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
NOTE: The following is taken from summaries released by PEPFAR on the PEPFAR Data Dashboard. They are incomplete summary paragraphs only and do not contain the full mechanism details. When the full narratives are released, we will update the mechanism pages accordingly.
With the highest HIV/AIDS prevalence rate in Central America, the U.S. Embassy in Belize uses the PEPFAR Small Grants Program (PSGP) to support small projects that work directly with key populations, including MSM, female and male sex workers, their clients, PLHIV, and youth engaged in high risk behaviors. Over the past few years, incredibly successful projects, including a study of risk factors for youth in northern Belize, have built up regional branches of the Belizean National AIDS Commission, expanded capacity in nascent non-government organizations (NGOs), and enhanced the national response to HIV/AIDS. These small grants provide opportunities to civil society groups who would not normally be able to access funding, and the grants have led to some creative programming that implement quality HIV/AIDS prevention programs serving key populations. Recent successful projects include curriculum development for students aged 14-20, an anti-stigma campaign in high traffic areas, such as bus stops, and peer counseling at the only prison in Belize. The Embassy will continue implementing these projects to build up local capacity to combat the spread of HIV/AIDS and fight against stigma and discrimination.
Since COP2014, PEPFAR no longer produces narratives for every mechanism it funds. However, PEPFAR has now included performance targets or indicator information for each mechanism based on the Monitoring, Evaluation, and Reporting (MER) system. The MER guidance is available on PEPFAR's website https://www.pepfar.gov/reports/guidance/. Note that COP years 2014-2015 were under a previous version of the MER system and the indicators and definitions may have changed as of the new 2.0 guidance.
This mechanism has no published performance targets or indicators.
