An Assessment of Financial Risk Management in Donor Funded Health Programmes: Evidence from the Ministry of Health in Zambia

Donor funding remains a critical pillar of healthcare financing in developing economies, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa where domestic fiscal capacity is constrained. In Zambia, the Ministry of Health depends heavily on donor resources to finance essential health programmes, including disease control, infrastructure development, and service delivery. However, persistent audit findings continue to reveal weaknesses in financial management systems, including misallocation of funds, weak internal controls, limited transparency, and exposure to fraud and corruption. This study assesses the effectiveness of financial risk management practices in donor funded health programmes within the Ministry of Health in Zambia. The study adopts a mixed methods exploratory case study design, integrating qualitative thematic analysis with a structured analytical framework. Data was collected through semi structured interviews and document analysis. The findings reveal that weak internal controls, inadequate monitoring systems, and poor transparency mechanisms significantly increase the likelihood of financial misappropriation, while governance and accountability structures mitigate such risks. However, institutional weaknesses and enforcement gaps continue to limit effectiveness. The study contributes to public financial management literature and provides policy relevant recommendations for strengthening fiduciary risk management and improving accountability in Zambia’s health sector.

Donor funding continues to play a pivotal role in financing healthcare systems

1. Auditor General of Zambia. (2019). Report of the Auditor General on the accounts of the Republic of Zambia for the financial year ended 31 December 2019. Office of the Auditor General. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Auditor General of Zambia. (2021). Report of the Auditor General on the accounts of the Republic of Zambia for the financial year ended 31 December 2021. Office of the Auditor General. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Auditor General of Zambia. (2022). Report of the Auditor General on the accounts of the Republic of Zambia for the financial year ended 31 December 2022. Office of the Auditor General. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bovens, M. (2007). Analysing and assessing accountability: A conceptual framework. European Law Journal, 13(4), 447–468. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2007.00378.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Brinkerhoff, D. W. (2004). Accountability and health systems: Toward conceptual clarity and policy relevance. Health Policy and Planning, 19(6), 371-379. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czh052 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. (2013). Internal control—Integrated framework. COSO. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. (2017). Enterprise risk management—Integrating with strategy and performance. COSO. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Geisser, S. (1974). A predictive approach to the random effect model. Biometrika, 61(1), 101–107. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/61.1.101 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. International Monetary Fund. (2019). Fiscal transparency handbook. International Monetary Fund. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. International Monetary Fund. (2023). Fiscal monitor: On the path to policy normalization. International Monetary Fund. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Jones, R., Smith, K., & Johnson, M. (2017). Financial risk management in donor-funded projects: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Project Management, 35(6), 1077-1092. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.05.008 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Kankam-Kwarteng, C., & Aidoo, E. (2018). Risk management and fraud prevention in public sector organisations. International Journal of Public Administration and Management Research, 4(2), 34–49. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Kusevija, N., & Pejić Bach, M. (2019). A conceptual framework for financial risk assessment and mitigation in public institutions. Financial Theory and Practice, 43(4), 471-497. https://doi.org/10.3326/fintp.43.4.4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Masebo, L., & Mumbi, C. (2015). The mismanagement of donor funds in Zambia’s education sector. Development Southern Africa, 32(4), 556-571. https://doi.org/10.1080/0376835X.2015.1039705 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Ministry of Finance and National Planning. (2022). 2022 annual economic report. Government of the Republic of Zambia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2016). Official development assistance: Definition and coverage. OECD Publishing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Harper & Row. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability Secretariat. (2016). Framework for assessing public financial management. PEFA Secretariat. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability Secretariat. (2017). Zambia: Public expenditure and financial accountability assessment. PEFA Secretariat. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2019). Research methods for business students (8th ed.). Pearson Education Limited. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Stone, M. (1974). Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 36(2), 111–147. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1974.tb00994.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Transparency International. (2022). Corruption perceptions index 2022. Transparency International. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. United Nations Development Programme. (2022). Strengthening public financial management systems in developing economies. UNDP. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. World Bank. (2017). World development report 2017: Governance and the law. World Bank. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. World Bank. (2020). Public financial management reforms in developing countries: Lessons of experience. World Bank. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. World Bank. (2022). Governance and accountability in public financial management. World Bank. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. World Health Organization. (2021). Global expenditure on health: Public spending on the rise? World Health Organization. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. World Health Organization. (2023). Global health expenditure report 2023. World Health Organization. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Yamane, T. (1967). Statistics: An introductory analysis (2nd ed.). Harper & Row. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Indirect Effect of Liquidity and Activity on Company Value with Profitability as an Intervening Variable
• Effect of Financial Skills, Knowledge, and Attitude on The Financial Behaviour of Clergy
• A Decade of Review: Trends in Budget Execution and Financial Performance of Development Projects in Tanzania (2014/15-2023/24)
• The Influence of Pre-Project Planning on the Budget Absorption Rate of Public Funded Infrastructure Projects in Kenya a Comparative Case Study of Narok, Migori, and Kisii County Government Projects
• Assessment of Factors Influencing Digital Transformation in Hotels’ Facility Management in Abuja Metropolis, Nigeria