AAHRED logoAAHRED home

Transparency & Accountability

Open books, independent oversight and published shortfalls

Institutional and sovereign partners require assurance before they commit. This page consolidates the audited financial position, compliance posture, safeguarding architecture and full policy library in one disclosure surface.

Results dashboard Governance structure

Financial position

Five-year income, expenditure and efficiency

Consolidated figures presented on an accrual basis with restricted and unrestricted funds segregated. FY2025 statements carry an unqualified independent audit opinion.

0.0%

Programme expenditure ratio

0.0%

Administration ratio

0%

Resource mobilisation ratio

0.0m

FY2025 income (USD)

Expenditure by category, 2021–2025

USD millions, consolidated across all country programmes

Source: audited consolidated financial statements

Income by funding source, FY2025

Share of total income recognised in the financial year

Source: FY2025 statement of financial activities

How every dollar is used

Cents per USD 1.00 of total expenditure, FY2025

Independent audit confirms allocation methodology

Assurance posture

Compliance, audit and safeguarding

AAHRED maintains the control environment expected by bilateral donors, multilateral institutions and institutional philanthropy, with documented systems available for due diligence.

External audit

Unqualified opinion

Independent statutory audit of FY2025 consolidated financial statements.

Financial standard

IFRS-aligned

Accrual accounting with restricted and unrestricted fund segregation.

Grant compliance

2 CFR 200 ready

Systems mapped to uniform guidance for federal and bilateral awards.

Data protection

Kenya DPA 2019 · GDPR-aligned

Registered data controller with documented processing agreements.

Safeguarding

PSEAH policy in force

Mandatory training, survivor-centred reporting and independent investigation.

Anti-fraud

Zero-tolerance

Whistleblower channel, conflict-of-interest register and sanctions screening.

Disclosure library

Annual reports and statutory disclosures

Reports are released within 120 days of the financial year end. Requests for additional documentation are handled by the secretariat within five working days.

Annual Report & Audited Financial Statements

2025 · 148 pages · PDF

Request copy

Annual Report & Audited Financial Statements

2024 · 132 pages · PDF

Request copy

Annual Report & Audited Financial Statements

2023 · 121 pages · PDF

Request copy

Safeguarding & Accountability Annual Disclosure

2025 · 36 pages · PDF

Request copy

Enterprise Risk Register — Public Summary

2025 · 24 pages · PDF

Request copy

Strategic Framework 2025–2030

2025 · 68 pages · PDF

Request copy

Policy framework

Institutional policies in force

Every policy is board-approved, reviewed on a two-year cycle and binding on staff, contractors, consortium members and implementing partners.

  • Safeguarding & PSEAH Policy
  • Anti-Fraud, Bribery & Corruption Policy
  • Whistleblower Protection Policy
  • Data Protection & Research Ethics Policy
  • Environmental & Social Safeguards Framework
  • Procurement & Supplier Code of Conduct
  • Conflict of Interest & Gifts Policy
  • Beneficiary Feedback & Complaints Mechanism

Confidential reporting channel

Concerns relating to fraud, safeguarding or misconduct can be raised confidentially and, where requested, anonymously. Reports are received by the independent Safeguarding & Accountability Panel, not by programme management.

Raise a concern

Tripartite operating model

Think tank, implementation partner and governance/MEL advisory in one institution

Evidence generation translates into execution and delivery, which is in turn evaluated and governed — closing the loop between research, policy design, operations and accountability. Each arm is independently staffed and independently reported, so evaluation is never marked by the team that delivered the work.

  • Pillar 1

    Think Tank & Applied Research Arm

    Evidence generation, policy analytics and horizon scanning

    • Translational policy research turning epidemiological, macroeconomic and spatial data into legislative roadmaps and ministerial briefs.
    • Econometric and micro-simulation modelling: cost-benefit analysis, UHC fiscal space assessment and predictive shock modelling.
    • Policy harmonisation with AU Agenda 2063, the Abuja Declaration, the Maputo Plan of Action and Africa CDC frameworks.
    • Ethics, bioethics and data sovereignty protocols safeguarding indigenous health data, genomic assets and vulnerable population registries.
    Core outputs
    Ministerial briefs, costed policy options, national investment cases, peer-reviewed papers and open data dictionaries.
    Methods & instruments
    Micro-simulation, spatial econometrics, cost-benefit and fiscal-space modelling, horizon scanning and political-economy analysis.
    Delivery capacity
    42 researchers, economists and modellers across epidemiology, health financing, GIS and bioethics.
  • Pillar 2

    Implementation & Programme Delivery Arm

    Technical assistance, direct execution and capacity building

    • Direct programme rollout and pilot scalability across maternal-child health, cross-border surveillance, nutrition hubs and safety nets.
    • Embedded technical assistance seconding senior advisors, health economists and data architects into line ministries and RECs.
    • SOP development codifying clinical pathways, MISP emergency response and multi-agency coordination manuals.
    • Institutional capacity building for decentralised civil servants, local councils and community health networks.
    Core outputs
    Programme designs, SOP libraries, service-delivery pilots, supply and referral pathways, trained frontline cadres.
    Methods & instruments
    Embedded technical assistance, results-based grant execution, MISP emergency response, sub-award management and procurement support.
    Delivery capacity
    Field teams across 14 countries with surge deployment inside 72 hours for outbreak and displacement events.
  • Pillar 3

