Monitoring health system performance - synthesis of some experiences from low-income countries Dina Balabanova, Tim Powell-Jackson, Richard Coker, Kara Hanson & Anne Mills London School.
Download
Report
Transcript Monitoring health system performance - synthesis of some experiences from low-income countries Dina Balabanova, Tim Powell-Jackson, Richard Coker, Kara Hanson & Anne Mills London School.
Monitoring health system performance -
synthesis of some experiences from low-income
countries
Dina Balabanova, Tim Powell-Jackson, Richard Coker, Kara Hanson &
Anne Mills
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
Health System Metrics, Glion sur Montreux,
28-29 September 2006
Overview
Background
Complexity
Objectives and methods
Measurement
Health financing
Health care delivery
Emerging issues
Conclusions
Background
Commitment to invest in health systems is unprecedented, but will
not last unless it is possible to show results
Currently poor health information available but demand for
improved health system metrics (national / international)
Opportunities
– Health System Metrics and other initiative seeking to strengthen HIS
– Commitment to the health MDGs – need to measure progress
– Growing consensus of importance of measurement strategies & monitoring &
evaluation built into programme planning cycles
Threats
– Limited resources for health information and sustainability
– Capacity constraints (in the health and social sectors)
Objectives & Methods
Purpose of the study: a review of some low-income countries’
experiences with health system performance monitoring and use of
data
Case study countries:
–
–
–
–
–
Georgia
Rwanda
Uganda
West Bengal, India
Material from other countries
Selection criteria
Analytical approaches:
– uses the WHO health system performance framework
– synthesis around common themes and issues
– identifying unique lessons in each type of context
Complexity
How should health system performance be measured?
– Increasingly multiple contacts with the system, chronic diseases
– Outcomes determined by different care components, sectors
– Need for system-wide and inter-sectoral indicators
Tension between international (donor-driven) demands and
country-level agendas and needs
Use of normative approaches imply causality
To what extent monitoring influences policy?
Impact of measurement on health systems, e.g. Indicators that are
measured often improve
Monitoring information may be complex to interpret where a
range of interventions co-exist.
Measurement
What approaches are taken to measure health
system performance in the study countries?
What is measured ?
Data
Georgia
Rwanda
Uganda
West Bengal
Demographic
Census (2002)
Census (2002)
Census (2002)
Census (2001)
NHA (2004)
NHA (2003)
NHA (2001), public
expenditure reviews,
Tracking Study (2001)
NHA (2001)
Health outcomes incl.
births and deaths
RHS (2005) & MICS
(2006), Vital
registration & HMIS
DHS (2005), HMIS
(facility)
DHS (2004)
DHS (2005)
Co-coverage of
interventions
MICS (2006) & RHS
(2005)
DHS (2005)
DHS (2004)
DHS (2005)
HMIS
HR inventory
HR inventory
HMIS
HMIS & SAM (200506)
HMIS, SAM (2004) &
Service Provision
Assessment Survey
(2001)
HMIS, SAM (2004), Area
Team assessments
HMIS
n/a
n/a
Various / accreditation
n/a
Immunisation, TB,
HIV/AIDS
Immunisation, malaria,
HIV/AIDS, TB etc.
Immunisation, malaria,
HIV/AIDS, TB etc.
Malaria, RCH, TB,
Leprosy, Polio, HIV/AIDS
etc.
IDRS
Sentinel sites (HIV), early
warning system, IDRS
Sentinel sites (HIV)
HMIS
Health financing
Human resources
Service provision
Quality
Vertical programme
monitoring
Disease surveillance
Health financing
How has information been used?
Where are the gaps?
What challenges remain?
Use of health financing information
Identification of financing gaps and advocacy for increased allocation
of funds to health (Rwanda)
Health sector leadership and management of funds (Tanzania,
Rwanda)
Equity of health financing in the health system (South Africa, Rwanda)
Protection against the financial burden of ill health (Mexico)
Resource allocation with the health sector (Rwanda)
Gaps in health financing information
Private health expenditures – difficult to collect compared to
public and external health financing sources
Coverage of NHA relatively low in developing countries but
expanding
Health financing data at decentralised levels for local decisionmaking
Financial burden of ill health and impact on impoverishment at
the household level
National Health Accounts in Africa
Number of NHA Rounds 1994 – 2004
NHA Rounds
>2
2
1
0
0
5
10
15
Countries (N=46)
20
25
30
Remaining challenges
Institutionalisation of NHA into the routine activities of Government
Underlying problems in Public Expenditure Management systems and data
reliability
Timeliness of data (NHAs and household surveys)
Collection of private expenditure health financing data
Tension between disease expenditure and general health expenditure
financial tracking
Addressing the needs of in-country policy makers vis-à-vis that of external
agencies
Health care delivery
How has information been used?
