HIV/AIDS Resource Mobilisation Training Course

Participants can select and interpret HIV evidence that supports a credible funding case.

• UNAIDS 95-95-95 targets linked to programme investment arguments
• Epidemic profile analysis using prevalence, incidence and viral suppression data
• Disaggregation by age, sex, location and key population status
• Service cascade bottlenecks translated into clearly defined funding needs
• Community-led monitoring findings incorporated into programme problem statements
• Data quality limitations disclosed without weakening credible funding arguments

Participants can build a structured map of relevant HIV funding sources and entry points.

• Bilateral, multilateral, foundation, corporate and domestic funding channels compared
• Global Fund allocation, catalytic funding and country dialogue mechanisms
• PEPFAR priorities, implementing-partner requirements and funding opportunity sources
• Foundation prospect research using mission, geography and grant history
• Domestic funding actors mapped across government, insurance and private sectors
• Donor intelligence captured in a standard opportunity profile

Participants can rank funding opportunities using transparent fit, feasibility and value criteria.

• Eligibility screening against registration, geography and thematic requirements
• Go-no-go matrix scoring strategic fit, competitiveness and delivery capacity
• Funding-call requirements converted into a proposal compliance checklist
• Decision criteria weighted for award size, timing and restricted costs
• Competitor and partner positioning assessed before proposal development begins
• Opportunity pipeline stages defined from prospect identification to award

Participants can draft a resource mobilisation strategy for a defined HIV programme portfolio.

• Strategic funding objectives derived from programme plan and financing gap
• Donor segmentation by relationship type, funding potential and decision horizon
• Funding targets assigned by source, programme component and quarter
• Resource mobilisation action plan with owners, deadlines and dependencies
• Pipeline conversion assumptions tested against past proposal performance
• Strategy review cycle linked to donor calendars and programme changes

Participants can identify partners that strengthen HIV funding credibility, reach and delivery capacity.

• Stakeholder mapping identifies influence, interest, contribution and potential resistance
• Community-based organisations assessed for representation, reach and governance
• Consortium partner selection using technical, financial and safeguarding criteria
• Partner roles defined through contribution matrices and accountability lines
• Memorandum of understanding clauses address funding, data and branding
• Government engagement aligned with national HIV strategic plan priorities

Participants can construct a testable theory of change for a priority HIV intervention.

• Problem tree analysis traces structural, behavioural and service-delivery barriers
• Target population segmentation clarifies intervention pathways and access constraints
• Theory of change links activities, outputs, outcomes and impact
• Causal assumptions tested against HIV evidence and implementation realities
• Rights-based and gender-responsive pathways incorporated into intervention design
• External risks documented with assumptions requiring active monitoring

Participants can prepare a donor-ready results framework with measurable HIV indicators.

• Logframe hierarchy distinguishes impact, outcome, output and activity statements
• SMART indicators selected from programme monitoring and donor requirements
• Indicator reference sheets specify definitions, sources and disaggregation
• Baselines, targets and milestones derived from service capacity evidence
• Means of verification matched to routine data and survey sources
• Data protection considerations built into beneficiary and health-data collection

Participants can specify credible, feasible HIV interventions for inclusion in funding proposals.

• Combination prevention packages matched to priority population risk profiles
• Differentiated service delivery models considered for treatment continuity
• Community-led approaches strengthen demand creation, adherence and accountability
• Referral pathways connect testing, prevention, treatment and psychosocial support
• Quality standards translated into activities, supervision and monitoring costs
• Implementation feasibility checked against staffing, commodities and partner capacity

Participants can prepare a concise HIV concept note that meets donor decision needs.

• Concept note structure aligned with donor template and review criteria
• Executive summary states need, intervention, results and funding request
• Problem statement combines epidemic evidence, service gaps and community perspectives
• Intervention narrative explains approach, delivery model and implementation partners
• Value proposition differentiates the proposal from alternative funding requests
• Concept note review applies word limits, logic and evidence checks

Participants can organise and draft coherent proposal sections that answer donor questions.

