Dataset Information

11 years of tracking aid to reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health: estimates and analysis for 2003-13 from the Countdown to 2015.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Tracking aid flows helps to hold donors accountable and to compare the allocation of resources in relation to health need. With the use of data reported by donors in 2015, we provided estimates of official development assistance and grants from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (collectively termed ODA+) to reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health for 2013 and complete trends in reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health support for the period 2003-13.

Methods

We coded and analysed financial disbursements to reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health to all recipient countries from all donors reporting to the creditor reporting system database for the year 2013. We also revisited disbursement records for the years 2003-08 and coded disbursements relating to reproductive and sexual health activities resulting in the Countdown dataset for 2003-13. We matched this dataset to the 2015 creditor reporting system dataset and coded any unmatched creditor reporting system records. We analysed trends in ODA+ to reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health for the period 2003-13, trends in donor contributions, disbursements to recipient countries, and targeting to need.

Findings

Total ODA+ to reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health reached nearly US$14 billion in 2013, of which 48% supported child health ($6·8 billion), 34% supported reproductive and sexual health ($4·7 billion), and 18% maternal and newborn health ($2·5 billion). ODA+ to reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health increased by 225% in real terms over the period 2003-13. Child health received the most substantial increase in funding since 2003 (286%), followed by reproductive and sexual health (194%), and maternal and newborn health (164%). In 2013, bilateral donors disbursed 59% of all ODA+ to reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health, followed by global health initiatives (23%), and multilateral agencies (13%). Targeting of ODA+ to reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health to countries with the greatest health need seems to have improved over time.

Interpretation

The increase in reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health funding over the period 2003-13 is encouraging. Further increases in funding will be needed to accelerate maternal mortality reduction while keeping a high level of investment in sexual and reproductive health and in child health.

Funding

Subgrant OPP1058954 from the US Fund for UNICEF under their Countdown to 2015 for Maternal, Newborn and Child Survival Grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

SUBMITTER: Grollman C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5565636 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundProgress in reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health (RMNCH) in Kenya has been inconsistent over the past two decades, despite the global push to foster accountability, reduce child mortality, and improve maternal health in an equitable manner. Although several cross-sectional assessments have been done, a systematic analysis of RMNCH in Kenya was needed to better understand the push and pull factors that govern intervention coverage and influence mortality trends. As such, we aimed to determine coverage and impact of key RMNCH interventions between 1990 and 2015.MethodsWe did a comprehensive, systematic assessment of RMNCH in Kenya from 1990 to 2015, using data from nationally representative Demographic Health Surveys done between 1989 and 2014. For comparison, we used modelled mortality estimates from the UN Inter-Agency Groups for Child and Maternal Mortality Estimation. We estimated time trends for key RMNCH indicators, as defined by Countdown to 2015, at both the national and the subnational level, and used linear regression methods to understand the determinants of change in intervention coverage during the past decade. Finally, we used the Lives Saved Tool (LiST) to model the effect of intervention scale-up by 2030.FindingsAfter an increase in mortality between 1990 and 2003, there was a reversal in all mortality trends from 2003 onwards, although progress was not substantial enough for Kenya to achieve Millennium Development Goal targets 4 or 5. Between 1990 and 2015, maternal mortality declined at half the rate of under-5 mortality, and changes in neonatal mortality were even slower. National-level trends in intervention coverage have improved, although some geographical inequities remain, especially for counties comprising the northeastern, eastern, and northern Rift Valley regions. Disaggregation of intervention coverage by wealth quintile also revealed wide inequities for several health-systems-based interventions, such as skilled birth assistance. Multivariable analyses of predictors of change in family planning, skilled birth assistance, and full vaccination suggested that maternal literacy and family size are important drivers of positive change in key interventions across the continuum of care. LiST analyses clearly showed the importance of quality of care around birth for maternal and newborn survival.InterpretationIntensified and focused efforts are needed for Kenya to achieve the RMNCH targets for 2030. Kenya must build on its previous progress to further reduce mortality through the widespread implementation of key preventive and curative interventions, especially those pertaining to labour, delivery, and the first day of life. Deliberate targeting of the poor, least educated, and rural women, through the scale-up of community-level interventions, is needed to improve equity and accelerate progress.FundingUS Fund for UNICEF, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Project description:BackgroundIn 2015, 5.3 million babies died in the third trimester of pregnancy and first month following birth. Progress in reducing neonatal mortality and stillbirth rates has lagged behind the substantial progress in reducing postneonatal and maternal mortality rates. The benefits to prenatal and neonatal health (PNH) from maternal and child health investments cannot be assumed.MethodsWe analysed donor funding for PNH over the period 2003-2013. We used an exhaustive key term search followed by manual review and classification to identify official development assistance and private grant (ODA+) disbursement records in the Countdown to 2015 ODA+ Database.ResultsThe value of ODA+ mentioning PNH or an activity that would directly benefit PNH increased from $105 million in 2003 to $1465 million in 2013, but this included a 3% decline between 2012 and 2013. Projects exclusively benefitting PNH reached just $6 million in 2013. Records mentioning PNH accounted for 3% of the $2708 million disbursed in 2003 for maternal, newborn and child health (MNCH) and increased to 13% of the $9287 million disbursed for MNCH in 2013. In 11 years, only nine records ($6 million) mentioned stillbirth, miscarriage, or the fetus, although the two leading infectious causes of stillbirth were mentioned in records worth $832 million. The USA disbursed the most ODA+ mentioning PNH ($2848 million, 40% of the total) and Unicef disbursed the most ODA+ exclusively benefitting PNH ($18 million, 30%). We found evidence that funding mentioning and exclusively benefitting PNH was targeted to countries with greater economic needs, but the evidence of targeting to health needs was weak and inconsistent.ConclusionsNewborn health rose substantially on the global agenda between 2003 and 2013, but prenatal health received minimal attention in donor funding decisions. Declines in 2013 and persistently low funding exclusively benefitting PNH indicate a need for caution and continued monitoring of donors' support for newborn health.

