CCM and other policy bodies may influence the private sector to be more responsive as corporate social responsibility. There could be some sorts of incentive (national recognition) by the CCM for such endeavor by the private sector in the 3-disease.
During planning, private sector can more be involved; it is simple to say but difficult to materialized in developing countries were corporate responsibilities are almost zero.
Greater access to good practices of GF project implementation can be shared (already shared through different reports and e-forum) but there is inertia of adapting those during proposal development. This can also be mandatory; for example out Top-Ten good practice, one or two to be incorporate considering socio-economic and epidemiological context.
Institutional capacity building foremost important and the important question is HOW? Do we really want to be developed, if yes, there is no need of extra support. The GF may initiate dialogue for the sustainable developmental issues.
QA is the important what is highly missing during the implementation.
Partners NGOs are to be audited not only by the LFA but by other may be the Transparency International?? But better have a quality audit mechanism of GF by its own. The same is the point related with TQM.
Wish you all the best.