• Proposal storyboard sequences donor requirements into a coherent argument
• Win themes connect organisational capability with donor strategic priorities
• Technical narrative uses claims, evidence, method and expected result
• Workplans align activities, milestones, responsibilities and reporting dates
• Cross-referencing removes contradictions between narrative, logframe and budget
• Proposal production schedule controls drafting, review and approval stages

Participants can prepare an activity-based budget for a proposed HIV intervention.

• Activity-based costing links workplan quantities, unit costs and totals
• Personnel budgeting calculates effort, salary rates and statutory costs
• Direct programme costs cover outreach, testing, referrals and supervision
• Commodity assumptions address procurement, storage, distribution and stock losses
• Indirect cost treatment follows donor rules and organisational policy
• Budget quality checks reconcile formulas, narratives and implementation timeline

Participants can defend HIV budget assumptions through clear narratives and efficiency evidence.

• Budget narrative explains calculation basis, necessity and cost reasonableness
• Unit-cost analysis compares delivery options without sacrificing service quality
• Economy, efficiency, effectiveness and equity frame value-for-money arguments
• Cost drivers identified for outreach intensity, geography and target populations
• Scenario analysis tests budget sensitivity to coverage and price changes
• Cost-sharing contributions documented with source, value and confirmation status

Participants can identify realistic domestic financing routes for HIV community services.

• Domestic resource mobilisation assesses public budgets, insurance and philanthropy
• Social contracting models finance civil-society delivery of public services
• Budget advocacy messages connect HIV outcomes with fiscal policy decisions
• Government budget cycle identifies entry points for funding requests
• Public-private partnership options assessed for mission fit and safeguards
• Domestic donor stewardship plans build repeat support and accountability

Participants can develop appropriate approaches for corporate and foundation HIV funding prospects.

• Corporate prospect assessment considers purpose, operations and reputational risks
• Shared-value propositions identify credible business and community benefits
• Foundation engagement tailored to grant history, priorities and decision processes
• Sponsorship packages distinguish cash, in-kind and pro bono contributions
• Due diligence screens prospective partners for ethical and safeguarding concerns
• Recognition plans respect confidentiality, consent and community preferences

Participants can plan and conduct purposeful donor engagement before and after proposal submission.

• Donor engagement plan defines objectives, contacts, messages and follow-up
• Discovery questions reveal donor interests, constraints and decision processes
• Two-minute funding pitch communicates need, approach, results and ask
• Meeting briefs prepare evidence, participant roles and desired decisions
• Follow-up communications record commitments, actions and relationship history
• Stewardship calendar schedules updates, site visits and result-sharing

Participants can establish core controls for compliant HIV grant implementation and reporting.

• Grant agreement review identifies deliverables, restrictions and reporting obligations
• Compliance calendar tracks narrative, financial, audit and close-out deadlines
• Segregation of duties controls approval, payment, reconciliation and reporting
• Allowable-cost testing applies donor rules to expenditure decisions
• Subrecipient monitoring checks financial controls, performance and documentation
• Audit readiness file maintains contracts, invoices, timesheets and approvals

Participants can address material delivery, ethical and compliance risks in HIV funding plans.

• Risk register scores likelihood, impact, controls and accountable owners
• Stigma and discrimination risks assessed within programme access pathways
• Safeguarding measures address children, vulnerable adults and power imbalances
• Confidentiality protocols protect HIV status and sensitive beneficiary information
• Fraud risk controls cover procurement, cash handling and partner payments
• Contingency actions address commodity disruption, policy change and security events

Participants can produce donor reports that support accountability, learning and renewal discussions.

• Narrative reports connect activities, outputs, outcomes and implementation challenges
• Variance analysis explains differences between planned and actual expenditure
• Outcome stories use consented evidence without exposing beneficiary identities
• Corrective action plans address underperformance, delays and emerging risks
• Learning briefs convert monitoring findings into programme improvement decisions
• Renewal strategy starts before grant end through evidence and engagement

Participants can build, review and present a complete HIV funding package for a defined donor opportunity.

• Donor opportunity selected using the completed qualification and prioritisation matrix
• Funding package integrates concept note, logframe, workplan and budget
• Resource mobilisation strategy aligns pipeline actions with funding request
• Compliance checklist verifies eligibility, attachments, approvals and submission requirements
• Peer review panel tests evidence, logic, cost realism and risk controls
• Donor presentation defends programme design, budget and partnership approach