An analysis of funding patterns in development assistance for mental health: who, when, what, and where

Abstract

Background Mental health has recently gained increasing attention on global health and development agendas, including calls for an increase in international funding. Few studies have previously characterized official development assistance for mental health (DAMH) in a nuanced and differentiated manner in order to support future funding efforts. Methods Data from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development Creditor Reporting System were obtained through keyword searches. Projects were manually reviewed and categorized into projects dedicated entirely to mental health and projects that mention mental health (as one of many aims). Analysis of donor, recipient, and sector characteristics within and between categories was undertaken cumulatively and yearly. Findings Between the two categories of official DAMH defined, characteristics differed in terms of largest donors, largest recipient countries and territories, and sector classification. However, across both categories there were clear and consistent findings: the top donors accounted for over 80% of all funding identified; the top recipients were predominantly conflict-affected countries and territories, or were receiving nations for conflict-affect refugees; and sector classification demonstrated shifting international development priorities and political drivers. Conclusion Across DAMH, significant amounts of funding are directed toward conflict settings and relevant emergency response by a small majority of donors. Our analysis demonstrated that, within minimal international assistance for mental health overall, patterns of donor, recipient, and sector characteristics favor emergency conflict-affected settings. Calls for increased funding should be grounded in understanding of funding drivers and directed toward both emergency and general health settings.

Hidden within a pandemic: how is international funding supporting mental health during COVID-19?

“…The top recipient countries of mental health relevant funding within COVID-19 funding as identified by this analysis are mainly conflict- and disaster-affected (or receiving nations for conflict- and disaster-affected refugees). These results are similar to previous research on international funding for mental health, with DAMH prior to COVID-19 predominantly going towards conflict-affected countries (Gribble et al ., 2021 ). Similarly, previous research has shown the dominance of just a handful of donors in providing mental health funding, including the European Union, Germany, the United States, Norway and Canada, as found in this analysis (Gribble et al ., 2021 ).…”

“…These results are similar to previous research on international funding for mental health, with DAMH prior to COVID-19 predominantly going towards conflict-affected countries (Gribble et al ., 2021 ). Similarly, previous research has shown the dominance of just a handful of donors in providing mental health funding, including the European Union, Germany, the United States, Norway and Canada, as found in this analysis (Gribble et al ., 2021 ). This emphasises the narrow range of resources available to support the large burden of mental health globally.…”