Technical Review Panel
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reports of the TRP and the Secretariat on Proposals and Board Funding Decisions |
|
To support the Global Fund in financing effective programs, the Board relies on an independent panel of international experts of health and development. The Technical Review Panel (TRP) reviews eligible grant proposals for technical merit (soundness of approach, feasibility and potential for sustainability) for more detailed information please refer to the Guidelines for Round 7 Proposals. Based on this review the TRP recommends proposals for funding to the Board.
The TRP consists of a maximum of 35 experts. Each expert is appointed by the Board for a period of up to four Rounds. The panel for Round 7 is chaired by Dr Peter Godfrey-Faussett (United Kingdom). The Vice Chair for Round 7 is Dr Indrani Gupta (India).
The composition of the TRP covers expertise in HIV/AIDS, TB, malaria and cross-cutting issues. Balances in terms of gender, regional representation and a mix of sectoral experience are taken into consideration in the composition of the panel.
TRP Recommendations
The TRP provides its comments in writing, in a document titled TRP Review Form. The TRP Review Form outlines the main strengths and weaknesses of the components, and the TRP recommendations to the Board. There are four (4) categories of recommendations:
Category 1:
Recommended for approval without changes (and no or only minor clarifications); orCategory 2:
Recommended for approval provided that clarifications or adjustments are met within a limited timeframe; orCategory 3:
Not recommended for approval in its present form but strongly encouraged to resubmit following major revision; orCategory 4:
Rejected.
Appeals
Where the Board, following TRP recommendation, rejected the same application twice in consecutive rounds of proposals, the applicant may appeal the relevant decision. In this case an independent appeal panel will review the appeal. Grounds for appeals are limited to significant and obvious error made by the TRP regarding the information contained in the second submission of the proposal.
