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: 2013 2014
During the FY12 ROP planning process, the USG team decided to set aside two percent of the total budget for an external interagency evaluation. We are entering into the third year of Partnership Framework implementation and therefore the USG is proposing a performance evaluation to measure the degree of progress that USG supported interventions have achieved in terms of sustainability. This is a regional evaluation, taking into account activities performed by the four USG agencies: Peace Corps, DOD, USAID and CDC.
The proposed evaluation questions are:
-What is the degree of progress in sustainability in the PF areas of Prevention and Health System Strengthening?
-What are the gaps identified that must be addressed to achieve sustainability, measured through efficacy, efficiency, effectiveness and ownership/appropriation?
-What are the key recommendations to close the identified gaps?
Closely in line with PEPFAR and GHI emphasis on evaluation, USG will use this evaluation to inform programming and work together with host-country partners to make important mid-course corrections to ensure all activities are enabling and supporting country ownership.
An interagency evaluation team has been developed and is working in coordination with support from HQ experts to develop a detailed Scope of Work and the exact mechanism will identified in the next 1-2 months.
With a strong focus on sustainability, this evaluation will provide important information for all the Partnership Framework partners and will inform strategic and operational planning. Sustainability will be measured by the degree of efficacy, efficiency, level of ownership and effectiveness of priority interventions/activities identified in the Partnership Framework. Due to limited funding and time, the evaluation will focus on two of the goals/areas: Prevention and Health System Strengthening. The remaining goals: Strategic Information and Policy Environment should be evaluated as cross cutting interventions inside the first two areas.
The specific objectives of the evaluation are:
-To measure the efficacy (the degree to which an intervention accomplishes the desired or projected outcomes) of PF activities in the HIV prevention and HSS for MARPs and PLWA
-To measure the efficiency (the production of the desired effects or results with minimum waste of time, effort, or skill) of PF activities in the HIV prevention and HSS for MARPs and PLWA
-To measure the cost -effectiveness of PF activities in the prevention and HSS for MARPS and PLWA in Central America
-To measure the degree of ownership/appropriation of PF actions in prevention and HSS by the host countries.
-To retroactively define the baseline of sustainability in 2010 and what advances have been made in the first three years of the PF prevention and HSS interventions
-To identify gaps and recommendations to improve sustainability of PF interventions in HIV prevention and health system strengthening by the host countries.
Coinciding with the PF focus on MARPs, the evaluation will focus on MARPs in the context of Prevention and Health System Strengthening.
