270 likes | 288 Views
This article outlines the background, government efforts, and results achieved in implementing Results-Based Financing (RBF) in Afghanistan. It presents practical lessons learned from the process.
E N D
Some Practical Lessons on Implementing RBF from Afghanistan Benjamin Loevinsohn World Bank October 2008
Outline • Background on Afghanistan • What the Government tried to do • Some of the results accomplished • Practical lessons about implementation
Very conservative society where social obstacles impede women’s access to services
Country Context • Pop’n = 25 Million • 650 000 km2 • 34 provinces • One of the poorest countries in the world (GDP ~ 300 dollars/ capita/year • Civil War since 1978 • 1-2 million people died, >5 million refugees • 80% rural
Afghanistan in 2002-Reasons to Worry • Little physical infrastructure • MOPH had limited capacity • Health workers afflicted by the “3 wrongs” • wrong gender • wrong skills • wrong location • Little coordination of NGO activities
Distribution of NGO Health Centers was Chaotic and Unequal – 1 HF per 50,000 Road un-served
Inequalities were very serious, MMR much worse in rural and remote areas
What the Government did: • Established the “Basic Package of Health Services” – priority health interventions • Signed Results-Based Contracts with NGOs on a very large scale – 90% of rural Afghans live in areas served by contracted NGOs • Competitively recruited Afghans to work in MOPH at market wages • Invested heavily in monitoring & 3rd party evaluation including HFSs, HHSs, HMIS
Results-Based Contracting • EC, USAID, MOPH (with WB funding) signed contracts/grants with NGOs • Similarities: • focused on BPHS; • same indicators & M&E process; • clear geographic responsibility (provinces); • competitive recruitment; • move towards MOPH management of all grants and contracts
Results-Based Contracting - PPAs • MOPH signed “performance-based partnership agreements” (PPAs) using WB funds • 46% local NGOs, 27% INGOs, 29% with consortia • credible threat of sanctions – one INGO was terminated for poor performance, one local NGO’s contract not extended • considerable autonomy – lump sum instead of line item budgets
Results-based Aspects of PPAs • Credible threat of termination • Bonuses for NGOs: annual 1% of contract value for 10 point increase in BSC, 5% for increase in coverage at the end of the contract • Could have been better designed (+23% in year 1, less bonus than 10% and 10%) • bonuses also paid to provincial health officials to align incentives
Setting up a Grants and Contract Management Unit • Competitive recruitment of local consultants • Transparent recruitment thru involvement of external stakeholders • Paid market wages but on contract • Caused considerable resentment in MOPH • However, attracted very capable people, many from NGO sector • Much appreciated by senior management • Much cheaper than international consultants
Health Facility Surveys • JHU worked with stakeholders to develop a health facility assessment • Carried out annually since 2004 • 600+ facilities per year • Formulated a “balanced score-card” (BSC) that rated facilities on a scale of 0-100
Health Facility Surveys – An Important M&E Tool • BSC looked at 29 areas of care including: (i) equity; (ii) patient satisfaction; (iii) availability of drugs, equipment, & staff; (iv) knowledge of providers; (v) quality of patient-provider interaction; (vi) patient load, etc. • Costs about $300,000 per year
32% Improvement in Quality of Care from facility survey (BSC)
Improvements in Reproductive Health – Household Surveys 2003 to 2006
Implementation Lessons Learned • Have clear objectives: The MOPH focused on the BPHS in rural areas and ensured all DPs did too!! • Have explicit contracts: The MOPH spent time and effort to ensure contracts were clear on whatwas expected but left howto NGOs. Used a checklist in designing them • Have an explicit plan: PIP dealt with NGO selection, contract management, M&E
Implementation Lessons Learned • Clear Arrangements for Contract Mgt: MOPH set up GCMU: 10 people with proper budget – look after all DP contracts/grants • Field visits to assess progress, ID issues, and diagnose causes • Ensure prompt payment of NGOs • Hold NGOs accountable for obligations • Track performance using available data • Keep MOPH leadership informed
Implementation Lessons Learned • Monitor Carefully: Used different sources of information to assess performance on explicit indicators: • Health facility surveys – very useful to do yearly by 3rd party • HMIS – insisted on high reporting rate • Household surveys to verify HMIS data – found big differences for vaccination & ANC coverage • Field visits using checklists • Involve community
Implementation Lessons Learned • Give Implementers Autonomy: MOPH gave NGOs substantial autonomy by: • Use of lump-sum (not line item budgets) • Allowing NGOs to procure their own drugs, supplies, and equipment • Focusing on what not how; e.g. insisted on female health workers • Encouraging NGOs to innovate
Per capita outpatient visits per year in Secure and Insecure Provinces with PPAs by same NGO