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.
In FY11, PEPFAR Malawi will explore monitoring early population-based PMTCT effectiveness through
an approach similar to what has been used in South Africa and elsewhere in which routine rapid testing of
infants at the 4-6 weeks immunization visit is linked to EID for those with positive rapid tests. As the new
longitudinal PMTCT and postnatal follow-up registers and pre-ART tools are widely implemented, these
will also be used to evaluate the PMTCT program using a cohort approach as well. However, to
comprehensively attempt to measure the effectiveness of the national PMTCT program, PEPFAR Malawi
proposes to support an evaluation along the lines of the PEARL study which incorporates both the
population-based and longitudinal components. A baseline would be done in September 2010, once the
new registers have been implemented nationally, and then one year later the evaluation would be done to
look at the effectiveness after a full year of implementation. PEPFAR Malawi would like to discuss further
with HQ, but has tentatively budgeted funding for this activity. The evaluation would not attempt to directly
estimate HIV-free survival by surveys however, as this would be too costly, but rather only model it based
upon the number of women on ART, reported infant feeding practices, etc.
BUDGET - Redacted
EVALUATION OF PMTCT EFFECTIVENESS
an approach similar to what has been used in South Africa and elsewhere in which routine rapid testing
of infants at the 4-6 weeks immunization visit is linked to EID for those with positive rapid tests. As the
new longitudinal PMTCT and postnatal follow-up registers and pre-ART tools are widely implemented,
these will also be used to evaluate the PMTCT program using a cohort approach as well. However, to
new registers have been implemented nationally, and then one year later the evaluation would be done
to look at the effectiveness after a full year of implementation. PEPFAR Malawi would like to discuss
further with HQ, but has tentatively budgeted funding for this activity. The evaluation would not attempt to
directly estimate HIV-free survival by surveys however, as this would be too costly, but rather only model
it based upon the number of women on ART, reported infant feeding practices, etc.
