Key Implementers of U.S. Global Health Efforts

Summary
  1. Figures in this analysis should not to be compared to earlier KFF analyses of USAID spending to NGOs due to data and methodology differences. See Appendix A for more information. Earlier reports include KFF: The Role of NGOs in the U.S. Global Health Response, July 2015; Foreign NGO Engagement in U.S. Global Health Efforts: Foreign NGOs Receiving USG Support Through USAID, May 2015; NGO Engagement in U.S. Global Health Efforts: U.S.-Based NGOs Receiving USG Support Through USAID, Dec. 2014.

    ← Return to text

Issue Brief
  1. Figures in this analysis should not to be compared to earlier KFF analyses of USAID spending to NGOs due to data and methodology differences. See Appendix A for more information. Earlier reports include KFF: The Role of NGOs in the U.S. Global Health Response, July 2015; Foreign NGO Engagement in U.S. Global Health Efforts: Foreign NGOs Receiving USG Support Through USAID, May 2015; NGO Engagement in U.S. Global Health Efforts: U.S.-Based NGOs Receiving USG Support Through USAID, Dec. 2014.

    ← Return to text

  2. KFF analysis of USAID FY 2015 transaction data provided via personal communication with USAID staff of the U.S. Foreign Assistance Dashboard, ForeignAssistance.gov, July 21, 2016; and KFF personal communication with OGAC and the Global Fund, July 2016.

    ← Return to text

  3. Based on KFF analysis of USAID FY 2015 transaction data provided via personal communication with USAID staff of the U.S. Foreign Assistance Dashboard, ForeignAssistance.gov, July 21, 2016; FY 2015 transaction data from the U.S. Foreign Assistance Dashboard website, ForeignAssistance.gov, downloaded July 14, 2016; and data from the Office of Management and Budget, Agency Congressional Budget Justifications, and Congressional Appropriations Bills, and the U.S. Foreign Assistance Dashboard website, ForeignAssistance.gov.

    ← Return to text

  4. Some recipients were not identified in the data, i.e., the information was redacted, most likely for privacy reasons because the recipient was an individual.

    ← Return to text

  5. Funding through U.S.- and non-U.S.-based channels directly supported activities in 90 countries; some of this funding supported “worldwide” activities and regional activities spanning five regions (Africa, Asia, Europe & Eurasia, Latin America & the Caribbean, and the Middle East) and may have reached additional countries. Additionally, funding through multilateral and international channels indirectly supported activities that may have reached additional countries/regions as well.

    ← Return to text

  6. Our earlier analyses of FY 2013 and FY 2014 health spending by USAID focused specifically on NGOs and include a definition of NGOs. This category also includes other non-profit organizations, which would include those that were not identified in the data as PIOs nor, in earlier analyses, by KFF as NGOs (e.g., hospitals, educational institutions, organizations with ties to government(s), and foundations supporting these) as well as recipients that were redacted in the data but were categorized as non-profit organizations in the data. In this report, we did not categorize non-profit organizations as NGOs and other non-profits specifically and, therefore, did not delineate between them, but many of the NGOs and other non-profits identified in our earlier analyses also appear in the FY 2015 USAID health spending data. Earlier analyses demonstrated that nearly all support for non-profits went to NGOs. See KFF: The Role of NGOs in the U.S. Global Health Response, July 2015; Foreign NGO Engagement in U.S. Global Health Efforts: Foreign NGOs Receiving USG Support Through USAID, May 2015; NGO Engagement in U.S. Global Health Efforts: U.S.-Based NGOs Receiving USG Support Through USAID, Dec. 2014.

    ← Return to text

  7. For-profit organizations.

    ← Return to text

  8. This also includes other non-profit organizations, which are organizations identified in the data as non-profits that were neither identified as public international organizations in the data, nor would they classified as NGOs (see KFF definition of NGOs used in earlier analyses); they might include hospitals, educational institutions (specifically, those not classified separately as such in the data), organizations with ties to government(s), and foundations supporting these. See KFF: The Role of NGOs in the U.S. Global Health Response, July 2015; Foreign NGO Engagement in U.S. Global Health Efforts: Foreign NGOs Receiving USG Support Through USAID, May 2015; NGO Engagement in U.S. Global Health Efforts: U.S.-Based NGOs Receiving USG Support Through USAID, Dec. 2014.

    ← Return to text

  9. Referred to in the data as Public International Organizations (PIOs), which are defined in USAID, ADS Chapter 308: Awards to Public International Organizations, April 3, 2014, as “an international organization composed principally of countries or such other organization as designated pursuant to” a section therein, and also in USAID, ADS Glossary, April 30, 2014, as “an organization in which the U.S. participates composed principally of governments.”

    ← Return to text

  10. For more information on the Global Fund, see KFF, “The U.S. & The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria,” fact sheet.

    ← Return to text

  11. This is the amount of funding that the U.S. government and the Global Fund reported as the U.S. contribution for FY 2015, although a portion of it was disbursed in FY 2016 due to congressional requirements on the overall level of U.S. funding for the Global Fund. KFF personal communication with OGAC and the Global Fund, July 2016.

    ← Return to text

  12. This funding is provided by Congress to the Department of State, which in turn provides it as a pass-through to USAID. KFF personal communication with OGAC, March 2016; CRS, U.S. Agency for International Development: Background, Operations, and Issues, July 21, 2015, R44117.

    ← Return to text

  13. Funding for the Global Fund is attributed by USAID in the data to HIV only rather than to HIV, malaria, and TB.

    ← Return to text

Appendix
  1. This is the amount of funding that the U.S. government and the Global Fund reported as the U.S. contribution for FY 2015, although a portion of it was disbursed in FY 2016 due to congressional requirements on the overall level of U.S. funding for the Global Fund. KFF personal communication with OGAC and the Global Fund, July 2016.

    ← Return to text

  2. For example, USAID transaction data analyzed for this report include funds transferred from the Department of State to USAID for HIV efforts, which were then obligated and eventually disbursed to various implementing organizations.

    ← Return to text

  3. Our earlier analyses of FY 2013 and FY 2014 health spending by USAID focused specifically on NGOs and include a definition of NGOs. Other non-profit organizations would include those that were not identified in the data as PIOs, nor would they classified as NGOs (see KFF definition of NGOs used in earlier analyses); they might include hospitals, educational institutions (specifically, those not classified separately as such in the data), organizations with ties to government(s), and foundations supporting these. See KFF: The Role of NGOs in the U.S. Global Health Response, July 2015; Foreign NGO Engagement in U.S. Global Health Efforts: Foreign NGOs Receiving USG Support Through USAID, May 2015; NGO Engagement in U.S. Global Health Efforts: U.S.-Based NGOs Receiving USG Support Through USAID, Dec. 2014.

    ← Return to text

  4. Positive and negative disbursements along with zero-dollar disbursements that are no-cost extensions are each closely linked to the recent completion or ongoing execution of global health activities, providing the best approximation available for showing where work is being done.

    ← Return to text