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.
The Higa Ubeho project has shown remarkable success in establishing savings groups currently reporting more than 2,100 groups and 46,000 members, more than any other PEPFAR OVC project. The impending expansion of the project provides a unique opportunity to design and implement an evaluation to understand the impact of its model on targeted families & their children. The potential for an experimental research design would provide the opportunity to attribute observed impacts to the savings group intervention. Using Higa Ubehos theory of change for its savings group intervention, the evaluation would also aim to identify or validate the mechanisms by which this intervention brings about the observed impacts. The proposed evaluation could also provide an opportunity to enhance the project with better linkages to growth opportunities. Evaluation findings would contribute to global knowledge and PEPFAR policy but, most importantly, they can immediately influence the direction of the OVC response in Rwanda.
The impacts of savings group interventions take time to manifest. Because of the interest in understanding the long-term impacts of savings groups, their sustainability, and their prospects for self-replication, it is both acceptable and desirable for the evaluation to continue beyond the anticipated end of the Higa Ubeho project. The Assets and Market Access (AMA) Collaborative Research Support Program (CRSP) has been identified as a promising partner. AMA CRSP is a research and evaluation partnership with leading U.S. universities managed by USAIDs Bureau for Food Security.
Care and support for OVC in Rwanda is a priority for USG in COP 13. The goal of the Higa Ubeho Impact Evaluation would be to provide a unique opportunity to design and implement an evaluation to understand the impact of the programs savings group model on targeted families & their children. The potential for an experimental research design would provide the opportunity to attribute observed impacts to the savings group intervention. Using Higa Ubehos theory of change for its savings group intervention, the evaluation would also aim to identify or validate the mechanisms by which this intervention brings about the observed impacts.
Prior research suggests that unadorned savings group interventions have modest livelihood impacts. The proposed evaluation could provide an opportunity to enhance the project with better linkages to growth opportunities. This pro-growth enhancement could offer insights on relative effectiveness of adorned and unadorned projects.
The findings of this evaluation would contribute significantly to global knowledge and to PEPFAR policy. In its current second phase for response, the wider PEPFAR initiative is committed to increasing the evidence for AIDS-related programmatic and policy interventions. In relation to this shifting focus, more attention and support for robust evidence linking outcomes to programmatic input are being tested. The Higa Ubeho evaluation would contribute to this growing knowledge-base by increasing understanding of promising approaches relevant to the care and protection of OVC. With economic strengthening, and savings groups in particular, being promoted as an effective, sustainable intervention to positively impact OVC and their families, this evaluation will serve to strengthen our base of evidence for this intervention.
