Radelet S.  Siddiqi B.  Ainsworth M. 

May 2007

Lancet  2007 369: 1807-1813

View PDF

Center for Global Development (CGD)

Governance, funding

A review of 134 Global Fund grants using multivariate quantitative methods.

The aim of the review is to identify correlations between Global Fund grants evaluation scores and characteristics of the programme, the health sector, and the recipient country.

The authors apply an ordered probit multivariate analysis of 134 GF grants evaluated in 2006

This evaluation identifies positive and negative correlations between Global Fund grant evaluation scores and characteristics of health programme, the health sector, and the recipient country.

Programmes that had government agencies as principal recipients, had a large amount of funding, were focused on malaria, had weak initial proposals, or were evaluated by the accounting firm KPMG, scored lowest. Countries with a high number of doctors per head, high measles immunisation rates, few health-sector donors, and high disease-prevalence rates had higher evaluation scores. Poor countries, those with small government budget deficits, and those that have or have had socialist governments also received higher scores.

The authors stress that their study shows associations, not causality, and focuses on evaluation scores rather than actual performance of the programmes. Nevertheless, they conclude that their findings provide some early indications of characteristics that can help the GF identify and monitor programmes that might be at risk. The authors note that their results should not be used to influence the distribution of funding, but rather to allocate resources for oversight and risk management.

Note: This analysis complements an earlier study by Lu, Michaud, Khan et al [Lancet 368 (2006): 483-88] of recipient countries capacity to disburse Fund money. Also see these authors Comment on Radelet and Siddiqis study in the Lancet 369 (2007): 1768-1769.