PEPFAR's annual planning process is done either at the country (COP) or regional level (ROP).
PEPFAR's programs are implemented through implementing partners who apply for funding based on PEPFAR's published Requests for Applications.
Since 2010, PEPFAR COPs have grouped implementing partners according to an organizational type. We have retroactively applied these classifications to earlier years in the database as well.
Also called "Strategic Areas", these are general areas of HIV programming. Each program area has several corresponding budget codes.
Specific areas of HIV programming. Budget Codes are the lowest level of spending data available.
Expenditure Program Areas track general areas of PEPFAR expenditure.
Expenditure Sub-Program Areas track more specific PEPFAR expenditures.
Object classes provide highly specific ways that implementing partners are spending PEPFAR funds on programming.
Cross-cutting attributions are areas of PEPFAR programming that contribute across several program areas. They contain limited indicative information related to aspects such as human resources, health infrastructure, or key populations programming. However, they represent only a small proportion of the total funds that PEPFAR allocates through the COP process. Additionally, they have changed significantly over the years. As such, analysis and interpretation of these data should be approached carefully. Learn more
Beneficiary Expenditure data identify how PEPFAR programming is targeted at reaching different populations.
Sub-Beneficiary Expenditure data highlight more specific populations targeted for HIV prevention and treatment interventions.
PEPFAR sets targets using the Monitoring, Evaluation, and Reporting (MER) System - documentation for which can be found on PEPFAR's website at https://www.pepfar.gov/reports/guidance/. As with most data on this website, the targets here have been extracted from the COP documents. Targets are for the fiscal year following each COP year, such that selecting 2016 will access targets for FY2017. This feature is currently experimental and should be used for exploratory purposes only at present.
Years of mechanism: 2008 2009
Building on the results of a quality-of-care assessment of the ART continuum-of-care system and initial
quality improvement (QI) activities started with FY07 plus-up funds, URC/QAP will continue the rapid scale-
up of QI activities and improvement of the HIV/AIDS treatment and care system, processes, and outcomes
and the overall quality of the family-centered treatment approach.
In FY07, URC/QAP is carrying out a detailed assessment of ART services across the continuum of care at
all national ART sites. This includes evaluating palliative care, PMTCT, CT, ART (including pediatric ART),
and HIV/TB services and the efficiency of resource use. Important issues in the system of care and in the
processes of care are being studied and analyzed, including providers' understanding of and compliance
with national standards of care, barriers to providers' complying with standards of care, access to and
quality control of laboratories (both referral and at facilities), drug and lab supply stockouts and supervision,
and patient compliance and adherence to therapy. By reviewing medical records and through interviews,
URC/QAP is also following selected patients to understand the difficulties they have in negotiating the
system and accessing timely services. URC/QAP has extensive experience in conducting quality-of-care
assessments, including HIV/AIDS services in such countries as South Africa, Rwanda, Uganda, Tanzania,
and Jamaica.
Using the assessment as a basis, URC/QAP will engage the government of Cote d'Ivoire and other partners
in determining the best way to rapidly solve the problems identified and build a sustainable quality control
and quality improvement system for ART and other HIV/AIDS services. Quality of care committees (or
subcommittees of existing oversight groups) will be organized at national, regional, and district levels.
Selected staff will be trained in QI approaches, coaching and mentoring of facilities, quality monitoring, and
implementing selected QI approaches.
While URC/QAP will support implementation of any QI approach selected, it has extensive experience with
the improvement collaborative approach, which was developed by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement
(IHI) in Boston and is in widespread use in Western countries. URC/QAP has led the way in its use in 15
developing countries, including six PEPFAR focus countries. It consists of an organized network of a large
number of sites (districts, facilities, or communities) that work together for a limited period of time, usually
nine to 24 months, to achieve significant improvements in a focused topic area, such as ART services,
through shared learning and intentional spread methods. URC/QAP has helped countries to achieve
dramatic results in a short period of time, including in the outcomes of care.
With FY07 funds, such a QI approach will be launched to rapidly scale up a quality assurance approach at
all ART sites. This approach is expected to achieve significant improvements in compliance with standards
and patient adherence, retention, and follow-up along the continuum of care.
With FY08 funds, URC/QAP will:
1. Continue to assist the national program and stakeholders to build the ART system's QI structure,
functions, and capacity
2. Continue to assist the national program to strengthen its process for updating guidelines and key
indicators for monitoring quality of care
3. Continue to assure, revise, and adapt monitoring tools for self-assessment by facilities and other service
providers, and for coaches
4. Continue to develop regional and district QI structure, functions, and capacity through training, mentoring,
involvement in learning sessions, and coaching visits
5. Continue to assist the national program and partners in the implementation of the ART QI approach at all
sites. This will include:
• Learning sessions, during which site representatives present their challenges and results, share key
indicator data, and receive technical updates and refresher training in quality improvement
• Action periods, during which site quality-improvement teams identify problems, select changes to test, self-
assess, report results achieved monthly, and confer with coaches, who visit sites once a month
• A national conference/workshop
6. Assist the national program to develop a sustainability plan for the continuation of QI activities
7. Assist the national program to prepare a report on the QI activities.
Expected results include:
1. National, regional, and district QI capacity developed, i.e. managers and staff assure updating of
guidelines for care and key indicators of quality. They also continue to assess the quality of ART care,
coach site QI teams, assure validity of data, set priorities, provide resources, and reward good performance
2. Completion of the first ART system QI effort involving all ART sites, with dramatic improvements in quality
of care as measured by key input, process, and outcome indicators
3. QI sustainability plan developed and implementation started
4. National conference on improving ART care held and results of QI efforts presented. Sustainability plan
discussed and approved
5. Report of QI activities published
6. Ivorian counterparts present results at an international forum.