Technical Evaluation Reference Group

Strategic Reviews

As part of its responsibilities, the Technical Evaluation Reference Group periodically performs strategic reviews on the work of the Global Fund and the implementation of its strategies.

2015 Strategic Review

  • Strategic Review 2015
    download in English

In 2015, the Global Fund Board asked the Technical Evaluation Reference Group to conduct a strategic review with the following two objectives:

  • Review progress made against the 2012-2016 strategy
  • Assess impact made against the three diseases


The strategic review included both quantitative and qualitative analysis, including structured document reviews, analyses of existing data, online surveys with key informants and focus group discussions, making maximum use of existing data.

Objective 1

For the first objective, in-depth case studies were carried out on 16 countries, which included on-site visits in four of these countries. These case studies included more qualitative information on:

  • How the Global Fund strategy has been operationalized and what impact this may have had on the implementation of national disease programs
  • Possible causality between the strategy and changed behavior/outcomes, both at the country level and at the Secretariat

The intention of the case studies was not to produce separate reports for each of the countries or specifically evaluate and judge the Global Fund's performance in each country. Instead, they provided the basic evidence to allow systematic analysis across the differing country contexts.

Objective 2

For the second objective, the reference group looked at the impact made on the three diseases between 2000 and 2014 and, specifically, progress made against the goals outlined in the 2012-2016 strategy of 10 million lives saved and 140-180 million infections averted.

This involved two broad sets of analysis:

  1. An “adequacy” impact assessment on 27 countries to assess whether expected changes in impact indicators occurred over the relevant period. Modeling data, country impact profiles and program review data were used for this analysis
  2. A “plausibility” assessment to answer the question: Did the program have an effect on the disease above and beyond other external factors?


The review was based on the following five principles:

  1. Use a partner approach which builds on, collaborates and synchronizes evaluations with partners while maintaining rigor and objectivity
  2. Conduct periodic evaluations on an ongoing basis rather than through large-scale one-off evaluations (“five years of evaluation rather than a five-year evaluation”)
  3. Rely on plausibility designs to the extent possible that provide evidence of program impact, positive and negative, built on agreed monitoring and evaluation results chains and taking into account non-program influences on outcomes
  4. Build on country platforms by use of national systems (e.g. disease program reviews) and strengthening of country monitoring and evaluation capacity
  5. Focus on practicality for grant management such that reviews provide a limited number of actionable recommendations

The results of the Strategic Review 2015 contributed to the development of the Global Fund Strategy 2017-2022.