Comparative Analysis of the Funding Priorities and Best Practices in Family Planning Programming as Defined by Three Major INGO Funders: USAID, DFID and The Gates Foundation: A Special Studies Project Open Access
Holmes, Melissa (Spring 2020)
Published
Abstract
Introduction: There is a major need to address the unmet need for family planning in low-and-middle-income countries (LMIC). Many women of reproductive age in developing countries who want to avoid pregnancy are not using a modern form of contraception. This fact spurred an overwhelming commitment to family planning (FP) by the global health and international development communities. In 2012 and again in 2017, global leaders met in London and committed to providing voluntary FP services to 120 million women in the developing world. International non-governmental organizations (INGO) are major implementers of FP programs and projects. The three major donors that provide financial support for FP programs are the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the UK’s Department for International Development (DFID), and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF).
Statement of Purpose: This project grew out of my work with CARE International in Atlanta, GA. As a part of my internship, I was tasked with conducting a comprehensive literature review that examined and highlighted USAID’s best practices, key tools and approaches, and exemplar funded programs in a variety of topical areas. This project is an expansion of that work and is aimed at identifying the FP- and sexual and reproductive health (SRH)-focused priorities, key strategies, and approaches as defined by the three major international FP funders: USAID, DFID, and BMGF. The purpose of this project is to inform INGOs’ program design and resource mobilization efforts as they work to develop proposals for these three donors. INGOs engage in a very competitive process to secure funding for their FP programs. In-depth knowledge of what funders deem important is key to submitting successful program proposals as a prime organization.
Methods: The literature review and results were based on searches of Google Scholar, PubMed, and donor funding databases, as well as, insight from CARE staff members. The data found were examined for keywords, recurring phrases, and direct statements related to FP priorities. Funding databases were used to examine previously funded international FP programs by the three donors.
Discussion: Through my review of the literature and funding databases, I found that all three organizations have similar overlapping priorities, including gender equality, increasing uptake of modern methods, and prioritizing adolescents. USAID emphasizes self-reliance and resilience and cannot currently support any program that advocates for safe and legal abortion. DFID is committed to ensuring access to safe, legal abortions in countries where they work. They also prioritize work with vulnerable and disabled populations, violence against women, and ensuring value for money spent on programming and interventions. BMGF is committed to finding novel contraceptive technology that is accessible to those who current methods are not useful for. The foundation is also very interested in work that adds to the evidence base and can be scaled up in other contexts.
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION
1.1 - PURPOSE STATEMENT
1.2 - INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND GLOBAL HEALTH
1.3 - IMPORTANCE OF FAMILY PLANNING
1.4 - THE FUNDING LANDSCAPE
METHODOLOGY
2.1 - SYSTEMATIC SEARCH FOR ARTICLES FOR LITERATURE REVIEW INCLUSION
2.2 - FUNDING DATABASES
LITERATURE REVIEW
3.1 - US FAMILY PLANNING HISTORY
3.2 - USAID STRATEGY
3.3 - APPROACH FOR EXPANDING CHOICE AND ACCESS TO LARC’S
3.4 - ENGAGING MEN, BOYS, AND THE COMMUNITY
3.5 - HEALTHY TIMING AND SPACING OF PREGNANCY
3.6 - EXEMPLAR PROGRAMS
3.7 - DFID AND FAMILY PLANNING
3.8 - DFID’S PRIORITIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
3.9 - ABORTION
3.11 - FLAGSHIP PROGRAMS
3.12 - BMGF BEGINNINGS
3.13 - FP STRATEGY
3.14- CONTRACEPTIVE TECHNOLOGY
3.15 - ADOLESCENTS AND YOUTH
3.16 - MODEL PROGRAMS
3.17 - HOW FUNDING DECISIONS ARE MADE
DISCUSSION
4.1 – COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
4.2 – STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 - USAID
5.2 - DFID
5.3 – BILL AND MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION
CONCLUSION
About this Master's Thesis
| School | |
|---|---|
| Department | |
| Degree | |
| Submission | |
| Language |
|
| Research Field | |
| Keyword | |
| Committee Chair / Thesis Advisor |
Primary PDF
| Thumbnail | Title | Date Uploaded | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Comparative Analysis of the Funding Priorities and Best Practices in Family Planning Programming as Defined by Three Major INGO Funders: USAID, DFID and The Gates Foundation: A Special Studies Project () | 2020-05-02 16:20:34 -0400 |
|
Supplemental Files
| Thumbnail | Title | Date Uploaded | Actions |
|---|