TABLE 11-5 Evolution of PEPFAR-Supported Evaluation and Research Activities

Program (Fiscal Year) Scope Methods Funding Mechanism Oversight Program Priorities
Targeted Evaluations (2005–2006) Rapid answers to specific, measurable, and focused questions about program implementation to improve services and identify best practices Rigorous assessments including pre- and post-test results with a comparison or control group Mission/country and centrally funded
Funded through COP
Scientific Steering Committee and Targeted Evaluation Subcommittee
Minimal central oversight
Country driven
Targeted Evaluations (2007) Answer specific questions around efficacy and best practices to produce generalizable results and contribute to program sustainability Rigorous assessments including pre- and post-test results with a comparison or control group Funded through COP Scientific Steering Committee and Targeted Evaluation Subcommittee
Minimal central oversight
Technical working group driven
Public Health Evaluations (PHEs) Phase 1 (2008) Answer questions around program effectiveness, compare program models, answer operational questions, and determine program outcome and impact with shift in focus from individuals to communities and populations Rigorous, scientifically sound research methodology using experimental or quasi-experimental designs, including (but not limited to) randomization, modeling, advanced statistical techniques, and comparison groups Funded centrally Scientific Steering Committee and PHE Subcommittee
Subcommittee has more responsibility and is able to convene multi-agency PHE evaluation teams representing CDC, DoD, NIH, HRSA, USAID Increased central support and coordination oversight
Globally significant priorities generated at country, central, and technical working group level


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement