Since its inception, the fund has committed $11,3-billion (about R112,3-billion) to 136 countries, about half of which has been disbursed. Funding to beneficiary countries is based on performance, and failure to meet targets can lead to delays, suspension, discontinuation or termination of grants.

These are some of the countries that have fallen foul of the fund's strict accounting procedures:

Pakistan
In 2002, the fund discontinued support for Pakistan's malaria projects because of weak project implementation, slow procurement of health products, poor data quality, and slow spending of project funds; according to reports, only 15 percent of insecticide treated nets were distributed during the specified grant period.

Ukraine
In 2004, the Global Fund temporarily withdrew grants worth $92-million to Ukraine, citing "management issues". The grants were reinstated one-and-a-half months later, when a new principal recipient, the International HIV/AIDS Alliance, was put in place.

Myanmar
In 2005, the Global Fund discontinued grants worth $98,4-million after the government imposed temporary restrictions on travel and new procedures for reviewing the procurement of medical and other supplies. The fund said at the time that the restrictions "prevented implementation of performance-based and time-bound programmes in the country".

Senegal
In 2005, the fund cut malaria grants worth $7,1-million over systemic issues that resulted in poor performance. The fund later approved a grant proposal for malaria projects submitted in Round Four.

South Africa
In 2005, the Global Fund board stopped funding for an HIV prevention programme. The board decided that the grant, implemented by the NGO, LoveLife, had failed to "sufficiently address weaknesses in its implementation".

Uganda
In 2005, the fund temporarily suspended all five of its grants after a review by auditors PricewaterhouseCoopers of one of the grants revealed evidence of "serious mismanagement" by the project management unit in the Ministry of Health. The grants were worth a total of $201-million over two years, of which $45,4-million had already been disbursed. The health minister and his two deputies lost their positions and are on trial with several other government officials for charges relating to the misuse of Global Fund money.

Chad
In 2006, the Global Fund suspended its support after an audit uncovered evidence of misuse of funds and a lack of satisfactory capacity in the principal recipient and sub-recipients to manage the fund's resources. The suspension was lifted in 2007 after a series of investigations and commitments from stakeholders to put better systems in place.

Nigeria
In 2006, the fund decided to discontinue its Round One support for Nigeria's HIV/AIDS programmes, but awarded other HIV/AIDS grants in Round Five.

Kenya
In 2008, the Global Fund's Technical Review Panel (TRP) recommended that the board reject Kenya's application for $300-million in Round Eight. The government has not made public the reasons for rejection, but national media report that mismanagement and the misappropriation of money are the likely causes. The minister of health has put together a task force to trace and account for all money disbursed to Kenya by the fund, and has called for the suspension of the application in Round Nine until management glitches are ironed out. The government has experienced difficulties with its Global Fund proposals in the past: in 2003, $37-million was delayed after claims of corruption in the National AIDS Control Council.

Zimbabwe
In 2008, the Global Fund accused Zimbabwe of misusing $7,3-million of a $12,3-million grant, and asked for the money to be returned. In October, the TRP recommended that Zimbabwe receive some $500-million from Round Eight. If the board approves the money, it will be only the third time the country's proposal has been accepted - the government has frequently accused the Geneva-based agency of political bias in its approval of grants, which the Global Fund denies.

Several other countries, including Namibia, Tanzania and Togo, have also had proposals for funding rejected in the past. Countries can appeal a grant decision when a proposal has been rejected in two consecutive rounds - PlusNews

Related articles

HIV programmes suffer as government, NGOs feel the pinch

Donor AIDS money weakening health systems

African leaders back Mogae AIDS prevention initiative

HIV puts Malaria back in spotlight

Women's rights groups push for more AIDS funding

Feachem reflects on Global Fund journey