Understanding health system resilience in responding to COVID-19 pandemic: experiences and lessons from an evolving context of federalization in Nepal.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has tested the resilience capacities of health systems worldwide and highlighted the need to understand the concept, pathways, and elements of resilience in different country contexts. In this study, we assessed the health system response to COVID-19 in Nepal and examined the processes of policy formulation, communication, and implementation at the three tiers of government, including the dynamic interactions between tiers. Nepal was experiencing the early stages of federalization reform when COVID-19 pandemic hit the country, and clarity in roles and capacity to implement functions were the prevailing challenges, especially among the subnational governments. METHODS: We adopted a cross-sectional exploratory design, using mixed methods. We conducted a desk-based review of all policy documents introduced in response to COVID-19 from January to December 2020, and collected qualitative data through 22 key informant interviews at three tiers of government, during January-March 2021. Two municipalities were purposively selected for data collection in Lumbini province. Our analysis is based on a resilience framework that has been developed by our research project, ReBUILD for Resilience, which helps to understand pathways to health system resilience through absorption, adaptation and transformation. RESULTS: In the newly established federal structure, the existing emergency response structure and plans were utilized, which were yet to be tested in the decentralized system. The federal government effectively led the policy formulation process, but with minimal engagement of sub-national governments. Local governments could not demonstrate resilience capacities due to the novelty of the federal system and their consequent lack of experience, confusion on roles, insufficient management capacity and governance structures at local level, which was further aggravated by the limited availability of human, technical and financial resources. CONCLUSIONS: The study findings emphasize the importance of strong and flexible governance structures and strengthened capacity of subnational governments to effectively manage pandemics. The study elaborates on the key areas and pathways that contribute to the resilience capacities of health systems from the experience of Nepal. We draw out lessons that can be applied to other fragile and shock-prone settings.

Implementation of PM-JAY in India: a qualitative study exploring the role of competency, organizational and leadership drivers shaping early roll-out of publicly funded health insurance in three Indian states.

BACKGROUND: The Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (PM-JAY), a publicly funded health insurance scheme, was launched in India in September 2018 to provide financial access to health services for poor Indians. PM-JAY design enables state-level program adaptations to facilitate implementation in a decentralized health implementation space. This study examines the competency, organizational, and leadership approaches affecting PM-JAY implementation in three contextually different Indian states. METHODS: We used a framework on implementation drivers (competency, organizational, and leadership) to understand factors facilitating or hampering implementation experiences in three PM-JAY models: third-party administrator in Uttar Pradesh, insurance in Chhattisgarh, and hybrid in Tamil Nadu. We adopted a qualitative exploratory approach and conducted 92 interviews with national, state, district, and hospital stakeholders involved in program design and implementation in Delhi, three state capitals, and two anonymized districts in each state, between February and April 2019. We used a deductive approach to content analysis and interpreted coded material to identify linkages between organizational features, drivers, and contextual elements affecting implementation. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: PM-JAY guideline flexibilities enabled implementation in very different states through state-adapted implementation models. These models utilized contextually relevant adaptations for staff and facility competencies and organizational and facilitative administration, which had considerable scope for improvement in terms of recruitment, competency development, programmatic implementation support, and rationalizing the joint needs of the program and implementers. Adaptations also created structural barriers in staff interactions and challenged implicit power asymmetries and organizational culture, indicating a need for aligning staff hierarchies and incentive structures. At the same time, specific adaptations such as decentralizing staff selection and task shifting (all models); sharing of claims processing between the insurer and state agency (insurance and hybrid model); and using stringent empanelment, accreditation, monitoring, and benchmarking criteria for performance assessment, and reserving secondary care benefit packages for public hospitals (both in the hybrid model) contributed to successful implementation. Contextual elements such as institutional memory of previous schemes and underlying state capacities influenced all aspects of implementation, including leadership styles and autonomy. These variations make comparisons across models difficult, yet highlight constraints and opportunities for cross-learning and optimizing implementation to achieve universal health coverage in decentralized contexts.

How do we design and evaluate health system strengthening? Collaborative development of a set of health system process goals.

Strong health systems are widely recognized as a key requirement for improving health outcomes and also for ensuring that health systems are equitable, resilient and responsive to population needs. However, the related term Health Systems Strengthening (HSS) remains unclear and contested, and this creates challenges for how HSS can be monitored and evaluated. A previous review argued for the need to rethink evaluation methods for HSS to examine systemic effects of HSS investments. In line with that recommendation, this article describes the work of the HSS Evaluation Collaborative (HSSEC) in the development of a framework and tool to guide HSS monitoring, evaluation and learning by national and global actors. It was developed based on a rapid review of the literature and iterative expert consultation, with the aim of going beyond a focus on the building blocks of health systems and on health system outputs or health outcomes to think about the features that constitute a strong health system. As a result, we developed a list of 22 health system process goals which represent desirable attributes for health systems. The health system process goals (or rather, progress towards them) are influenced by positive and negative, intended and unintended effects of HSS interventions. Finally, we illustrate how the health system process goals can be operationalised for prospective and retrospective HSS monitoring, evaluation and learning, and how they also have the potential to be used for opening a space for participatory, inclusive policy dialogue about HSS.

How can we strengthen partnership and coordination for health system emergency preparedness and response? Findings from a synthesis of experience across countries facing shocks.

