Development Partners

Development partners are multilateral partners, that is international agencies related to the United Nations; and bilateral agencies, that is government agencies of industrialized nations.

The Global Fund relies on international organizations for technical expertise – at Board level and for the Secretariat, to Country Coordinating Mechanisms (CCMs) and potential Principal Recipients. Such organizations include the World Health Organization (WHO), the Joint United Nations programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), the United Nations Development Programme, (UNDP), public private partnerships (Roll Back Malaria, Stop TB, UNITAID) and the World Bank which serves as the Global Fund’s trustee.

Bilateral partners are donors, Board members, CCM members, providers of technical assistance and implementing partners. Their strong engagement with the Global Fund is essential at all levels to clarify policy issues, harmonize the Global Fund’s procedures with established development practices and to identify specific roles bilateral partners may undertake at country level to support the Global Fund  process. The Global Fund enters in to partnership agreements with bilateral partners where mutually identified as necessary.

As a financing institution, the Global Fund does not provide technical assistance to its grant recipients. Rather, it relies on development partners to engage in every stage of proposal writing, grant implementation and monitoring and evaluation of Global Fund programs.

With the growth of Global Fund funding in countries, Global Fund processes have become increasingly complex. These investments can create additional burdens on implementers and partners at the country level when not aligned with country structures or harmonized with other partners’ support. As part of a collective effort on aid effectiveness in the follow-up to the Paris Declaration and the Accra Agenda for Action, the Global Fund is taking part in monitoring the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (coordinated by OECD) working with partners to improve data quality and consistency  through monitoring; and identifying successes and challenges in implementing results-based management frameworks in countries with a focus on impact towards the Millennium Development Goals.

Another significant global effort in line with the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness and the Accra Agenda for Action is the international Health Partnership and related initiatives (IHP+). Along with a number of other agencies and bilateral partners, the Global Fund is a signatory of the IHP Global Compact and is committee to the principles of harmonization, alignment and coordination.

Key players

A crucial role of the country-level partnership during proposal development lies with the technical agencies, particularly the UN and partnerships hosted by WHO such as Roll Back Malaria and Stop TB Partnerships, in identifying priorities for response to the disease. In order to formalize these partnerships the Global Fund has signed Memoranda of Understanding with UNAIDS, UNDP and the World Bank.

For its commodity purchases, the Global Fund is working with global supply mechanisms such as the Global TB Drug Facility, UNICEF and private sector companies.

UNDP functions as the Principal Recipient of last resort. This arrangement is relevant in a few countries, where for various reasons national Principal Recipients cannot be found. In addition UNDP sits on several Country Coordinating Mechanisms.

The Global Fund regularly consults with the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI) on issues related to the grant process, evaluation and impact assessment. Created in 2000 and based on similar principles as the Fund, GAVI has provided valuable lessons for the Fund in its formative period. The Global Fund, GAVI and the World Bank (with technical support from WHO) are working to harmonize their Health System Strengthening (HSS) strategies and funding frameworks under a pilot joint funding platform.

Provision of disease-specific technical assistance is supported through UNAIDS Technical Support Facilities, Roll Back Malaria, the Stop TB Partnership, and the Green Light Committee. The Office of the U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator (OGAC) has made millions of dollars available for technical assistance activities to support Global Fund grant implementation.

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH, the government-owned German corporation for international cooperation, is funding the BACKUP Initiative which was initiated in September 2002. The initiative assists Germany's partner countries to fully exploit the potential and opportunities provided by global financing mechanisms. It provides financial and technical resources to strengthen Country Co-ordinating Mechanisms, offers capacity building and supports monitoring and evaluation.

Country support is also provided by the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD), Swedish International Development Agency (SIDA), the UK Department for International Development (DfID), the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) and others to a wide range of countries. NORAD has also provided financial support to WHO to strengthen its capacity to advise countries on issues related to the grant applications and program support.

In Latin America, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) is supporting the design and implementation of country-led projects working to supplement financing for health-related programs.

The International Labour Office (ILO) is working with the Global Fund to strengthen public-private partnerships in recipient countries and focus attention on joint employee/community programs for funding. It has set in motion a joint initiative to invite private sector engagement in Country Coordinating Mechanisms and encourage co-financing proposals from the private sector.

The GIP Esther, a French Aid organization working to enhance the capacity in developing countries to treat HIV positive people, also works in partnership with the Global Fund.

Parliamentarians play an important role both as advocates and policy makers. Their advocacy can – and has – influenced funding decisions taken by donor governments.