Programmatic Sections of the Progress Update

The PU/DR (refers to both PU/PUDR) is received via the Global Fud Partner Portal. The Programmatic reporting section of the PU/DR includes Tab 1A: Impact/Outcome Indicators; 1B: Impact/Outcome Disaggregation; 1C: Coverage Indicators; 1D: Coverage Indicators Disaggregation, and 1E: Workplan Tracking Measures (WPTMs).

For the reporting period in question, the PU/DR is pre-filled with all the required impact, outcome, coverage indicator targets and WPTMs that need to be reported upon. It is recommended as a first step to double-check that all pre-filled information on the indicators and corresponding targets match the most recently agreed Performance Framework. Please note Performance Framework revisions may take up to three months to process, therefore the pre-filled information may reflect previously agreed indicator/target. However, certain time sensitive Performance Framework revisions can be completed after approval of the revision request based on a notification email issued to the PR which can later be formalized through an Implementation Letter.

It is important to note that for some grants, the reporting of indicator disaggregation (at impact, outcome and coverage level) may not be required. If required, disaggregation reporting is only required for the PU/DR and not the PU. Required disaggregation to be completed should automatically be prepopulated in the PU/DR received. You may also refer to the Modular Framework Handbook for greater detail on indicator disaggregation if the grant is required to report upon disaggregation. As of GC7, the Global Fund has included equity and gender indicators in the Performance Framework that may be either standard or custom indicators under impact, outcome, or coverage). If they are custom indicators, disaggregation for these indicators are not required.

For Challenging Operating Environment (COE) countries, particularly those in acute crises, the Global Fund CT may grant flexibilities in reporting requirements such as reporting due date extensions, deactivation of certain indicators, and post PUDR-performance rating adjustments. The PR should reach out to their respective GF CT to better understand their available flexibilities under reporting.

Impact/outcome indicators

If an indicator result is unavailable or delayed, it is important to note this, as well as the reasons for the delay and revised timelines, in the comment field for the indicator in question. The indicator result will then become outstanding, and the indicator will reappear in the next reporting period and continue to appear until reported upon. If an indicator result is delayed due to a postponement of a planned survey from one year to the next, it is important to coordinated with the Global Fund CT in changing the Performance Framework target to correspond to the new year in which the result will become available for reporting.

As survey results may not become available within the typical three-year lifetime of a grant, the Global Fund may include in the PF reporting timeframes beyond the grant end date. These results are usually reported in the grant closure period in the last PU. If the results are only available past the grant closure period, and the related interventions are supported by the new grant, these indicators are included in the new grant and the last available results are used to set the baselines in the new PFs.

In the PR comments field, the following information should be summarized: (a) results achieved, (b) data sources, (c) analysis of trends over time, and (d) any other relevant contextual information. Particularly it is encouraged to seek inputs from technical partners while drafting the performance analyses and explain any deviations from targets and / or prior results.

Please note: Although the PR may only have to report on a subset of impact and or outcome indicators in a given reporting period, it is recommended to keep track of the implementation of the surveys necessary for future reporting (e.g. malaria indicator survey (MIS) or Integrated Biological and Behavior Survey).

Coverage indicators

The results reported normally reflect activities carried out in the period just completed and should be reported against the indicators and targets from the most recent approved Performance Framework. In some cases, however, it may not be possible to receive information before the 45-day or 60-day window for reporting to the Global Fund elapses. If such delay is unavoidable, the Principal Recipient (PR) should still submit the report for that period, include all available data at the time of report submission, specify the reporting completeness percentage and provide the updated results to the LFA during the verification process. If the time-lag in data collection for any of the indicators goes beyond the reporting deadline, and already known at grant negotiations, it is advisable to stipulate this information in the indicator comments field in the Performance Framework.

In the PR comments field, the following information should be summarized: (a) results achieved, (b) data sources, and (c) any other contextual information, the PR should explain specific reasons for under- or over-achievement of targets. An analysis of disaggregated results by geographic areas will enable to identify areas with the lowest performance which will help in the planning of targeted actions. Examples of common reasons for underachievement include: delays in disbursement or procurement, Sub-recipients (SRs) not contracted in the time originally planned or sub-optimal functionality, challenges in robust and reliable data collection, or other implementation challenges. This explanation is very important in the PU/DR. The PR should report all specific shortcomings/obstacles that may have impacted the achievement of the target and mitigating circumstances beyond its control. The PR should also summarise all remedial actions completed or in progress (or planned) to address under-performance; to the extent possible, the timelines and responsible person/entities should be specified. Any progress made on the respective measures should be similarly reported in the current and future PU/DRs.