    MEL & Governance Advisory

    Accountability, systems strengthening and oversight

    • Third-party monitoring and independent verification of multilateral programmes in high-risk and cross-border corridors.
    • Impact evaluation using RCTs, difference-in-differences and mixed-method process evaluation to measure attribution and ROI.
    • Digital MEL infrastructure: mobile-first pipelines, geospatial dashboards and automated anomaly detection against data falsification.
    • Public financial management and governance audits covering procurement integrity and expenditure tracking.
    Core outputs
    Independent verification reports, impact evaluations, governance and PFM audits, live MEL dashboards.
    Methods & instruments
    RCTs, difference-in-differences, mixed-method process evaluation, third-party monitoring and anomaly detection analytics.
    Delivery capacity
    Evaluation unit operating to OECD-DAC criteria with a firewalled reporting line to the Board Audit Committee.

  1. 01

    Diagnose

    Burden, equity and fiscal-space diagnostics using national datasets, geospatial layers and community consultation.

  2. 02

    Design

    Costed intervention design with theory of change, indicator framework and explicit assumptions on attribution.

  3. 03

    Pilot

    Controlled implementation with embedded measurement to test feasibility, unit economics and delivery risk.

  4. 04

    Scale

    Government-owned scale-up with SOPs, workforce training, procurement pathways and digital reporting rails.

  5. 05

    Evaluate

    Independent evaluation, public financial audit and open publication of results — including null findings.

Engagement matrix

Multi-level institutional engagement

Who AAHRED works with at each level of governance, what it delivers there, the legal instruments used and the cadence of reporting back to partners.

Institutional clients, service offerings, engagement instruments and reporting cadence at each level of governance.
Governance levelCore institutional clientsKey service offeringsEngagement instrumentsReporting cadence
Continental & MultilateralAfrican Union, Africa CDC, UNECA, WHO AFRO, World Bank, Global FundStrategic framework development, regional public goods governance, cross-border treaty alignment and macro-level grant evaluation.Framework agreements, technical secretariats, joint working groupsMulti-year (3–5 yrs)
Regional Economic CommunitiesEAC, IGAD, ECOWAS, SADCSurveillance harmonisation, cross-border migration protocols and trade-related biosecurity standards.Protocol harmonisation compacts, corridor surveillance MOUsAnnual review cycles
National GovernmentsMinistries of Health, Finance, Gender/Social Protection and AgriculturePolicy formulation, UHC benefit package design, fiscal space analysis and embedded ministerial technical assistance.Embedded advisory placements, costed national plans, MoUsBudget-cycle aligned
Sub-National & Local GovernanceCounty and district health directorates, municipalities, local councilsDecentralised planning, budget execution tracking, frontline worker training and community engagement architecture.County work plans, community compacts, frontline training grantsQuarterly

  • Closing the policy-to-execution gap

    Unlike academic think tanks producing non-operational papers, or NGOs executing without rigorous evaluation, AAHRED unifies theoretical rigour with frontline delivery.

  • End-to-end programmatic lifecycle

    Empirical research → policy drafting → pilot implementation → nationwide scale-up → independent impact evaluation.

  • South-led contextualisation

    Endogenous African data models accounting for informal economies, pastoralist mobility and customary governance systems overlooked by external consultancies.

Evaluation standards
OECD-DAC criteria
Financial reporting
IFRS + 2 CFR 200
Data protection
GDPR / national DPAs
Safeguarding
PSEAH policy, independent channel

How does AAHRED avoid marking its own homework?
The MEL and Governance Advisory arm is staffed separately from delivery teams and reports directly to the Board Audit Committee. Where a programme exceeds USD 2 million in value, evaluation is contracted to an external firm under OECD-DAC criteria and published in full, including null and negative findings.
Who owns the data and intellectual property generated?
Primary data collected in-country is co-owned with the relevant national authority and stored under that country's data-protection regime. Anonymised, aggregated indicators are released as open data under CC-BY 4.0 with a published data dictionary; genomic and vulnerable-population registries are governed by a separate sovereignty protocol requiring ministerial consent for any secondary use.
How quickly can AAHRED mobilise for an emergency?
Surge teams deploy inside 72 hours for outbreak, flood and displacement events in the 14 countries of operation, using the Minimum Initial Service Package (MISP) and pre-positioned framework contracts for procurement and logistics.
What financial and procurement standards apply?
Accounts are prepared under IFRS and audited annually by an international firm. Grant administration follows 2 CFR 200 for US-sourced funds and EU PRAG-equivalent procedures for European funds. Sub-awards are subject to pre-award capacity assessment, quarterly financial verification and spot audits.
How are safeguarding and misconduct concerns handled?
A PSEAH policy applies to every staff member, consultant and sub-grantee. Reports can be made through an independent channel that bypasses line management, are triaged within 48 hours and investigated by an external panel where a conflict of interest exists.
Can governments contract AAHRED directly?
Yes. Engagements are structured as framework agreements, embedded advisory placements or results-based delivery contracts, aligned to the national budget cycle so that costed plans arrive before the medium-term expenditure framework is fixed.
How is value for money demonstrated?
Every investment case carries a benefit-cost ratio, cost per DALY averted and a fiscal-space assessment. Delivery is tracked against unit-cost benchmarks, and variance above 15 percent triggers a formal review by the Programme Committee.