5 July 2021
Chapter 5 presents findings on the role the PCE has played at the country and global levels, including the way recommendations and other inputs have been used by national program and grant managers and the inputs the PCE has made to Strategy Committee and Secretariat decisions and processes at the Global Fund Secretariat. [...] The advantages of input-based budgeting in terms of up front control and risk management did not outweigh the complexity of subsequent adaptations to implementation plans during the course of the grant cycle. [...] Figure 3 illustrates the magnitude of budget variance (the difference between the budgets from the first 3 semester PU/DRs and the original approved grant budgets) for grants in six PCE countries.9 The trends varied by country, with increases to the implementation budgets compared to the original budgets in Uganda and Sudan, and overall decreases in Cambodia, Senegal, Myanmar and DRC. [...] This was evidenced through: reinvestment of grant savings to support the scale up of proven priority interventions and services focusing on high burden geographies and key populations; the integration of portfolio optimization funds to implement interventions in the Unqualified Quality Demand (UQD) register; and revised performance frameworks and increased programmatic targets in line with the add. [...] As reported in the 2018-19 PCE synthesis report, the misalignment of timelines for approval and disbursement of matching funds from the main grants contributed in large part to implementation delays (of note, for the 2020-2022 allocation period, this issue has been addressed by the Secretariat and matching funds will be submitted within the main grant).