Any better? A follow-up content analysis of adolescent sexual and reproductive health inclusion in Global Financing Facility country planning documents.

BACKGROUND: The Global Financing Facility (GFF) supports national reproductive, maternal, newborn, child, adolescent health, and nutrition needs. Previous analysis examined how adolescent sexual and reproductive health was represented in GFF national planning documents for 11 GFF partner countries. OBJECTIVES: This paper furthers that analysis for 16 GFF partner countries as part of a Special Series. METHODS: Content analysis was conducted on publicly available GFF planning documents for Afghanistan, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, CAR, Côte d'Ivoire, Guinea, Haiti, Indonesia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Tajikistan, Vietnam. Analysis considered adolescent health content (mindset), indicators (measure) and funding (money) relative to adolescent sexual and reproductive health needs, using a tracer indicator. RESULTS: Countries with higher rates of adolescent pregnancy had more content relating to adolescent reproductive health, with exceptions in fragile contexts. Investment cases had more adolescent content than project appraisal documents. Content gradually weakened from mindset to measures to money. Related conditions, such as fistula, abortion, and mental health, were insufficiently addressed. Documents from Burkina Faso and Malawi demonstrated it is possible to include adolescent programming even within a context of shifting or selective priorities. CONCLUSION: Tracing prioritisation and translation of commitments into plans provides a foundation for discussing global funding for adolescents. We highlight positive aspects of programming and areas for strengthening and suggest broadening the perspective of adolescent health beyond the reproductive health to encompass issues, such as mental health. This paper forms part of a growing body of accountability literature, supporting advocacy work for adolescent programming and funding.

Main findings: Adolescent health content is inconsistently included in the Global Financing Facility country documents, and despite strong or positive examples, the content is stronger in investment cases than project appraisal documents, and diminishes when comparing content, indicators and financing.Added knowledge: Although adolescent health content is generally strongest in countries with the highest proportion of births before age 18, there are exceptions in fragile contexts and gaps in addressing important issues related to adolescent health.Global health impact for policy and action: Adolescent health programming supported by the Global Financing Facility should build on examples of strong country plans, be more consistent in addressing adolescent health, and be accompanied by public transparency to facilitate accountability work such as this.

Form and functioning: contextualising the start of the global financing facility policy processes in Burkina Faso.

BACKGROUND: Burkina Faso joined the Global Financing Facility for Women, Children and Adolescents (GFF) in 2017 to address persistent gaps in funding for reproductive, maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent health and nutrition (RMNCAH-N). Few empirical papers deal with how global funding mechanisms, and specifically GFF, support resource mobilisation for health nationally. OBJECTIVE: This study describes the policy processes of developing the GFF planning documents (the Investment Case and Project Appraisal Document) in Burkina Faso. METHODS: We conducted an exploratory qualitative policy analysis. Data collection included document review (N = 74) and in-depth semi-structured interviews (N = 23). Data were analysed based on the components of the health policy triangle. RESULTS: There was strong national political support to RMNCAH-N interventions, and the process of drawing up the investment case (IC) and the project appraisal document was inclusive and multi-sectoral. Despite high-level policy commitments, subsequent implementation of the World Bank project, including the GFF contribution, was perceived by respondents as challenging, even after the project restructuring process occurred. These challenges were due to ongoing policy fragmentation for RMNCAH-N, navigation of differing procedures and perspectives between stakeholders in the setting up of the work, overcoming misunderstandings about the nature of the GFF, and weak institutional anchoring of the IC. Insecurity and political instability also contributed to observed delays and difficulties in implementing the commitments agreed upon. To tackle these issues, transformational and distributive leaderships should be promoted and made effective. CONCLUSIONS: Few studies have examined national policy processes linked to the GFF or other global health initiatives. This kind of research is needed to better understand the range of challenges in aligning donor and national priorities encountered across diverse health systems contexts. This study may stimulate others to ensure that the GFF and other global health initiatives respond to local needs and policy environments for better implementation.

Main findings: There was a high level of political commitment to the Global Financing Facility in Burkina Faso, but its implementation has been hindered by policy fragmentation, competing interests, weak institutional anchoring, and misunderstandings.Added knowledge: This study documents the initiation of a global health initiative, specifically the Global Financing Facility, including the development and implementation of its planning documents, namely the Investment Case and Project Appraisal Document.Global health impact for policy and action: An understanding of the factors that facilitated or impeded the policy processes of developing and implementing the Global Financing Facility can inform the design and implementation of future initiatives.

Towards a better tomorrow: addressing intersectional gender power relations to eradicate inequities in maternal health.

An equity lens to maternal health has typically focused on assessing the differences in coverage and use of healthcare services and critical interventions. While this approach is important, we argue that healthcare experiences, dignity, rights, justice, and well-being are fundamental components of high quality and person-centred maternal healthcare that must also be considered. Looking at differences across one dimension alone does not reflect how fundamental drivers of maternal health inequities-including racism, ethnic or caste-based discrimination, and gendered power relations-operate. In this paper, we describe how using an intersectionality approach to maternal health can illuminate how power and privilege (and conversely oppression and exclusion) intersect and drive inequities. We present an intersectionality-informed analysis on antenatal care quality to illustrate the advantages of this approach, and what is lost in its absence. We reviewed and mapped equity-informed interventions in maternal health to existing literature to identify opportunities for improvement and areas for innovation. The gaps and opportunities identified were then synthesised to propose recommendations on how to apply an intersectionality lens to maternal health research, programmes, and policies.