DFID’s support to the health sector in Zimbabwe

Our report assesses DFID’s support to the health sector in Zimbabwe which has had a substantial and positive impact, most notably for those living with HIV/AIDS.

Score: Green/Amber
  1. Status: Completed
  2. Published: 22 November 2011
  3. Subject: Country focus, Global health
  4. Assessment: Green/Amber
  5. Location: Zimbabwe
  6. Lead commissioner: Graham Ward CBE

Read the review

Review

Our review concluded that the Department for International Development (DFID)’s support to the health sector in Zimbabwe had a substantial and positive impact, most notably for those living with HIV/AIDS. We made five recommendations. As a result of our findings, this review is marked green-amber.

Findings

DFID’s support to the health sector in Zimbabwe has had a substantial and positive impact, most notably for those living with HIV/AIDS. Overall, value for money has been good in the majority of the programme. The underlying health system, however, is still failing. DFID helped to avert a total collapse in 2007-09 but the likelihood that it can achieve sustained improvement in health outcomes will remain poor until there is a more secure political context.

Recommendations

  1. As noted by the International Development Committee, DFID should support the Zimbabwe Ministry of Health to strengthen its capability to manage the health system.
  2. DFID should plan to address the risk of falling value for money if funding is scaled up further. This should include identifying the major value for money risks and specifying how they will be managed and monitored.
  3. DFID should continue its efforts to promote the removal of user fees for pregnant women and children under five and ensure that this is a core objective in future support to maternal health.
  4. DFID should ensure more comprehensive reporting across the delivery chains, with clearer linking of funding to performance delivered.
  5. DFID should take the lead in the donor community to agree a common definition of administrative costs and require implementing partners to report administrative costs on that basis.

 

Read the news story

Timeline

Review publication

Published 22 November 2011

Government response

Published 12 December 2011

ICAI follow-up

Published 1 July 2013