Where are the gaps?
What challenges remain?
Use of information: country examples
West Bengal, India
Aim: to monitor the performance of public sector programmes. Improve
accountability and planning at national level
Standard service use indicators & regular meetings in PHC facilities
Uganda
Aim: to link health system performance monitoring to SWAPs and national
policy process. Allows policy adjustment.
Data used in the annual health sector review process and to inform the
development of annual plans
District league tables to rank performance of districts & motivate
districts to improve indicators.
Tracking surveys – at the start of SWAP, 2001- to assess Govt systems
(financial procedures, drug distribution, HR deployment)
Major gaps in measurement
Private sector – service use, service availability
(infrastructure, human resources, services
offered)
Vital events
Efficiency of health system
Quality of health care
Effective coverage
Remaining challenges
Low capacity and motivation to use data:
– Locally
– For decision-making or for policy initiatives
Lack of ownership by health providers, who are not involved in
designing of monitoring procedure and indicators
Capacity for analysis concentrated at central level
Feedback to lower levels is limited, poor internal feedback
HMIS is often mistrusted
Selection of indicators often creates distortions
Information systems do not reflect move from project to system
performance
– India: ‘critical milestones’ & vertical project indicators
Emerging issues
Data quality and reliability
Existing information systems, but data inaccessible or
inappropriate to needs and policy process
Developing parallel monitoring frameworks rather than
adapting & use of existing data: concerns for complexity and
data reliability
HIS not always reflecting reform developments
Limited external data audit and reliance on single data
sources (Rwanda, Uganda)
Technology involved in data collection, analysis and use often
rely on bespoke software.
Parallel systems
Donor agenda regarding data collection, unsustainable
Data collection, analysis and use for policy is fragmented
– Uganda/Nepal: lack of unified data linked to SWAPs
– Private sector is often not covered (India/Uganda)
Multiple reporting requirements (Rwanda/India).
Lack of inter-sectoral information systems and unified quality
standards. (Uganda/ Rwanda)
Vertical donors-supported programmes often function well in
the short-term but may distort wider systems (e.g. Georgia &
Angola)
Information flows & level of use
One-way traffic for information
– Disaggregated data not available at sub-national level
– Information intended to be used locally, is used at national level, or for
different purpose reflecting governance & aid coordination
Information that is not aggregated nationally, less useful
internationally
Governance and stewardship at local level needs to be able to draw
effectively on aggregate & disaggregate data
– Disaggregated data feeds effectively into local planning when linked to
decentralised decision-making (TEHIP)
Peer comparisons at district level – productive vs unhelpful
Factors facilitating measurement & use of data
Health system monitoring embedded within reform process
– SWAPs/ PRSP in Uganda, Rwanda; district autonomy (TEHIP)
Unintended consequences (Afghanistan)
– Selective use of data internationally (user fees/HIV, in Uganda)
In post-conflict settings, the aid influx promotes monitoring health
systems & early warning systems. Possible inefficiencies.
The importance of governance
– Channels for policy exist (annual reviews, SWAPs meetings) & comparable
timelines.
– Communities and non-health system stakeholders involved
Large-scale data collection exercises are resource-intensive and not
synchronised with the policy process (some In-DEPTH/ LSMS).
Technology, appropriate to context
Conclusions
Effective health systems monitoring requires:
Capacity: to collect or use existing data, analyse, inform policy
Ownership
Coherence between domestic and external demands
Coherence between external agencies
Coherence between system-wide monitoring and vertical
programmes performance measurement
Coherence between assessing the performance of different system
elements
Domestic governance
Impact measurement to ensure sustainability/reform (scaling up)
Foster partnership between stakeholders
Acknowledgements
Georgia
India
Rwanda
Tanzania
Uganda
George Gotsadze
Barun Kanjilal
Vianney Nizeyimana
Graham Reid
Valeria Oliveira-Cruz
Freddy Ssengoba