Project description:BackgroundFour methods have previously been used to track aid for reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health (RMNCH). At a meeting of donors and stakeholders in May, 2018, a single, agreed method was requested to produce accurate, predictable, transparent, and up-to-date estimates that could be used for analyses from both donor and recipient perspectives. Muskoka2 was developed to meet these needs. We describe Muskoka2 and present estimates of levels and trends in aid for RMNCH in 2002-17, with a focus on the latest estimates for 2017.MethodsMuskoka2 is an automated algorithm that generates disaggregated estimates of aid for reproductive health, maternal and newborn health, and child health at the global, donor, and recipient-country levels. We applied Muskoka2 to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's Creditor Reporting System (CRS) aid activities database to generate estimates of RMNCH disbursements in 2002-17. The percentage of disbursements that benefit RMNCH was determined using CRS purpose codes for all donors except Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance; the UN Population Fund; and UNICEF; for which fixed percentages of aid were considered to benefit RMNCH. We analysed funding by donor for the 20 largest donors, by recipient-country income group, and by recipient for the 16 countries with the greatest RMNCH need, defined as the countries with the worst levels in 2015 on each of seven health indicators.FindingsAfter 3 years of stagnation, reported aid for RMNCH reached $15·9 billion in 2017, the highest amount ever reported. Among donors reporting in both 2016 and 2017, aid increased by 10% ($1·4 billion) to $15·4 billion between 2016 and 2017. Child health received almost half of RMNCH disbursements in 2017 (46%, $7·4 billion), followed by reproductive health (34%, $5·4 billion), and maternal and newborn health (19%, $3·1 billion). The USA ($5·8 billion) and the UK ($1·6 billion) were the largest bilateral donors, disbursing 46% of all RMNCH funding in 2017 (including shares of their core contributions to multilaterals). The Global Fund and Gavi were the largest multilateral donors, disbursing $1·7 billion and $1·5 billion, respectively, for RMNCH from their core budgets. The proportion of aid for RMNCH received by low-income countries increased from 31% in 2002 to 52% in 2017. Nigeria received 7% ($1·1 billion) of all aid for RMNCH in 2017, followed by Ethiopia (6%, $876 million), Kenya (5%, $754 million), and Tanzania (5%, $751 million).InterpretationMuskoka2 retains the speed, transparency, and donor buy-in of the G8's previous Muskoka approach and incorporates eight innovations to improve precision. Although aid for RMNCH increased in 2017, low-income and middle-income countries still experience substantial funding gaps and threats to future funding. Maternal and newborn health receives considerably less funding than reproductive health or child health, which is a persistent issue requiring urgent attention.FundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation; Partnership for Maternal, Newborn & Child Health.

