'All my co-workers are good people, but ': collaboration dynamics between frontline workers in rural Uttar Pradesh, India.

Multisectoral collaboration has been identified as a critical component in a wide variety of health and development initiatives. For India's Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) scheme, which serves >100 million people annually across more than one million villages, a key point of multisectoral collaboration-or 'convergence', as it is often called in India-is between the three frontline worker cadres jointly responsible for delivering essential maternal and child health and nutritional services throughout the country: the Accredited Social Health Activist (ASHA), Anganwadi worker (AWW) and auxiliary nurse midwife (ANM) or 'AAA' workers. Despite the long-recognized importance of collaboration within this triad, there has been relatively little documentation of what this looks like in practice and what is needed in order to improve it. Informed by a conceptual framework of collaborative governance, this study applies inductive thematic analysis of in-depth interviews with 18 AAA workers and 6 medical officers from 6 villages across three administrative blocks in Hardoi district of Uttar Pradesh state to identify the key elements of collaboration. These are grouped into three broad categories: 'organizational' (including interdependence, role clarity, guidance/support and resource availability); 'relational' (interpersonal and conflict resolution) and 'personal' (flexibility, diligence and locus of control). These findings underscore the importance of 'personal' and 'relational' collaboration features, which are underemphasized in India's ICDS, the largest of its kind globally, and in the multisectoral collaboration literature more broadly-both of which place greater emphasis on 'organizational' aspects of collaboration. These findings are largely consistent with prior studies but are notably different in that they highlight the importance of flexibility, locus of control and conflict resolution in collaborative relationships, all of which relate to one's ability to adapt to unexpected obstacles and find mutually workable solutions with colleagues. From a policy perspective, supporting these key elements of collaboration may involve giving frontline workers more autonomy in how they get the work done, which may in some cases be impeded by additional training to reinforce worker role delineation, closer monitoring or other top-down efforts to push greater convergence. Given the essential role that frontline workers play in multisectoral initiatives in India and around the world, there is a clear need for policymakers and managers to understand the elements affecting collaboration between these workers when designing and implementing programmes.

Public sector engagement of private healthcare providers during the COVID-19 pandemic in Uttar Pradesh, India.

The COVID-19 pandemic has strained public health resources and overwhelmed health systems capacity of countries worldwide. In India, the private sector is a significant source of healthcare particularly in large states like Uttar Pradesh (UP). This study sought to examine: (i) the government's approach to engaging the private health sector in the COVID-19 response in UP; (ii) the effects of government's engagement on private providers' practices and (iii) the barriers and facilitators to effective private sector engagement during the period. While the literature acknowledges weaknesses in private sector engagement during emergencies, our study provides deep empirical insight into how this occurs, drawing on the UP experience. We reviewed 102 Government of UP (GOUP) policy documents and conducted 36 in-depth interviews with government officials, technical partners, and private providers at district- and state-levels. We developed timelines for policy change based on the policy review and analyzed interview transcripts thematically using a framework analysis. We found that GOUP's engagement of the private sector and private providers' experiences varied substantially. While the government rapidly engaged and mobilized private laboratories, and enlisted private hospitals to provide COVID-19 services, it undertook only limited engagement of solo private providers who largely acted as referral units for suspected cases and reported data to support contact tracing efforts. Informal private providers played no formal role in the COVID-19 response, but in one district supported community-level contact tracing. Allopathic, alternative medicine, and diagnostic private providers faced common barriers and facilitators affecting their engagement relating to provider fear, communication, testing capacity, case reporting, and regulations. The establishment of mixed diagnostic networks during COVID-19 demonstrates the potential for public-private collaboration, however, our study also reveals missed opportunities to engage smaller-scale private health providers and establish mechanisms to effectively communicate and mobilize them during the pandemic, and beyond.

Government resource contributions to the private-not-for-profit sector in Uganda: evolution, adaptations and implications for universal health coverage.

