|Prevalence||Totals (FY 2005–2011)|
|<1%||Number of countries||6|
|Funding range (min, max)||($4.0, $97.8)|
|1–10%||Number of countries||16|
|Funding range (min, max)||($4.0, $565.0)|
|>10%||Number of countries||9|
|Funding range (min, max)||($6.5, $590.9)|
|All 31 Countries||Number of countries||31|
|Funding range (min, max)||($4.0, $590.9)|
NOTE: Funding data are presented in current USD millions.
SOURCES: OGAC, 2005, 2006b, 2007c, 2008c, 2010e, 2011c,d; UNAIDS, 2010.
10 percent in 2009, and PEPFAR funded all of them (UNAIDS, 2012a). There were 41 countries with HIV prevalence rates between 1 and 10 percent; in 2009 PEPFAR provided funding to 25 of these countries, including 16 that prepare COPs and are included in this analysis. This distribution of funding is consistent with the congressional and programmatic intent to focus primarily, although not exclusively, on countries with a high burden of HIV. Indeed, Ambassador Goosby has recently said that OGAC has “aggressively tried to re-equilibrate more appropriate allocations to prevalence rates” (Donnelly, 2012b).
PEPFAR Funding per PLHIV
Another measure for examining PEPFAR funding by severity of the epidemic is average PEPFAR funding per PLHIV. Although the number of PLHIV is not a perfect proxy for the HIV prevention, care, and treatment needs in a country, this approach does provide a reasonable approximation of the funding relative to the burden, which allows for a richer assessment of the distribution of funding than simply the HIV prevalence level. The committee used planned/approved PEPFAR funding and yearly estimates of PLHIV from UNAIDS to calculate the average PEPFAR funding per PLHIV (age 15+) from FY 2005 to FY 2010 (UNAIDS, 2010a). Table 4-4 shows this calculation, which for context is presented alongside the population