African civil society organizations have called for greater accountability and transparency from African leaders regarding the use of public funds for the survival of mothers and babies. This call to action marks the launch of an African-led network demanding better use of existing funds for African women and children’s health as well as a greater share of African national budgets allocated to mothers and babies’ survival. While most African government have already made commitments about improving the health of their population, including through greater spending, it is difficult to check whether they are keeping their promises if the budget is not publicly available or if the information in the budget is not clearly presented. The members of the Africa Health Budget Network have compiled a scorecard[1] showing how open African Governments are about their health spending. Out of the 26 African countries profiled, only one, South Africa, is reported to be sufficiently transparent.
Resource allocation and health financing
This article examines elements of a successful cash transfer program from Latin America and discusses challenges inherent in scaling-up such programs. The authors attempt a cost simulation of a cash transfer program for HIV prevention in South Africa comparing its cost and relative effectiveness – in number of HIV infections averted – against other prevention interventions. If a cash transfer program were to be taken to scale, the intervention would not have a substantial effect on decreasing the force of the epidemic in middle- and low-income countries. The integration of cash transfer programs into other sectors and linking them to a broader objective such as girls’ educational attainment is argued by the authors as one way of addressing doubts raised by the authors regarding their value for HIV prevention.
Malawi is one of the most aid dependent countries in the world. When one considers the work that is done by international NGOs, however, or by them through local surrogates, it is argued that there is no aspect of life in Malawi that has escaped external funding. With July 6, 2014 a day 50 years to the day when Malawi became an independent state the author argues that it’s important to accentuate the discussion on aid in Malawi and its implications for Malawi. the author argues that a heavy reliance on external funding means that foreigners, not the citizens, are in charge of the country’s governance.
Principal Recipients (PRs) receive money from the Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (Global Fund) to manage and implement programs. However, little research has gone into understanding their opinions and experiences. This survey set out to describe these, thereby providing a baseline against which changes in PR opinions and experiences can be assessed as the recently introduced new funding model is rolled out. An internet based questionnaire was administered to 315 PRs. A total of 115 responded from 69 countries in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe and Latin America. The study was conducted between September and December 2012. Three quarters of PRs thought the progress update and disbursement request (PU/DR) system was a useful method of reporting grant progress. However, most felt that the grant negotiation processes were complicated, and that the grant rating system did not reflect performance. While nearly all PRs were happy with the work being done by sub-Recipients (92%) and Fund Portfolio Managers (86%), fewer were happy with the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). Non-government PRs were generally less happy with the OIG’s work compared to government PRs. Most PRs thought the Global Fund’s Voluntary Pooled Procurement system made procurement easier. However, only 29% said the system should be made compulsory. When asked which aspects of the Global Fund’s operations needed improvement, most PRs said that the Fund should re-define and clarify the roles of different actors, minimize staff turnover at its Secretariat, and shorten the grant application and approval processes. All these are currently being addressed, either directly or indirectly, under a new funding model. Vigorous assessments should nonetheless follow the roll-out of the new model to ensure the areas that are most likely to affect PR performance realize sustained improvement. Opinions and experiences with the Global Fund were varied, with PRs having good communication with Fund Portfolio Managers and sub-Recipients, but being unhappy with the grant negotiation and grant rating systems. Recommendations included simplifying grant processes, finding performance assessment methods that look beyond numbers, and employing Local Fund Agents who understand public health aspects of programs.
This report presents the findings of USAID’s Health Systems 20/20 Project assessment of local interest in and capacity to implement PBIs. PBIs are reported to be legally and culturally feasible. Given the low level of health spending, limited population coverage, and estimates of unmet need in
Mozambique, the authors argue that PBIs should be designed to improve system efficiency but not be expected to reduce spending in absolute terms. Local stakeholders are repirted to be open to the PBI concept, citing CDC, USAID, and World Bank being ready to support introducing PBIs in Mozambique; however, some authorities and health worker staff express concerns about sustainability and equity of paying for performance.
Performance-based incentives (PBIs) aim to counteract weak providers’ performance in health systems of many developing countries by providing rewards that are directly linked to better health outcomes for mothers and their newborns. Translating funding into better health requires many actions by a large number of people. The actions span from community to the national level. While different forms of PBIs are being implemented in a number of countries to improve health outcomes, there has not been a systematic review of the evidence of their impact on the health of mothers and newborns. This paper analyzes and synthesizes the available evidence from published studies on the impact of supply-side PBIs on the quantity and quality of health services for mothers and newborns. This paper reviews evidence from published and grey literature that spans PBI for public-sector facilities, PBI in social insurance reforms, and PBI in NGO contracting. Some initiatives focus on safe deliveries, and others reward a broader package of results that include deliveries. The Evidence Review Team that focused on supply-side incentives for the US Government Evidence Summit on Enhancing Provision and Use of Maternal Health Services through Financial Incentives, reviewed published research reports and papers and added studies from additional grey literature that were deemed relevant. After collecting and reviewing 17 documents, nine studies were included in this review, three of which used before-after designs; four included comparison or control groups; one applied econometric methods to a five-year time series; and one reported results from a large-scale impact evaluation with randomly-assigned intervention and control facilities. The available evidence suggests that incentives that reward providers for institutional deliveries result in an increase in the number of institutional deliveries. There is some evidence that the content of antenatal care can improve with PBI. We found no direct evidence on the impact of PBI on neonatal health services or on mortality of mothers and newborns, although intention of the study was not to document impact on mortality. A number of studies describe approaches to rewarding quality as well as increases in the quantities of services provided, although how quality is defined and monitored is not always clear. Because incentives exist in all health systems, considering how to align the incentives of the many health workers and their supervisors so that they focus efforts on achieving health goals for mothers and newborns is critical if the health system is to perform more effectively and efficiently. A wide range of PBI models is being developed and tested, and there is still much to learn about what works best. Future studies should include a larger focus on rewarding quality and measuring its impact. Finally, more qualitative research to better understand PBI implementation and how various incentive models function in different settings is needed to help practitioners refine and improve their programmes.
