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.
Redacted. It will provide USAID/Namibia with access to high quality external technical expertise to design, support, and evaluate programs within the USG portfolio. Implementation of performance evaluations and, when feasible, impact evaluations will inform ongoing and future USG investments. This grant and contract managing activity will include mid-term and end-of-project evaluations to improve metrics, monitoring and evaluation in line with the GHI principles. In addition, activities within this mechanism will be guided by the Namibia GHI Strategy to use M&E activities to inform progress made against the GHI immediate results and to use evaluations as part of the GHI learning agenda. Qualified local consultants with relevant expertise will be given priority which will help with building local capacity and contribute to the overall transition as described in the GHI Strategy.
No vehicle purchases or leases are envisaged.
Redacted. This activity is a follow-on which supports transition through capacity building, technical assistance (TA), and generation of evidence based on national trends, surveys and program best practices and evidence. Under the HKID budget code, this activity will utilize COP13 funding to complete the following objectives: (1) Support the Government of Namibia (GRN), National Statistics Agency (NSA), and the Ministry of Health and Social Services (MOHSS) in the development and implementation of secondary analysis for the 2013 Namibian Demographic and Health Survey (NDHS); and (2) Implement the follow-up/end-line evaluation of the Health Extension Worker (HEW) program in the Kunene region.
This activity will be implemented at both national and regional levels. The NDHS, which is a nationally representative survey, will cover all 13 regions in Namibia; as well as the NDHS secondary analysis. Additionally, this activity will support the HEW evaluation, which will be focused on evaluating the HEW program currently being implemented in Kunene.
The strategy of the NDHS secondary analysis will be to provide key stakeholders and GRN policy and decision makers with information around key demographic and health trends. These specific trends will provide data and evidence for future program planning and decision making. In particular, the HEW evaluation will provide evidence around the effectiveness and impact of the HEW program in Kunene and enable MOHSS policy and technical staff to determine the possibility of implementing the HEW in additional regions.
This activity will support the secondary analysis from the 2013 NDHS. Under the HKID budget code, secondary analysis will focus on analyzing demographic and health trends related to Orphans and Vulnerable Children (OVC). Some examples of additional secondary analysis around OVC from the NDHS will include: anemia and malnutrition rates for OVC by stratified demographic and health characteristics; access to clinical services and health expenditures for households with OVC; and multivariate analyses around OVC and households with HIV positive caregivers. The follow-up/end-line evaluation of the HEW program in the Kunene region is critical to providing information around mother-and-child health seeking behaviors and morbidity; including households with identified OVC, and health attitudes and practices of the caregivers.
Support of this activity will provide key information around best practices, program evidence, and key demographic and health trends in Namibia. These activities will ensure collaboration with other USG partners. For NDHS secondary analysis, the partner will ensure collaboration with ICF International. The HEW evaluation will collaborate with C-Change, MCHIP and the MOHSS.
This narrative is linked to activities under HVSI. No motor vehicle, construction, or renovation envisaged.
Redacted. Under this activity, USAID plans to implement approximately five evaluations (mid-term and end-of-project). Midterm evaluations will enable USAID/Namibia and the larger USG team to take actions aimed at improving program performance and/or achieving higher efficiency and effectiveness. End-of-project evaluations will be used to inform future programs and future USG investments as well as host country programs to improve performance and achieving greater impact.
