Abstract Introduction Funding is essential to build climate resilience in public health and healthcare systems and enable populations to adapt to the increasing impacts on climate change on health across the globe. This study aimed to investigate how health has been considered by the projects supported by the Green Climate Fund (GCF), created by the Paris Agreement to support climate adaptation and mitigation. Methods Adaptation, mitigation, and cross-cutting projects funded by the GCF between 2021 and 2023 were included. Information was collected for the percentage of funding allocated to health adaptation by cross-cutting and adaptation projects. For mitigation projects, information was extracted on the extent to which health co-benefits were considered. Results The 69 adaptation and cross-cutting projects funded by the GCF in 2021-2023 contributed $226 million towards adaptation, of which $59 (26%) million were for health adaptation. There was an increase in the funding provided by the GCF to adaptation from $1 million in 2021 to $156 million in 2023. Funding for health adaptation increased from $178,000 in 2021 to $42 million in 2023. Of the co-funding provided by beneficiaries, $637 million contributed to adaptation and $165 (26%) million to health adaptation. There was an increase in co-funding for adaptation provided by beneficiaries from $131 million in 2022 to $506 million in 2023, with funding for health adaptation increasing from $23 (18%) million to $142 (28%) million. Among the 48 mitigation and cross-cutting projects, 15 did not mention health, 13 mentioned did not correctly articulate health co-benefits, 11 identified specific health co-benefits, and 9 correctly labelled and measured health co-benefits. The main co-benefits derived from reducing air pollution. Conclusions Among the projects funded by the GCF, funding for health adaptation remains a small proportion of the adaptation funding and health co-benefits are rarely considered by mitigation projects. Key messages • The proportion of adaptation funding provided for the health sector remains low. • Health co-benefits are seldom considered and measured by climate mitigation projects.