Strategies for capacity building for health systems research in LMIC

Download Report

Transcript Strategies for capacity building for health systems research in LMIC

Strategies for capacity building for
health systems research in LMIC: some
lessons and ideas from ICDDRB
HPF Hub Technical Review meeting
Krishna Hort : Friday 7 October 2011
Introduction
• Engaged by donors of ICDDR,B in 2006 to review
support, and in 2010 to follow up
• Article describing results published in Health
Research Policy and Systems: 2011, 9: 31 as
• ‘Mahmood S, Hort K, Ahmed S, Salam M, Cravioto
A. Strategies for capacity building for health
research in Bangladesh: Role of core funding and
a common M&E Framework’
• Acknowledge co-authors in this presentation
based on collective work
Literature review on research
capacity building in LMIC
• Definition of research capacity: ‘ an ability of
individuals, organisations and systems to
perform and utilise health research
effectively, efficiently and sustainably’ (Bates
et al, 2006)
• Requires both institutional support and
improving individual research capacity
Literature review on research
capacity building in LMIC
Some of the challenges:
• Adequate funds for researcher and staff
salaries;
• Training of individual researchers;
• Career structure for researchers;
• Good research management;
• Access to scientific and technical information;
• Partnerships with international groups;
• Effective communication with research users;
• Competent and motivated research leaders
Role of external support
• Requires long term substantial financial support
from development partners
• Technical support from international research
expertise
• Issues of different perspectives of development
partners (concern for research uptake)
• Different development partners may have
different priorities and research interests
• Lack of evidence on effective development
partner support for research capacity building
ICDDRB, Introduction
• ICDDR,B: international research institute
located in Bangladesh
• Established in 1960
• International board of management
• Broad scope: infectious diseases, nutrition,
population, health systems, environment
• Also provides surveillance, clinical services
(diarrhoea), and training
• 1000 + staff, budget $38 million
ICDDRB: situation in 2006
• 55 donors and research grants, separate
topics and reporting
• Reluctant to pay 30% management levy
• Small group of donors contribute to
infrastructure
• Unable to progress own strategic priorities
• Difficult to invest in staff development or
research infrastructure
ICDDRB: Core funding proposal
• Group of donors agree to provide ‘unearmarked’ core funds
• Based on implementing priorities in ICDDRB
strategic plan
• Limited amount for ‘seed funding’ research
• Agreed common M&E framework to monitor
progress
• Single financial report
Core funding: review after 3 years:
2010
• Core funds rise from 25% to 40% total;
research grants rise from $13m to $23m
• Savings in reporting
• Improved relationship with core donors
• Improved sense of ownership and direction
• Progress against strategic priorities
• Seed funding attracts and retains returned
PhDs
• Supports more use of strategic direction
throughout institute
Lessons learnt
• Importance of investment in ‘core’ capacity
building of institutional supports
• Autonomy and ability of institution to
determine and pursue its priorities an
important aspect of capacity
• Use of un- earmarked core funding as
potential mechanism
• Requires significant capacity from receiving
institution + good relationships with donors
Strategies for hospital reform
• Some introductory thoughts:
• Why do hospitals matter ?
Role of hospitals in health systems
Dixon J, Alakeson V. Reforming health care: why we need to learn from
international experience. Nuffield Trust Briefing September 2010
System reform
• Policies that influence organisations
• National targets and performance
management in UK NHS
• Institutional regulation – accreditation
• Financial incentives- shift from fee for service
incentive to oversupply; encourage
competition between providers
• Local accountability – UK impact unclear
Intra-organisational levers
• Most providers influenced more by
organisational setting than system levers.
• Encourage clinical professionals to be more
engaged in management and leadership of
organisations: governance and patient safety
initiatives, pathways of care; motivate peers
• Where system governance weak,
organisations lead in initiatives
Individual motivation &
behaviour
• Most potent force to improve care is intrinsic
motivation of clinical professionals; and
intrinsic motivation of patients to improve their
health.
• Professional bodies address standards but
may not address intrinsic motivation.
• Encourage patients to take more active role
in their care; financial incentives
Individual motivation &
behaviour
• Interaction between system reform levers
providing external challenge to organisations,
and intra-organisation levers on intrinsic
motivation unexamined and unevaluated.
• Problems occur when dissonance / poor
alignment
• Do we neglect intrinsic motivation and focus
on economic lens ? Organisations provide
excellent care by attracting staff with mission
and ethos.
Working groups
• 3 groups
– In country networks in Asia
– Inter-country networks in Asia
– Pacific networks
• Questions
– What can networks contribute to evidence
based policy making in each context ?
– What management support do networks
need in each context ?