1 / 14

Tracking spending on health to improve equity – Kenyan case

Tracking spending on health to improve equity – Kenyan case. Thomas Maina 24/04/2012. Health care financing policy and strategy in Kenya. Important decisions made by the government over the past decade with regard to HCF The strategies include: Decision to introduce user fees in 1989

gaius
Download Presentation

Tracking spending on health to improve equity – Kenyan case

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Tracking spending on health to improve equity – Kenyan case Thomas Maina 24/04/2012

  2. Health care financing policy and strategy in Kenya • Important decisions made by the government over the past decade with regard to HCF • The strategies include: • Decision to introduce user fees in 1989 • Shift in focus from curative to preventive health care (HSSP II and KHPF) • Reform NHIF to enhance the benefit package and improve access to health care • Setting up a SHI scheme a flagship project of the Vision 2030 to improve equity in health care financing • Scale up Output Based Approach to improve access to health care by the disadvantaged • Development of a care financing policy

  3. History of NHA in Kenya • Kenya has implemented four rounds of NHA between 1997/98 and 2009/10 • The first round of NHA undertaken in 1998 and used data for FY 1994/95 • Financed by Danida and USAID through Partnership for Health Reform • HH contribution estimated using Welfare Monitoring Survey of 1994 • Key findings: • THE – Kshs. 31 billion ($US 560 million) • HH contributed bulk of the THE (53%)

  4. Sources of funding health care -1994/95

  5. Second round of NHA-2001/02 • Conducted in 2003 using data for FY 2001/02 • Financed by SIDA, USAID through Partnership for Health (ABT) and NHIF • A HIV/AIDS sub-analysis also undertaken • A Household Health Expenditure and Utilization undertaken to estimate HHs contribution • Key findings: • THE – Kshs. 47 billion (US$598 million) • Again HHs contributed bulk of THE (51%) • Public providers consumed 60% of the THE • HIV/AIDS sub account – THEhiv – Kshs. 8.2 billion (US$103 million with donors contributing 51%,HH 26% and Gov’t 21%

  6. Sources of funding -2001/02 –General Health and HIV/AIDS

  7. Percent distribution of public outpatient services

  8. Third round of NHA • Undertaken in 2007 and used data for FY 2005/06 • HIV/AIDS and RH sub-accounts • Financial and technical support by USAID through Health system 20/20 • HH survey also undertaken to estimate HH contribution • Key findings: • THE- Kshs. 71 billion (US$964 million) • HHs contributed 36% ( reduction of 15% from 2001/02) • THEhiv – Kshs 19 billion (US$256 million) • Donors financed 70%,HHs 23% and Govt 7% • THERH - Kshs. 9 billion (US$119 million –HHs 38%,Govt 35% and donors 24%

  9. Sources of funding – 2001/02,2005/06 and 2009/10

  10. Fourth round of NHA • Conducted in 2010 using data for 2009/0 • HIV/AIDS,RH,TB, Malaria and Child health sub-accounts • Financial and technical support from USAID through HS20/20, financial support also from WHO and World Bank • Key findings: • THE – Kshs. 122.9 billion (US$1,620 million) • Further reduction of HHs contribution from 36% in 2005/06 to 28.5% in 2009/10 • Doubling of donor support to 35% • THEHIV – Kshs. 30 billion – Donors 51%, private sector 28% and Govt 21% • THERH –Public and private major contributors (40% and 38% respectively • THEMalaria- 52% came from private sector including HH

  11. Cont’ fourth round of NHA • THETB – Donors contributed 39% • THECH – Donors contributed 44%

  12. Use of NHA by the government to inform policy – address equity and access issues Evidence • Results of 1997/98 and 2001/02 provided evidence on HH spending on health (over 50%) • The NHA of 1997/98 and 2001/02 also provided evidence that the rich benefit more from public spending on health – hospitals while the poor benefit more from – lower level health services Government response • HCF became a topical issue in many forums – Taskforce on HCF – SHI and OBA flagship projects of Vision 2030 • MoH lobbied for more resources from MoF – 30% increase in 2003/04

  13. Cont’ use of NHA by the government to inform policy – address equity and access issues • Measures to reduce OOP: • 10/20 policy (2004) – 50% increase in outpatient visits • HHES of 2003 reported stock outs leading to reduced access to health care – procurement of a 3 month kit of EMMS in lower level facilities leading to increased utilization • User fees accounted for 30% of O&M in health facilities – piloting of HFF in Coast and NE and scaling up of the same in all provinces (HSSF) • Mobilized donors to hire nurses for the lower level • All the above measures led to a reduction of OOP from 51% in 2001/02 to 30% in 2009/10

  14. Conclusion • Evidence provided by the several rounds of NHA impacted on policy process – pro-poor policies • The need to institutionalize NHA to continue providing evidence on HCF on regular and timely basis • Institutionalization efforts so far: • Msc in Health economics course – to increase the pool of graduates with knowledge on NHA • Standardized donors/NGO reporting tool – plans to computerize • Simplified NGOs tool • Piggy backing HH spending on health on regular surveys – KAIS in 2007 and 2012 • NHA as part of the PS performance contract to increase demand

More Related