-
Functional Areas
- Audit and Investigations
-
Capacity development and transition, strengthening systems for health
- A Strategic Approach to Capacity Development
- Capacity Development and Transition - Lessons Learned
- Capacity development and Transition Planning Process
- Capacity Development and Transition
- Capacity Development Objectives and Transition Milestones
- Capacity Development Results - Evidence From Country Experiences
- Functional Capacities
- Interim Principal Recipient of Global Fund Grants
- Legal and Policy Enabling Environment
- Overview
- Resilience and Sustainability
- Transition
-
Financial Management
- CCM Funding
- Grant Closure
- Grant Implementation
- Grant-Making and Signing
- Grant Reporting
- Overview
- Sub-recipient Management
-
Grant closure
- Overview
-
Steps of Grant Closure Process
- 1. Global Fund Notification Letter 'Guidance on Grant Closure'
- 2. Preparation and Submission of Grant Close-Out Plan and Budget
- 3. Global Fund Approval of Grant Close-Out Plan
- 4. Implementation of Close-Out Plan and Completion of Final Global Fund Requirements (Grant Closure Period)
- 5. Operational Closure of Project
- 6. Financial Closure of Project
- 7. Documentation of Grant Closure with Global Fund Grant Closure Letter
- Terminology and Scenarios for Grant Closure Process
- Human resources
- Human rights, key populations and gender
-
Legal Framework
- Agreements with Sub-sub-recipients
- Amending Legal Agreements
- Implementation Letters and Management Letters
- Language of the Grant Agreement and other Legal Instruments
- Legal Framework for Other UNDP Support Roles
- Other Legal and Implementation Considerations
- Overview
- Project Document
- Signing Legal Agreements and Requests for Disbursement
-
The Grant Agreement
- Grant Confirmation: Conditions Precedent (CP)
- Grant Confirmation: Conditions
- Grant Confirmation: Face Sheet
- Grant Confirmation: Limited Liability Clause
- Grant Confirmation: Schedule 1, Integrated Grant Description
- Grant Confirmation: Schedule 1, Performance Framework
- Grant Confirmation: Schedule 1, Summary Budget
- Grant Confirmation: Special Conditions (SCs)
- Grant Confirmation
- UNDP-Global Fund Grant Regulations
- Monitoring and Evaluation
- Principal Recipient Start-Up
-
Procurement and Supply Management
- Development of List of Health Products and Procurement Action Plan
- Distribution and Inventory Management
- Overview
- Price and Quality Reporting (PQR) System
- Procurement of Non-health Products and Services
- Procurement of Pharmaceutical and Other Health Products
- Quality Control
- Rational use of Medicines and Pharmacovigilance Systems
- Strengthening of PSM Services and Risk Mitigation
- UNDP Health PSM Roster
- UNDP Quality Assurance Policy and Plan
-
Reporting
- Communicating Results
- Grant Performance Report
- Overview
- Performance-based Funding and Disbursement Decision
- PR and Coordinating Mechanism (CM) Communication and Governance
- Reporting to the Global Fund
- UNDP Corporate Reporting
-
Risk Management
- Common Risks Identified in Global Fund Programmes
- Global Fund Risk Management
- Introduction to Risk Management
- Overview
- Risk Management in High Risk Environments
- Risk Management in UNDP-managed Global Fund Grants
- Risk management in UNDP
- UNDP Risk Management in the Global Fund Portfolio
- Sub-Recipient Management
Performance-based Funding and Disbursement Decision
Under the performance-based funding principle, additional funds are made available to Principal Recipients (PRs) based on results achieved in a defined time frame. The principle of performance-based funding links grant performance (overall grant rating) to funds disbursed (indicative disbursement range). Like the Indicator Rating, the disbursement range is indicative. Final disbursement amounts may lie outside the indicative range due to a number of factors identified by the Country Team.
Workplan tracking measure: Some programme areas (modules) and interventions – for example, the removing legal barriers and community systems strengthening modules – cannot be measured using available coverage indicators during the execution period being assessed, and will therefore not result in a standard indicator rating. Moreover, these areas require additional qualitative measures to assess their effectiveness.
To address this, the Global Fund has developed a specific monitoring and evaluation (M&E) framework for modules that do not have a service delivery component and will request the PR to report on progress through the Progress Update Disbursement Request (PU/DR) on the agreed upon workplan tracking measures (WPTMs) in country-specific, multicountry and regional grants.
A differentiated approach is applied in using these measures for determining an indicator rating and in making performance-based annual funding decisions:
- When grants do not include any coverage/output indicators, a scoring methodology is applied to measure progress against WPTMs to arrive at an indicator rating;
- When grants include both coverage/output indicators as well as the WPTMs, only the coverage/output indicators are used to calculate the indicator rating. In these instances, WPTMs may be used at the discretion of the Country Team in determining the overall grant rating and adjusting the annual funding decision amount.
Implementation progress during the reporting period | Category |
No progress against planned milestone or target | Not started |
Less than 50% completion of the milestone or target | Started |
50% or more completion of planned milestone or target | Advancing |
100% achievement of planned milestone or target | Completed |
The progress on workplan tracking measures i.e. milestones and targets for input and process indicators is categorized as follows:
- Achievement against each workplan tracking measure (milestones and targets) is graded on a four-point scale from 0 to 3.
Achievement against workplan tracking measure | 2. Score |
Not started | 0 |
Started | 1 |
Advancing | 2 |
Completed | 3 |
- At each reporting period, depending on the progress in implementation of various activities, the respective score is allotted by the Global Fund to each measure.
- Based on reported progress, the sum of all scores during the reporting period is compared against the maximum score for that period to obtain the default rating.
Percentage achievement during the reporting period (Total score/Maximum score) | Default WPTM rating |
100% or above | A1 |
90-99% | A2 |
60-89% | B1 |
30-59% | B2 |
<30% | C |
- The default rating determines the indicative funding range. The indicative funding ranges for each Indicator Rating, before other factors are taken into consideration, are as follow
Default WPTM Rating | Cumulative Budget Amount (including current funding request) |
A1 | Between 90-100% of cumulative budget through the next reporting period |
A2 | |
B1 | Between 60-89% of cumulative budget through the next reporting period |
B2 | Between 30-59% of cumulative budget through the next reporting period |
C | To be discussed individually |

As with the setting of all indicators, PRs are encouraged to ensure that the WPTMs are measurable and time-bound, including specific means for verification as well as the dates by which deliverables are due in the relevant sections of the performance framework (PF). WPTMs should be ambitious yet realistic, and it is important to keep in mind that these are process level outputs; the impact and outcome of programs related to promoting an enabling environment are generally assessed through baseline, midterm and/or endline reviews.
Loading resources