Project description:BackgroundFour initiatives have estimated the value of aid for reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health (RMNCH): Countdown to 2015, the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), the Muskoka Initiative, and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) policy marker. We aimed to compare the estimates, trends, and methodologies of these initiatives and make recommendations for future aid tracking.MethodsWe compared estimates of aid for RMNCH from the four initiatives for all years available at the time of our analysis (1990-2016). We used publicly available datasets for IHME and Countdown. We produced estimates for Muskoka and the OECD policy marker using data in the OECD Creditor Reporting System. We sought to explain differences in estimates by critically comparing the methods used by each approach to identify and analyse aid, and quantifying the effects of these choices on estimates.FindingsAll four approaches indicated substantial increases over time in global aid for RMNCH, but estimates of aid amounts and year-on-year trends differed substantially, especially for individual donors and recipient countries. Muskoka (US$ 13·0 billion in 2013, constant 2015 US$) and Countdown's RMNCH estimates ($13·1 billion in 2013) tended to be the highest and most similar, although they often indicated different year-on-year trends. IHME produced lower estimates ($10·8 billion in 2013), which often indicated different trends from the other approaches. The OECD policy marker produced by far the lowest estimates ($2·0 billion in 2013) because half of bilateral donors did not report on it consistently and those who did tended to apply it narrowly. Estimates differed across approaches primarily because of differences in methods for distinguishing aid for RMNCH from aid for other purposes; adjustments for inflation, exchange rates, and under-reporting; whether donors were credited for their support to multilateral institutions; and the handling of aid to unspecified recipients.InterpretationThe four approaches are likely to lead to different conclusions about whether individual donors and recipient countries have fulfilled their obligations and commitments and whether aid was sufficient, targeted to countries with greater need, or effective. We recommend that efforts to track aid for the Sustainable Development Goals reflect their multisectoral and interconnected nature and make analytical choices that are appropriate to their objectives, recognising the trade-offs between simplicity, timeliness, precision, accuracy, efficiency, flexibility, replicability, and the incentives that different metrics create for donors.FundingSubgrant OPP1058954 from the US Fund for UNICEF under their Countdown to 2015 for Maternal, Newborn and Child Survival Grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Project description:BackgroundKyrgyzstan has made considerable progress in reducing child mortality compared with other countries in the region, despite a comparatively low economic standing. However, maternal mortality is still high. Given the availability of an established birth registration system, we aimed to comprehensively assess the trends and determinants of reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health in Kyrgyzstan.MethodsFor this Countdown to 2030 country case study, we used publicly available data repositories and the national birth registry of Kyrgyzstan to examine trends and inequalities of reproductive, maternal, and newborn health and mortality between 1990 and 2018, at a national and subnational level. Coverage of newborn and maternal health interventions was assessed and disaggregated by equity dimensions. We did Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition to determine the contextual factors associated with the observed decline in newborn mortality rates. We also undertook a comprehensive review of national policies and programmes, as well as a prospective Lives Saved Tool analysis, to highlight interventions that have the potential to avert the most maternal, neonatal, and child deaths.FindingsOver the past two decades, Kyrgyzstan reduced newborn mortality rates by 46% and mortality rates of children younger than 5 years by 69%, whereas maternal mortality rates were reduced by 7% and stillbirth rates by 29%. The leading causes of neonatal deaths were prematurity and asphyxia or hypoxia, and preterm small-for-gestational-age infants were more than 80 times more likely to die in their first month of life compared with those born appropriate-for-gestational age at term. Except for contraceptive use, coverage of essential interventions has increased and is generally high, with limited sociodemographic inequities. With scale-up of a few essential neonatal and maternal interventions, 39% of neonatal deaths, 11% of stillbirths, and 19% of maternal deaths could be prevented by 2030.InterpretationKyrgyzstan has reduced newborn mortality rates considerably, with the potential for further reduction. To achieve and exceed the Sustainable Development Goal 3 targets for newborn survival and reducing stillbirths, Kyrgyzstan needs to scale up packages of interventions for the care of small and sick babies, assure quality of care in all health-care facilities with regionalised perinatal care, and create a linked national registry for mothers and neonates with rapid feedback and accountability.FundingUS Fund for UNICEF under the Countdown to 2015, UNICEF Kyrgyzstan Office.

Project description:BackgroundLittle is known about the patterns of development assistance (DA) for each component of reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health (RMNCAH) in conflict-affected countries nor about the DA allocation in relation to the burden of disease.MethodsWe tracked DA to RMNCAH in general and to each of its four components: reproductive health (RH), maternal and newborn health (MNH), child health (CH) and adolescent health (AH), in 25 conflict-affected countries between 2003 and 2017. We compared DA and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for each component. Using keyword searching and funding allocation methods, we produced two sets of estimates: DA primarily targeting RMNCAH (lower bound) and DA both primarily and partially for RMNCAH or DA not explicitly targeting RMNCAH but benefiting it (upper bound).FindingsBetween 2003 and 2017, we identified 46 833 projects among the 25 countries that targeted RMNCAH. During the study period, DA to RMNCAH increased by seven-fold from $0.5 billion to $3.6 billion, with a slowdown since 2013. Cumulatively, RH received the largest proportion of DA to RMNCAH (50%) with 84% of its funding earmarked for HIV/AIDS, which contributed to less than 6% of the total RMNCAH-related DALYs. AH received 3% of the DA-RMNCAH but contributed 15% to the RMNCAH-related DALYs. Non-communicable diseases caused more than one-third of the DALYs among adolescents, but received only 3% of DA to AH. RMNCAH-inclusive estimates showed consistent results.ConclusionWhile there was a substantial increase in funding to RMNCAH in conflict-affected countries over the period of study, some health issues with high disease burden (eg, AH and non-communicable diseases) received a disproportionately small portion of aid for RMNCAH. We recommend that donors increase investment to RMNCAH in conflict-affected countries, particularly in areas where the burden of disease or the potential benefit of investment is likely to be high.