Financing Uganda's health care services used to be based on a minimum package which cost more than the financial resources available. Donor aid contributed between 40-50% of these costs. Financial allocations were also biased towards national level hospitals and wages. For Uganda's health care system to become more efficient, reforms in the coordination and allocation of donor aid were essential. The findings show that efficiency gains can be made with a minimal budget increase and shifting of budget priorities. For these shifts to be feasible and sustainable, more donor aid needs to be channelled in a way that enables sector planners and government to implement reforms that affect broader health systems. The sector-wide approach (SWAp) in Uganda increased resources, allowed donor aid to be channelled through budget support arrangements, and gave the Ministry of Health (MOH) greater flexibility to implement reforms. However, the findings also show that increased efficiency cannot necessarily fill the resource gap. Although global financial initiatives can help to address this gap, they also need to strengthen SWAp arrangements, channel more funds through budget support and allow the MOH to adopt the long-term reforms needed for better health system developments.
Resource allocation and health financing
Today, millions of people in low- and middle-income countries do not have access to basic, good quality health services. The Alma Ata Declaration in 1978 defined primary health care as basic health care built on technically sound and socially adequate approaches, universally accessible and affordable to all individuals. This article explores the challenges facing donors and national governments in providing and financing primary health care for all. Given the high dependency of low income countries on aid, methods of aid delivery are central to the debate on how best to finance PHC. Sector-wide approaches (SWAps) and General Budget Support (GBS) emerged in the late 1980s to 1990s, in response to frustrations with the delivery of aid through 'vertical' projects. Such programmes were problematic because they were defined by donors giving little country ownership. Poor donor coordination lead to fragmentation and duplication of efforts, and governments were unable to respond effectively to different donor requirements.
Given the large size of aggregate remittance flows, they should be expected to have significant macroeconomic effects on the economies that receive them. In addition, remittances have been identified as a potential source of funding for economic development. Thus, two main issues are of interest to policymakers with regard to remittances: how to manage their macroeconomic effects; and how to harness their development potential. This paper directly addresses these two questions by reporting the results of the first global study of the comprehensive macroeconomic effects of remittances on the economies that receive them. The ultimate purpose of this endeavour is to draw summary policy implications for countries that receive significant flows of remittances. In broad terms, the findings of this paper tend to confirm the main benefit cited in the microeconomic literature: remittances improve households’ welfare by lifting families out of poverty and insuring them against income shocks. However, the systematic macroeconomic analysis of remittances developed over important caveats and policy considerations that have largely been overlooked: measurement, fiscal policy, debt sustainability, fiscal discipline, economic growth, Dutch disease effects, governance and incentives and the role of international financial institutions. The main challenge for policymakers, stated in general terms, is to design policies that promote remittances and increase their benefits while mitigating adverse side effects. Getting these policy prescriptions correct early on is imperative. Globalization and the aging of developed economy populations will ensure that demand for migrant workers remains robust for years to come. Hence, the volume of remittances likely will continue to grow, and with it, the challenge of unlocking the maximum societal benefit from these transfers.
The Tanzania National Voucher Scheme (TNVS) uses the public health system and the commercial sector to deliver subsidised insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) to pregnant women. The system began operation in October 2004 and by May 2006 was operating in all districts in the country. Evaluating complex public health interventions which operate at national level requires a multidisciplinary approach, novel methods, and collaboration with implementers to support the timely translation of findings into programme changes. This paper describes this novel approach to delivering ITNs and the design of the monitoring and evaluation (M&E). A comprehensive and multidisciplinary M&E design was developed collaboratively between researchers and the National Malaria Control Programme. Five main domains of investigation were identified: (1) ITN coverage among target groups, (2) provision and use of reproductive and child health services, (3) "leakage" of vouchers, (4) the commercial ITN market, and (5) cost and cost-effectiveness of the scheme. The evaluation plan combined quantitative (household and facility surveys, voucher tracking, retail census and cost analysis) and qualitative (focus groups and in-depth interviews) methods. This plan was defined in collaboration with implementing partners but undertaken independently. Findings were reported regularly to the national malaria control programme and partners, and used to modify the implementation strategy over time. The M&E of the TNVS is a potential model for generating information to guide national and international programmers about options for delivering priority interventions. It is independent, comprehensive, provides timely results, includes information on intermediate processes to allow implementation to be modified, measures leakage as well as coverage, and measures progress over time.
