ArticleGlobal health, science and practice2023
An Evaluation of Local Implementing Partner Performance During the First 2 Years of the USAID/PEPFAR Transition.
Article in Global health, science and practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integration of a vertical voluntary medical male circumcision program into routine health services in Zimbabwe: A solution for sustainable HIV prevention.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLocally led and owned development is considered the best practice for international aid. As an implementing agency for the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) supported the goal of transitioning 70% of its portfolio funding directly to local organizations by 2020, including partner country governments. However, limited evidence or evaluation exists on how such a transition can help achieve HIV-related health outcomes.
methodsWe evaluated monitoring, evaluation, and reporting performance; calculated indicators; and quality of service across the HIV/AIDS treatment cascade for local and international partners in the USAID/PEPFAR portfolio implementing similar programs during the U.S. Government fiscal years (FY) 2019 to 2020 (October 1, 2018-September 30, 2020). We compared results aggregated globally, by country, and across individual partners.
resultsGlobally, local partners met a lower proportion of their treatment targets than international partners and did not meet targets for pre-exposure prophylaxis or voluntary medical male circumcision in FY2020. However, local partners exceeded targets in programs supporting orphans, vulnerable children, and key populations affected by HIV/AIDS. Local partners also had testing positivity, linkage rates, and viral load suppression that were equivalent to or higher than that of international partners. Based on available assessments, local partners displayed quality of service delivery comparable to international partners.
conclusionLocal partners faced challenges, including unfamiliarity with USAID funding, increasing targets across several indicators, and the syndemics of HIV/AIDS and COVID-19. A higher percentage of targets and funding led South African local partners to yield an outsized effect on global percent target achievement. While these findings should be interpreted cautiously due to limited sample size and short time horizon, they are a key first step in evaluating the local partner transition support of the long-term goal of sustained epidemic control of HIV/AIDS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.