Conference Abstract | Volume 8, Abstract ELIC2025287 (Poster 152) | Published: 12 Aug 2025
Melody Okereke1,&
1Rivers State University Teaching Hospital, Nigeria
&Corresponding author: Melody Okereke, Rivers State University Teaching Hospital, Nigeria, Email: melokereke30@gmail.com
Received: 24 Mar 2025, Accepted: 09 Jul 2025, Published: 12 Aug 2025
Domain: Infectious Disease Epidemiology
Keywords: Lassa Fever, Budget, Africa, Donor, Allocations, Finance
©Melody Okereke. Journal of Interventional Epidemiology and Public Health (ISSN: 2664-2824). This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Cite this article: Melody Okereke. Financing the fight against Lassa Fever: A 10-year review of national budgetary allocations and donor contributions in 10 endemic African countries (2014–2024). Journal of Interventional Epidemiology and Public Health. 2025;8(Conf Proc 5):00296. https://doi.org/10.37432/JIEPH-CONFPRO5-00296
Lassa Fever (LF) poses a recurrent public health threat in Africa. Despite its epidemic potential, financing for preparedness remains inadequate across many endemic countries. This review examines the national budgetary allocations and donor contributions of 10 endemic countries towards LF preparedness, with a focus on sustainability and alignment with national policies.
A structured review of national health budgets, expenditure frameworks, and donor databases was conducted across ten LF–endemic countries: Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Ghana, Guinea, Benin, Togo, Mali, Burkina Faso, and Côte d’Ivoire. Data sources included WHO Joint External Evaluations, World Bank Health Financing Profiles, and OECD Creditor Reporting System records. Preparedness financing was categorized into six domains: surveillance, laboratory capacity, emergency operations, infection prevention and control, case management, and risk communication.
National budgetary allocations for LF preparedness were limited, with less than 17% of total funds originating from domestic sources. Nigeria showed the highest allocation but largely through emergency spending, not sustained budget lines. Post-Ebola reforms in Sierra Leone and Liberia improved donor alignment, yet domestic investment remained low. Other countries had no specific budget lines for LF, with funding dispersed under broader communicable disease programs. Donor funding from WHO, USAID, ECDC, and the World Bank Pandemic Emergency Financing Facility, often filled critical gaps but was mostly short-term and response-focused. Weak donor coordination and duplicative project funding were reported by stakeholders in six of the ten countries.
LF preparedness financing across endemic African countries remains heavily donor-dependent, poorly structured, and unsustainable. There is an urgent need to institutionalize epidemic financing within national budget cycles, with specific allocations for LF preparedness and health emergency infrastructure. Governments should establish public health emergency funds, adopt budgetary contingency frameworks, and explore innovative domestic financing approaches, such as levies on high-risk industries or integration into health insurance schemes.
Menu