Foreign aid is often mentioned as the first and easiest thing to cut, particularly in a Republican administration with a Republican Congress. But maybe not. Consider five points.
CGD Policy Blogs
It’s quite the buzz phrase: results-based development. But what is actually meant by "results"? Dr. Raj Shah, former Administrator of USAID under President Obama, and Michael Gerson, former presidential speechwriter and Assistant for Policy and Strategic Planning under George W. Bush, have reached across a generational and political divide to share their expertise.
This week, the Global Fund partnership will meet in Tokyo to plan for its fifth voluntary replenishment, covering the period 2017-2019. The stakes are high: in an austere budget climate, the Global Fund’s ability to raise the needed resources—and then to spend them effectively over the subsequent three years—will have outsize importance in determining the trajectory of the historic fight against AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria.
My recent blog on cash transfers as a tool for HIV prevention among adolescent girls and young women left out results from a number of recent evaluations that illustrate the importance of program design and, in particular, targeting the transfers to the poorest households in getting results in wellbeing. Tia Palermo, a social policy specialist with the Transfer Project at UNICEF Office of Research-Innocenti and UNC-Chapel Hill, wrote with an update, which I’m pleased to share with her permission.
Last September, we released a report on how the Global Fund could get more health for its money. In it, we offered concrete suggestions for improvements in several different value-for-money domains, all with an eye toward maximizing the health impact of every dollar spent.
Since the first case of Ebola appeared last year, the virus has infected nearly 10,000 people. The epidemic is concentrated in Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Guinea — post-conflict countries with incredibly weak health systems.
PEPFAR deserves to be commended for its efforts to define key measurable outcomes for its orphans and vulnerable children (OVC) portfolio. Approximately 17 million children worldwide have lost one or both parents due to HIV/AIDS. In response, PEPFAR has earmarked 10% of its annual program funds to help mitigate the psychological and developmental effects this loss can have on children.
This is a joint post with Jenny Ottenhoff.
Ten years ago – on May 27, 2003 – the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief was born with the stroke of a pen by President George W. Bush. Over the last decade, the program has experienced tremendous growth and made inroads against HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria in some of the world’s hardest hit areas. And through it all, PEPFAR managed to maintain bi-partisan support that bridged two US Administrations, six US congressional sessions, and one global economic crisis.
The Institute of Medicine, the prestigious health arm of the National Academy of Sciences, has weighed in with a massive report on the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), the multibillion dollar US effort to confront the epidemic in the developing world. The evaluation validates PEPFAR’s enormous reach during its first 10 years and identifies concrete actions that Congress and PEPFAR should take for the program to become more sustainable moving forward.