Conditions (SCs)
- Grant Confirmation
- UNDP-Global Fund Grant Regulations
- Monitoring and Evaluation
- Principal Recipient Start-Up
-
Procurement and Supply Management
- Development of List of Health Products and Procurement Action Plan
- Distribution and Inventory Management
- Overview
- Price and Quality Reporting (PQR) System
- Procurement of Non-health Products and Services
- Procurement of Pharmaceutical and Other Health Products
- Quality Control
- Rational use of Medicines and Pharmacovigilance Systems
- Strengthening of PSM Services and Risk Mitigation
- UNDP Health PSM Roster
- UNDP Quality Assurance Policy and Plan
-
Reporting
- Communicating Results
- Grant Performance Report
- Overview
- Performance-based Funding and Disbursement Decision
- PR and Coordinating Mechanism (CM) Communication and Governance
- Reporting to the Global Fund
- UNDP Corporate Reporting
-
Risk Management
- Common Risks Identified in Global Fund Programmes
- Global Fund Risk Management
- Introduction to Risk Management
- Overview
- Risk Management in High Risk Environments
- Risk Management in UNDP-managed Global Fund Grants
- Risk management in UNDP
- UNDP Risk Management in the Global Fund Portfolio
- Sub-Recipient Management
M&E Components of Grant Implementation
The Global Fund has a series of monitoring and evaluation requirements that take place during grant implementation:
(i) Health facility assessments (HFA): Focus on nationally representative, country-led HFAs (including data quality reviews) in High-Impact countries;
ii) On site data verification (OSDV)/ rapid service quality assessment (RSQA) assessments have been replaced with a set of assessment options customizable to the country context including national health facility assessments, targeted health facility assessments, special studies, programmatic spot checks, national data quality reviews, and/or targeted data quality reviews.
| Country Category | Assessment Approach | |||
| Programme Quality | Data Quality | Programmatic Reporting | Programme Evaluations | |
| Focused countries |
Programmatic spot-check, targeted health facility assessment, or special study in selected countries As required based on risks |
Targeted data quality review (DQR) in selected countries As required based on risks |
Report required every year. No Local Fund Agent (LFA) review. |
Targeted and thematic evaluations Required at least once during the implementation period |
| Core countries |
Programmatic spot-check, national or targeted health facility assessment, or special study Required every other year |
National or targeted DQR Required every other year |
Report required every 6 months. LFA review required annually, mid-year review optional. | |
| High Impact countries |
National health facility assessment Required once during the implementation period, aligned with the country reviews and planning cycle |
If Health Facility Assessment year, include the DQR; if not HFA year, complete a targeted data quality review or desk review Required every year |
Report required every 6 months. LFA review required annually, mid-year review optional. |
Evaluations including in-depth assessment of impact Required once during the implementation period |
For more details on programme and data quality assessment options please see the Global Fund Operational Policy Manual (Note on Data Quality Assessments).
Role of the Principal Recipient in data quality review (DQR)
The role of the Principal Recipient (PR) is primarily to facilitate the exercise and access to sites, as the PRs do for LFA verifications or Office of Audit and Investigations (OAI) and Office of the Inspector General (OIG). However, the PR continues to be accountable for the quality of the data and should continue its own data quality assurance processes.
Planning and budgeting for DQR
For 2017 the Global Fund has already entered into agreement with 11 external assurance providers who will be conducting the DQR exercises and they will subcontract national service providers for data collection and field work. The Global Fund will determine in which countries the DQR needs to be done and what the scope would be.
The costs for a nationally representative HFA should be planned for within the grant. As the Global Fund moves to this new model of programme and data quality assessments, there will be a transition period and it is recognized that not all grants will be able to absorb these costs immediately. In the short-term (2016-17), additional funding for HFAs will be provided through the central external assurance budgeting process. Beyond this period, it is anticipated that the cost of these assessments will be integrated into the grants. Funding for the quality assurance of these national HFA/DQR surveys (e.g. verification of the sampling methodology, reassessment of 5% of the sites surveyed, etc.) will continue to be funded centrally.
Loading resources