BACKGROUND: A case study was prepared examining government resource contributions (GRCs) to private-not-for-profit (PNFP) providers in Uganda. It focuses on Primary Health Care (PHC) grants to the largest non-profit provider network, the Uganda Catholic Medical Bureau (UCMB), from 1997 to 2015. The framework of complex adaptive systems was used to explain changes in resource contributions and the relationship between the Government and UCMB. METHODS: Documents and key informant interviews with the important actors provided the main sources of qualitative data. Trends for GRCs and service outputs for the study period were constructed from existing databases used to monitor service inputs and outputs. The case study's findings were validated during two meetings with a broad set of stakeholders. RESULTS: Three major phases were identified in the evolution of GRCs and the relationship between the Government and UCMB: 1) Initiation, 2) Rapid increase in GRCs, and 3) Declining GRCs. The main factors affecting the relationship's evolution were: 1) Financial deficits at PNFP facilities, 2) advocacy by PNFP network leaders, 3) changes in the government financial resource envelope, 4) variations in the "good will" of government actors, and 5) changes in donor funding modalities. Responses to the above dynamics included changes in user fees, operational costs of PNFPs, and government expectations of UCMB. Quantitative findings showed a progressive increase in service outputs despite the declining value of GRCs during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: GRCs in Uganda have evolved influenced by various factors and the complex interactions between government and PNFPs. The Universal Health Coverage (UHC) agenda should pay attention to these factors and their interactions when shaping how governments work with PNFPs to advance UHC. GRCs could be leveraged to mitigate the financial burden on communities served by PNFPs. Governments seeking to advance UHC goals should explore policies to expand GRCs and other modalities to subsidize the operational costs of PNFPs.

Integrated community case management for childhood illnesses: explaining policy resistance in Kenya.

BACKGROUND: There has been a re-emphasis recently on community health workers to provide child health care services including integrated community case management for childhood illness (iCCM). This research analysed iCCM policy development in Kenya and in particular the types of decision-making criteria used by Kenyan policy-makers in considering whether to advance iCCM policy. METHOD: Data were collected through document reviews (n = 41) and semi-structured interviews (n = 19) with key stakeholders in iCCM policy including government officials, development partners, bilateral donors, and civil society organizations. Initial analysis was guided by the policy triangle with further analysis of factors affecting policy decision-making drawing upon a simple framework developed by Grindle and Thomas (Policy makers, policy choices and policy outcomes: the political economy of reform in developing countries. 1989; Policy Sci 22: :213-48.). FINDINGS: Policy development for iCCM has been slow in Kenya, compared with other Sub-Saharan African countries. At the time of the study, the Government had just completed the Community Health Training Manual which incorporated iCCM as a module, but this was the only formal expression of iCCM in Kenya. We found technical considerations, notably concerns about community health workers dispensing antibiotics to be a key factor slowing iCCM policy development, but this also overlapped with bureaucratic considerations, such as how the development of community health worker cadres may affect clinicians, as well as initial concerns about how an integrated approach might affect vertically oriented programs. International actors through agreements such as the Millennium Development Goals helped to get child survival onto the national policy agenda and such actors were active promoters of iCCM policy change. However international funders had not committed funding to scale-up iCCM policy, and this probably constrained their influence over iCCM policy debate. CONCLUSION: Kenyan actors' concerns about iCCM underline the importance of adapting global policies to local conditions, and also generating local evidence to inform decision-making.

When do vertical (stand-alone) programmes have a place in health systems?

Few issues related to the organization of health systems and service delivery have attracted as much attention as the debate on vertical versus integrated health programmes. The literature has focused on the comparative effectiveness of vertical (disease- or service-specific) versus more systemic approaches since the 1960s, and both approaches have been widely implemented in low- and middle-income countries and in high-income countries. In vertical approaches (also referred to as stand-alone, categorical, disease management or disease control programmes), interventions are provided through delivery systems that typically have separate administration and budgets, with varied structural, funding and operational integration with the wider health system. In the integrated model (also known as horizontal approaches or programmes), services do not have separate administration orbudgets and are typically delivered through health facilities that provide routine or general health services. This policy brief has three objectives and is structured accordingly: to unpack what is meant by a vertical programme versus an integrated one; to assess the available evidence and lessons on when vertical programmes have a role to play in health systems; and to indicate under what circumstances vertical programmes have a role to play in health systems and to note the factors policy-makers need to take into account when considering implementing vertical programmes.