Table 3.

Implementation ‘intensity’ of AMFm supporting interventions, including communication and training

Country	Time from arrival of AMFm co-paid ACT to midpoint of endline survey (months)	Months of implementation of communication campaign preceding the midpoint of the endline survey*	Percentage of private for-profit outlet respondents reporting attending a training session on anti-malarials ‘with this symbol’ (i.e. AMFm logo) at endline	Disbursement of funding for supporting interventions preceding midpoint of endline survey (USD per capita)**
Ghana	15.5	9	50.2	0.42
Kenya	15	9	12.0	0.18
Tanzania mainland	13.5	7	18.1	0.03
Zanzibar	6.5	5	37.5	0.11
Nigeria	9.5	3	13.5	0.10
Niger	7	2	12.8	0.06
Madagascar	14	1	2.2	0.06
Uganda	9.5	0	16.6	0.17†

*In some countries there were also some limited communication activities prior to the main roll-out of the communication campaign. For Niger and Madagascar there were some communication campaign activities but these were suspended prior to endline data collection. In Madagascar the radio and TV campaigns ran only from April-May 2011 due to a ban on advertising prescription medication directly to the public except during periods of public health emergencies. ^** Figures represent disbursement of Global Fund grants for AMFm supporting interventions including communication campaigns and promotional materials; awareness-building community-based activities; training of anti-malarial providers; pharmacovigilance and post-marketing surveillance; and regulatory interventions – source: Global Fund Secretariat. ^†For Uganda $0.17 per capita disbursement took place, and although expenditure data was not available disbursement of funds took place less than one month before the midpoint of the endline survey, and no implementation of communication was recorded as taking place in this setting.