title: Implementing Global Fund programs: a survey of opinions and experiences of the Principal Recipients across 69 countries.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Principal Recipients (PRs) receive money from the Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (Global Fund) to manage and implement programs. However, little research has gone into understanding their opinions and experiences. This survey set out to describe these, thereby providing a baseline against which changes in PR opinions and experiences can be assessed as the recently introduced new funding model is rolled out.
  
  
  METHODS
  An internet based questionnaire was administered to 315 PRs. A total of 115 responded from 69 countries in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe and Latin America. The study was conducted between September and December 2012.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Three quarters of PRs thought the progress update and disbursement request (PU/DR) system was a useful method of reporting grant progress. However, most felt that the grant negotiation processes were complicated, and that the grant rating system did not reflect performance.While nearly all PRs were happy with the work being done by sub-Recipients (92%) and Fund Portfolio Managers (86%), fewer were happy with the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). Non-government PRs were generally less happy with the OIG's work compared to government PRs.Most PRs thought the Global Fund's Voluntary Pooled Procurement system made procurement easier. However, only 29% said the system should be made compulsory.When asked which aspects of the Global Fund's operations needed improvement, most PRs said that the Fund should re-define and clarify the roles of different actors, minimize staff turnover at its Secretariat, and shorten the grant application and approval processes. All these are currently being addressed, either directly or indirectly, under a new funding model. Vigorous assessments should nonetheless follow the roll-out of the new model to ensure the areas that are most likely to affect PR performance realize sustained improvement.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Opinions and experiences with the Global Fund were varied, with PRs having good communication with Fund Portfolio Managers and sub-Recipients, but being unhappy with the grant negotiation and grant rating systems. Recommendations included simplifying grant processes, finding performance assessment methods that look beyond numbers, and employing Local Fund Agents who understand public health aspects of programs.
authors.affiliation: Aidspan, Nairobi, Kenya. frankfula@yahoo.com.
authors.forename: Francis
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Wafula
authors.forename: Charles
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Marwa
authors.forename: David
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: McCoy
mesh_terms: D000163:Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome / Q000191:economics; D000349:Africa; D001208:Asia; D005061:Europe, Eastern; D005381:Financing, Organized / Q000458:organization & administration*; D014943:Global Health / Q000191:economics*; D006078:Government Programs / Q000458:organization & administration*; D006801:Humans; D007391:International Cooperation; D007843:Latin America; D008288:Malaria / Q000191:economics; D015397:Program Evaluation; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D014376:Tuberculosis / Q000191:economics