Paper short abstract:

In 2017, the Global Fund Board revised its Eligibility Policy, which sets out criteria for which countries are eligible for financing. This paper considers the role of civil society in high-level policy negotiations over such contested indicators as Gross National Income per capita (GNIpc).

Paper long abstract:

In 2017, the Board of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria revised its Eligibility Policy, which sets out the criteria for which countries are eligible for financing. This chapter considers the impact of decisions made using those indicators, and explores debates over use of Gross National Income per capita (GNIpc) to determine aid eligibility. It also shows the role of civil society and community representatives in these high-level policy debates. At a moment of flatlining global health financing, the Global Fund is not the only donor wrestling with these problems of prioritisation; in many countries the Fund is the last remaining external HIV donor to transition out. When some middle-income countries with concentrated epidemics among key populations saw multiple donors divest, programs for stigmatised key populations were at risk. In revising the Fund's Eligibility Policy, the high-stakes contest was focused on a brief document of just a few pages, in which changing a single indicator could have sweeping consequences for countries such as Russia, where the Fund supported civil society advocacy for key populations. This study shows how three civil society delegations worked together to advance a shared position on the policy.