| Agha 2002 [26]
|
Causal |
MDG 5.3 |
Social Marketing Adolescent Health Project |
Cameroon; Botswana; South Africa; Guinea |
USAID |
Study describes discrete project inputs with no indication of adherence to Paris Principles |
Unspecified |
1994–1998 |
| Baird 2010 [27]
|
Causal |
MDG 5.2; MDG 5.4 |
Safe Motherhood Project |
Indonesia |
World Bank |
The intervention is described as a first phase in a large-scale programme, suggesting partnership with the Indonesian Ministry of Health. However, there is insufficient detail to adequately assess depth of ownership or alignment, and the study describes discrete project interventions. |
USD42.5 m |
1998–2003 |
| Barbey 2001 [28]
|
Causal |
MDG 5.1; MDG 5.2; MDG 5.5 |
Dinajpur SafeMother Initiative |
Bangladesh |
CARE (Cooperative for Assistance and Relief Anywhere) |
The intervention takes a project approach but it is implemented in conjunction with the Government of Bangladesh and UNICEF; hence a suggestion of harmonisation and a degree of alignment. However, there is no indication of funding being on-budget. |
Unspecified |
1999–2001 |
| Buckley 2006 [29]
|
Correlation |
MDG 5.3 |
Various |
Uzbekistan |
Various bilateral (incl. USAID) and multilateral agencies (incl. UNFPA, UNESCO, UNAIDS) and Non- Governmental Organisations |
Study concerns multiple projects and donors; design is not conducive to determining any adherence to the Paris Principles |
Unspecified |
1993–2000 |
| Campbell 2005 [30]
|
Correlation |
MDG 5.1; MDG 5.2; MDG 5.3; MDG 5.5 |
Safe Motherhood Programme |
Egypt |
USAID |
Project approach with a suggestion of alignment with a national strategy as the project provides support to the national Safe Motherhood programme. Insufficient to classify as Paris-style aid. |
Unspecified |
Series of projects running from 1985–2005 |
| Debay 2007 [31]
|
Correlation |
MDG 5.3 |
The Toliara Province Child Survival Project |
Madagascar |
USAID |
Project approach using implementing partners; suggestion of government ministries as partners, but no indication of adherence to Paris Principles. |
USD1,229,843 |
2003–2006 |
| Hounton 2008 [32], [33]
|
Causal |
MDG 5.1; MDG 5.2; MDG 5.5 |
The Skilled Care Initiative |
Burkina Faso |
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; Family Care International (implementing partner) |
Project approach; insufficient information to indicate any adherence to the Paris Principles. |
Unspecified |
2001–2005 |
| Mathur 2004 [34]
|
Causal |
MDG 5.3; MDG 5.5 |
The Skilled Care Initiative |
Burkina Faso |
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; Family Care International (implementing partner) |
Discrete project interventions, involving community participation, but no indication of adherence to the Paris Principles. |
Unspecified |
2001–2005 |
| Meuwissen 2006 [35]
|
Causal |
MDG 5.3 |
Unspecified |
Nicaragua |
UK Department for International Development (DFID); Central American Health Institute (implementing partner), plus 4 NGOs (implementing partners) |
Project with insufficient information to assess adherence to Paris principles. |
Unspecified |
Dates unspecified but vouchers distributed between Sept 2000 and July 2001 |
| Mize 2008 [36]
|
Correlation |
MDG 5.2; MDG 5.5 |
Child Survival Grant |
Timor Leste |
USAID |
Project approach using implementing partners, with Ministry of Health as a partner (suggestion of alignment); insufficient detail to assess adherence to the Paris Principles. |
Unspecified |
2004–2008 (on-going to 2010) |
| Mulay 1992 [37]
|
Correlation |
MDG 5.3 |
3 projects: National Integrated Medical Association; Centre for Matru Mandir; Yusuf Meherally Centre |
India |
Various state bodies, national and international NGOs |
NGO-led projects, with no information about aid flows and management. |
Unspecified |
Since 1986 |
| Options Consultancy Services Ltd 2010 [38]
