Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40707046›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2025

Who funds the WHO Foundation? A transparency analysis of donation disclosures over the first 3 years of its operation.

Nason Maani, Emily R Adrion, Jeff Collin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. United Nations Partnerships With the Alcohol Industry.International journal of health policy and management · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Nason MaaniGlobal Health Policy Unit, School of Social and Political Science, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK nmaani@ed.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3398-0688
Emily R AdrionGlobal Health Policy Unit, School of Social and Political Science, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5592-2270
Jeff CollinGlobal Health Policy Unit, School of Social and Political Science, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe WHO Foundation (WHOF) was established in 2020 with the stated aim of broadening the donor pool to the WHO. Academics and civil society actors raised concerns regarding the potential nature and source of contributions from commercial actors with a conflict of interest, particularly regarding the central role of commercial determinants of health in contemporary global health challenges. However, to date, little is known regarding the nature of donations to the WHOF. This analysis sought to examine the transparency and patterns of donations received by the WHOF based on the Foundation's own disclosures.

methodsData was extracted from funding disclosures data made available by the WHOF on its transparency page. Donations were analysed descriptively by year, donor type, amount and earmarked programme. Sankey diagrams were constructed to illustrate the magnitude and flow of funds by donor type to the specific WHO programmes for which the donated funds were earmarked. Levels of transparency were assessed for each reporting period based on the A-E 'Who Funds You' transparency scale used by Open Democracy.

resultsSince its launch until the end of 2023, the Foundation disclosed total donation receipts of US$82 783 930 overall, of which US$39 757 326 (48%) was characterised as anonymous donations over US$100 000. The proportion of anonymous donations over US$100 000 increased year on year, alongside named donations from charitable foundations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, social media companies, medical device companies, banking/finance and pharmaceutical companies. The largest proportion was earmarked for 'WHO Foundation Operational Support'. The WHOF was assessed a 'B' transparency rating for the first reporting period, falling to a 'D' (less than 50% of donations by value disclosed) in the 2022 and 2023 calendar years.

conclusionsThis analysis finds that current levels of donor transparency are low, potentially exposing the WHOF-and by extension the WHO-to risks of perceived reputational damage or undue influence. These risks are assumed for financial contributions that, to date, have been relatively modest and follow donor, rather than WHO, priorities.

Indexed as

Conflict of InterestDisclosureFoundationsWorld Health OrganizationHumansGlobal HealthPublic Health

Identifiers

PMID40707046
PMCPMC12306262

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.