As high out-of-pocket payment dominates Nigeria’s healthcare spending and with low priority accorded to health by state and local governments, Nigeria’s quest to attain universal health coverage by 2015 is argued in this article to be bleak. The absence of financial protection has led most Nigerians to depend on out-of-pocket payment for healthcare financing with insurance penetration, which is a measure of the relationship between premiums earned and the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, put at less than 6 percent, according to industry experts. Experts explain that achieving universal health coverage would be hard to attain without expanding the fiscal space (through increasing domestic tax revenues, expanding tax base, developing social health insurance, and getting debt relief. Analysts believe that there is need to expand contributions from large profitable companies and tax mobile phone operators to fund healthcare.
Other innovations include tobacco and alcohol exercise tax, excise tax on foods that contribute to an unhealthy diet, and additional levy on top of existing VAT rate as is in the case with countries like Chile.
Some issues to consider in evaluating each innovative method include administrative costs, magnitude of the potential revenue, political acceptability and whether such funds should go into Consolidated Government Revenues or be earmarked.
In their paper on Fiscal Capacity and Aid Allocation: Domestic Resource Mobilization and Foreign Aid in Developing Countries the authors look into the interaction between fiscal performance and donor aid allocation. The analysis reveals that there is hardly any correlation between overall aid and fiscal performance and capacity. Furthermore, the authors point to gaps in terms of external funders delivering on their commitments to align with recipient country priorities and providing aid through country Public Finance Management systems - despite promises to pay greater attention to DRM efforts of recipient countries.
After a decade of high growth, a new narrative of optimism has taken hold about Africa and its economic prospects. Despite this, there is a broad
consensus that progress in human development has been limited given the volume of wealth created. There is growing concern that the high levels of
income inequality in sub-Saharan Africa are holding back progress. This report investigates the issue of income inequality in eight sub-Saharan African countries (Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe). While there is growing public recognition that inequality is the issue for our time - both globally and in sub-Saharan Africa – there is little definitive analysis of income inequality trends on the continent. This report seeks to contribute in this area, looking at whether income inequality is, in fact, rising and in what context this is occurring. In particular, this report seeks to locate an analysis of tax systems in sub-Saharan Africa in the context of these economic inequalities, given the primary importance of national tax systems in redistributing wealth. A central contention of this report is that rising income inequality is going hand in hand with – and is ultimately caused by – the current growth model, illicit financial flows and the the inability of governments to tax the proceeds of growth, because a large part of sub-Saharan Africa’s income and wealth has escaped offshore. This report also finds many shortcomings in direct taxation in the countries studied. The personal income tax (PIT) systems lack equity as the bulk of the burden is on employees. The self-employed rarely pay tax. The visible lack of equity erodes citizens’ trust in the system. While the report notes some signs of progress, such as some mineral taxation reforms, there is also a clear gap between rhetoric and reality. There is national and international consensus that it is urgent to address issues such as tax incentives, extractives taxation, the taxation of HNWI, tax evasion and illicit financial flows. However, countries are struggling to introduce new direct taxes and to enforce tax compliance against companies and elites. Support to make such transformational changes is reported to be inadequate.
The last decade has seen widespread retreat from user fees with the intention to reduce financial constraints to users in accessing health care and in particular improving access to reproductive, maternal and newborn health services. This has had important benefits in reducing financial barriers to access in a number of settings. If the policies work as intended, service utilization rates increase. However this increases workloads for health staff and at the same time, the loss of user fee revenues can imply that health workers lose bonuses or allowances, or that it becomes more difficult to ensure uninterrupted supplies of health care inputs. This research aimed to assess how policies reducing demand-side barriers to access to health care have affected service delivery with a particular focus on human resources for health. The authors undertook case studies in five countries (Ghana, Nepal, Sierra Leone, Zambia and Zimbabwe). In each the authors reviewed financing and HRH policies, considered the impact financing policy change had made on health service utilization rates, analysed the distribution of health staff and their actual and potential workloads, and compared remuneration terms in the public sectors. The authors question a number of common assumptions about the financing and human resource inter-relationships. The impact of fee removal on utilization levels is mostly not sustained or supported by all the evidence. Shortages of human resources for health at the national level are not universal; maldistribution within countries is the greater problem. Low salaries are not universal; most of the countries pay health workers well by national benchmarks. The interconnectedness between user fee policy and HRH situations proves difficult to assess. Many policies have been changing over the relevant period, some clearly and others possibly in response to problems identified associated with financing policy change. Other relevant variables have also changed. However, as is now well-recognised in the user fee literature, co-ordination of health financing and human resource policies is essential. This appears less well recognised in the human resources literature. This coordination involves considering user charges, resource availability at health facility level, health worker pay, terms and conditions, and recruitment in tandem. All these policies need to be effectively monitored in their processes as well as outcomes, but sufficient data are not collected for this purpose.