|
Correlation |
MDG 5.1; MDG 5.2; MDG 5.5 |
Support to Safe Motherhood Program |
Nepal |
DFID (main donor); five implementing partners (John Hopkins University, Actionaid, Ipas, UN Mission to Nepal, UNICEF) |
Suggestion of alignment (with national strategy) as the project provides support to the national Safe Motherhood programme with some co-funding from government; but insufficient information on the funding mechanisms and management to classify intervention as ‘Paris-style’, i.e. unclear if funding is budget support or sector budget support, if it is on-budget or using national systems. |
Limited information on overall budget, but Rs. 820 m in financial aid 2009/10 for Options Technical Assistance |
2004–2010 |
| Powell-Jackson 2006 [3]
|
Correlation |
MDG 5.1 |
Not relevant (article provide an overview of donor giving patterns) |
Covers approximately 150 countries |
OECD-DAC donors |
Data on different aid modalities (including budget support) but the study does not seek to make claims on behalf of different types of aid, nor does it provide detail to enable a classification as Paris-style aid. |
Amounts reported in Creditor Reporting System for majority of donors |
Not relevant |
| Price 2009 [39]
|
Correlation |
MDG 5.2; MDG 5.3; MDG 5.5 |
Unspecified |
Rwanda |
PEPFAR (plus implementing partner Family Healthcare International) |
Suggestion of ownership as direct grants are provided to local Primary Health Centres; but insufficient information to assess adherence to Paris Principles. |
USD 63,000 for basic HIV care from FHI in year one going down to USD 32,000 a year after that |
Unspecified |
| Ronsmans 2001 [40]
|
Correlation |
MDG 5.2 |
Safe Motherhood Programme |
Indonesia |
MotherCare (USAID-funded initiative) |
Suggestion of alignment (with national strategy) as the project provides support to the national Safe Motherhood programme in partnership with the Ministry of Health; but insufficient information on the funding mechanisms and management to classify the intervention as ‘Paris-style’. |
Unspecified |
1994-(end date unspecified) |
| Senlet 2008 [41]
|
Correlation |
MDG 5.2; MDG 5.5 |
PAIMAN Project |
Pakistan |
USAID (plus implementing partners) |
Discrete project with suggestion of some government involvement. |
USD 49,943,857 through 2009 |
2005–2009 |
| Snyder 2003 [42]
|
Correlation |
MDG 5.3 |
Not relevant (study presents meta-analysis). |
Covers multiple countries |
USAID (funder); John Hopkins University (implementing partner) |
Study analyses multiple targeted projects; limited information about the aid flows and management to enable classification as Paris-style aid. |
Unspecified |
Not Relevant |
| Williams 2007 [43]
|
Causal |
MDG 5.3 |
Africa Youth Alliance Programme |
Ghana, Tanzania, Uganda |
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (funder); United Nations Population Fund (implementing partner); Pathfinder International (implementing partner); Program for Appropriate Technology in Health (implementing partner) |
Project approach with suggestion of partnership with government, but limited information to assess adherence to the Paris Principles. |
Unspecified |
2000–2006 |
| World Bank 1998 [44]
|
Correlation |
MDG 5.2 |
Family Health Projects I & II, Sexually Transmitted Infections Project |
Zimbabwe |
World Bank |
Insufficient information to suggest anything other than discrete projects. |
Unspecified |
Initial loan provided in 1986, second one in 1991, then separate project on Sexually Transmitted Infections launched in 1993 |
| World Bank 2008 [45]
|
Correlation |
MDG 5.3; MDG 5.6 |
Egypt Population Project |
Egypt |
World Bank |
Programme aid (credit/loan), but most of the information is about support for NGOs with insufficient information to assess adherence to the Paris Principles. |
USD17.2 m |
1998–2005 |