African heads of state and government must not revise or further delay implementation of AU Abuja April 2001 15% health commitment says Archbishop Desmond Tutu & 15% Now Campaign. One hundred and forty-one African and global organisations and networks call on African leaders and finance ministers to restate 15% commitment at next AU Summit in Egypt.
The loss of over 8 million lives a year to preventable, treatable, and manageable diseases and health conditions is not acceptable or unsustainable. The African Union's Public Health 15% Now Campaign has launched a 30 day countdown to the mid year African Union summit to be held in Egypt from the 24th of June. The 30 day countdown which starts from the 15th of May to the 15th of June is aimed at mobilising national level and continental support for a civil society message to urge African Heads of States to restate their commitment to and urgently implement the Abuja 2001 pledge by African Heads of State to allocate 15% of national budgets to health.
Some donors and governments propose that health insurance mechanisms can close health financing gaps and benefit poor people. Although beneficial for the people able to join, this method of financing health care has so far been unable to sufficiently fill financing gaps in health systems and improve access to quality health care for the poor. Donors and governments need to consider the evidence and scale up public resources for the health sector. Without adequate public funding and government stewardship, health insurance mechanisms pose a threat rather than an opportunity to the objectives of equity and universal access to health care. This study presents the evidence for and against different models of social health insurance for developing countries. It concluded that models should be assessed for whether they increase universal access including to poorest and most vulnerable.
It has been argued that quality improvements that result from user charges reduce their negative impact on utilisation especially of the poor. In Uganda, because there was no concrete evidence for improvements in quality of care following the introduction of user charges, the government abolished user fees in all public health units on 1 March 2001. Different quality variables assessed showed that interventions that were put in place were able to maintain, or improve the technical quality of services. There were significant increases in utilisation of services, average drug quantities and stock out days improved, and communities reported health workers to be hardworking, good and dedicated to their work. The levels of technical quality of care attained in a system with user fees can be maintained, or even improved without the fees through adoption of basic, sustainable system modifications that are within the reach of developing countries. However, a trade-off between residual perceptions of reduced service quality, and the welfare gains from removal of user fees should guide such a policy change.
This retrospective analysis of routine programme data from Mbagathi District Hospital, Nairobi, Kenya shows the difference in rates of loss to follow-up between a cohort that paid 500 shillings/month (approximately US$7) for antiretroviral drugs (ART) and one that received medication free of charge. A total of 435 individuals (mean age 31.5 years, 65% female) was followed-up for 146 person-years: 265 were in the 'payment' cohort and 170 in the 'free' cohort. The incidence rate for loss to follow-up per 100 person-years was 47.2 and 20.5, respectively (adjusted hazard ratio 2.27, 95% CI 1.21-4.24, P=0.01). Overall risk reduction attributed to offering ART free of charge was 56.6% (95% CI 20.0-76.5). Five patients diluted their ART regimen to one tablet (instead of two tablets) twice daily in order to reduce the monthly cost of medication by half. All these patients were from the payment cohort. Payment for ART is associated with a significantly higher rate of loss to follow-up, as some patients might be unable to sustain payment over time. In resource-limited settings, ART should be offered free of charge in order to promote treatment compliance and prevent the emergence of drug resistance.
The potentially destructive polarisation between 'vertical' financing (aiming for disease-specific results) and 'horizontal' financing (aiming for improved health systems) of health services in developing countries has found its way to the pages of Foreign Affairs and the Financial Times. The opportunity offered by 'diagonal' financing (aiming for disease-specific results through improved health systems) seems to be obscured in this polarisation.In April 2007, the board of the Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria agreed to consider comprehensive country health programmes for financing. The new International Health Partnership Plus, launched in September 2007, will help low-income countries to develop such programmes. The combination could lead the Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria to a much broader financing scope. This evolution might be critical for the future of AIDS treatment in low-income countries, yet it is proposed at a time when the Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria is starved for resources. It might be unable to meet the needs of much broader and more expensive proposals. Furthermore, it might lose some of its exceptional features in the process: its aim for international sustainability, rather than in-country sustainability, and its capacity to circumvent spending restrictions imposed by the International Monetary Fund. The authors believe that a transformation of the Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria into a Global Health Fund is feasible, but only if accompanied by a substantial increase of donor commitments to the Global Fund. The transformation of the Global Fund into a 'diagonal' and ultimately perhaps 'horizontal' financing approach should happen gradually and carefully, and be accompanied by measures to safeguard its exceptional features.