Note: The GFP-HST M&E team provides support to all countries in the development and quality assurance of programmatic sections of Progress Updates, as specified in the sub-section Additional support for PU/DR preparation below.

Workplan tracking measure (WPTM):

For some interventions it is difficult to measure results in quantitative terms (e.g. the removing legal barriers and community systems strengthening). For these, qualitative/process measures are used to assess their effectiveness. These are known as WPTMs and are defined during grant negotiations along with established criteria for completion and timelines.

At reporting it is important to select the progress status as it relates to the established criteria for completion from O-Not Started, no progress against planned milestone or target; 1-Started, less than 50% of the milestone or target completed; 2-Advancing, 50% or more completion of planned milestone or target; and 3-Completed, 100% achievement of planned milestone or target.

Similar to coverage indicators, it is important to summarise in the comment field (a) progress made and results achieved; (b) reasons for deviation from workplan activities and milestones, as applicable, and contextual information if applicable; and (c) for the remedial actions for WTPM with limited progress.

Finally, it is important to note that completion of the WPTMs will not impact the grant ranting unless the entire grant is composed of WPTMs or if a disease specific grant contains substantial investments in RSSH and/or Community Rights Gender (CRG) - related modules. In these specific grants, if the overall WPTM rating is below 60%, the Rating can be downgraded by one rating grade.

Additional support for PU/DR preparation

The GFPHST M&E team provides support to all countries in the development and quality assurance of programmatic sections of Progress Updates during each reporting cycle.

In January 2023, the UNDP Global Fund Partnership and Health Systems Team (GFPHST) developed and disseminated further guidance to support PMUs in preparing and quality assuring programmatic sections of the PU/DR. This guidance is available in English, French, Russian and Spanish.

In February 2024, GFPHST hosted a webinar for to provide UNDP Country Office (CO) Project Management Units (PMUs) an overview of existing guidance for programmatic sections of S2 2023 or annual 2023 PU/PUDR submissions and examples of good practices and lessons learned from prior reporting cycles. The session recording and resources can be accessed here.

The deadline to submit the PU/DR for review by the UNDP Global Fund Partnership and Health Systems Team (GFPHST) is 5 working days before the Global Fund deadline.

Following the submission of the PU/DR, the report is reviewed and verified by the Local Fund Agent. Based on the LFA-verified report, Global Fund issues a Management Letter (ML), which provides feedback and recommendations for the PR on the implementation of the programme. The Country Team should normally issue the Performance Letter and Performance Rating within 95 days (PU) and 110 days (PUDR) from last reporting period end-date.

The PR should respond in writing to the Global Fund addressing the issues raised in the ML, by the deadline specified in the ML or no later than two weeks following receipt of the ML.

Grant Management

In Grant Management (Tab 9), all Grant Requirements contained in the Grant Agreement/Grant Confirmation or management actions in any subsequent implementation letters that are due for reporting during the period covered by the Progress Update should be listed. The PR must provide a status update on all listed CP and special conditions SCs. In addition, all management actions assigned to the PR by the Global Fund that are outstanding should be listed with a reference to the date of the respective Performance Letter and action number. Comments on progress toward fulfilment should be provided for each management action.

Principal Recipient’s Self-Assessment

In PR’s Overall Self Evaluation of grant performance (Tab 10), the PR should include self-evaluation of grant performance to date, undertaken by taking into account programmatic achievements, financial performance and programme issues in various functional areas (M&E, finance, health product management, and programme management, including management of SRs); a description of external contextual factors that have had or may have an impact on programme performance; a description of any planned changes to the programme. More comprehensive guidance on this can be found in the PU/DR guidelines (p.59 of the English version dated 17 February 2022).

If during programme implementation the PR observes that a target set or an indicator agreed to in the PF is no longer applicable/achievable, due to a changing epidemiological landscape or reasons beyond the control of the PR, this should be brought to the attention of the FPM and a request to amend the PF through an Implementation Letter should be considered. For more information, please refer to the Monitoring and Evaluation section.

Additional guidance to support this area of work are also available through resources listed below:

• Recording and resources from Webinar on S22023 and Annual Reporting – Programmatic sections