BACKGROUND: Discussions of health system resilience and emergency management often highlight the importance of coordination and partnership across government and with other stakeholders. However, both coordination and partnership have been identified as areas requiring further research. This paper identifies characteristics and enablers of effective coordination for emergency preparedness and response, drawing on experience from different countries with a range of shocks, including floods, drought, and COVID-19. METHODS: The paper synthesises evidence from a set of reports related to research, evaluation and technical assistance projects, bringing together evidence from 11 countries in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Methods for the original reports included primary data collection through interviews, focus groups and workshop discussions, analysis of secondary data, and document review. Reports were synthesised using a coding framework, and quality of evidence was considered for reliability of the findings. RESULTS: The reports highlighted the role played by coordination and partnership in preparedness and response, and identified four key areas that characterise and enable effective coordination. First, coordination needs to be inclusive, bringing together different government sectors and levels, and stakeholders such as development agencies, universities, the private sector, local leaders and civil society, with equitable gender representation. Second, structural aspects of coordination bodies are important, including availability of coordination structures and regular meeting fora; clear roles, mandates and sufficient authority; the value of building on existing coordination mechanisms; and ongoing functioning of coordination bodies, before and after crises. Third, organisations responsible for coordination require sufficient capacity, including staff, funding, communication infrastructure and other resources, and learning from previous emergencies. Fourth, effective coordination is supported by high-level political leadership and incentives for collaboration. Country experience also highlighted interactions between these components, and with the wider health system and governance architecture, pointing to the need to consider coordination as part of a complex adaptive system. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 and other shocks have highlighted the importance of effective coordination and partnership across government and with other stakeholders. Using country experience, the paper identifies a set of recommendations to strengthen coordination for health system resilience and emergency management.

Health system resilience during COVID-19 understanding SRH service adaptation in North Kivu.

BACKGROUND: There is often collateral damage to health systems during epidemics, affecting women and girls the most, with reduced access to non-outbreak related services, particularly in humanitarian settings. This rapid case study examines sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services in the Democratic Republic of the Congo when the COVID-19 hit, towards the end of an Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) outbreak, and in a context of protracted insecurity. METHODS: This study draws on quantitative analysis of routine data from four health zones, a document review of policies and protocols, and 13 key-informant interviews with staff from the Ministry of Public Health, United Nations agencies, international and national non-governmental organizations, and civil society organizations. RESULTS: Utilization of SRH services decreased initially but recovered by August 2020. Significant fluctuations remained across areas, due to the end of free care once Ebola funding ceased, insecurity, number of COVID-19 cases, and funding levels. The response to COVID-19 was top-down, focused on infection and prevention control measures, with a lack of funding, technical expertise and overall momentum that characterized the EVD response. Communities and civil society did not play an active role for the planning of the COVID-19 response. While health zone and facility staff showed resilience, developing adaptations to maintain SRH provision, these adaptations were short-lived and inconsistent without external support and funding. CONCLUSION: The EVD outbreak was an opportunity for health system strengthening that was not sustained during COVID-19. This had consequences for access to SRH services, with limited-resources available and deprioritization of SRH.

Women and girls often face increased challenges to accessing healthcare during epidemics on top of pre-existing health disparities. There is emerging evidence that COVID-19 has had negative impacts on the health of women and girls in sub-Saharan Africa due to diverted funding, reduced services, negative socioeconomic impacts, and increased or new barriers to access. In the DRC, COVID-19 hit shortly after the end of an Ebola epidemic within a context of protracted insecurity. This study used mixed methods and drew upon 13 interviews to examine the effects of COVID-19 on SRH services in North Kivu and how the health system did or did not adapt to ensure continued access and utilization of SRH services. There was limited prioritization of SRH during COVID-19. Although the government issued policies on how to adapt SRH services, these were developed centrally, without much guidance on how to operationalize these policies in different contexts. Consequently, healthcare providers and civil society actors developed their own ways to continue activities at local levels, not necessarily in a systematic way. There was limited longer-term strengthening of the health system that could adapt to the subsequent COVID-19 pandemic aside from increased capacity of healthcare providers to manage infection prevention and control measures. However, this was hampered by the lack of personal protective equipment that received no external support. Therefore, donors need to consider how resources can be leveraged to support sustained strengthening of the health system to be able to adapt to shocks even when resources are limited.

Political economy analysis of universal health coverage and health financing reforms in low- and middle-income countries: the role of stakeholder engagement in the research process.

BACKGROUND: Progress towards universal health coverage (UHC) is an inherently political process. Political economy analysis (PEA) is gaining momentum as a tool to better understand the role of the political and economic dimensions in shaping and achieving UHC in different contexts. Despite the acknowledged importance of actors and stakeholders in political economy considerations, their role in the PEA research process beyond "study subjects" as potential cocreators of knowledge and knowledge users has been overlooked so far. We therefore aimed to review the approaches with reference to stakeholder engagement during the research process adopted in the current published research on the political economy of UHC and health financing reforms, and the factors favouring (or hindering) uptake and usability of PEA work. METHODS: We reviewed the literature to describe whether, when and how stakeholders were involved in the research process of studies looking at the political economy of UHC and health financing reforms, and to identify challenges and lessons learned on effective stakeholder engagement and research uptake. We used a standardized search strategy with key terms across several databases; we screened and included articles that focused on PEA and UHC. Additionally, we conducted a short survey of the authors of the included studies to complement the information retrieved. RESULTS: Fifty articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. We found overall little evidence of systematic engagement of stakeholders in the research process, which focused mostly on the data collection phase of the research (i.e., key informant interviews). Our study identifies some reasons for the varying stakeholder engagement. Challenges include PEA requiring specific skills, a focus on sensitive issues, and the blurriness in researchers' and stakeholders' roles and the multiple roles of stakeholders as research participants, study subjects and research users. Among the approaches that might favour usability of PEA work, we identified early engagement, coproduction of research questions, local partners and personal contact, political willingness, and trust and use of prospective analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Stakeholder engagement and research uptake are multifaceted concepts and complex processes, particularly when applied to PEA. As such, stakeholder engagement in the research process of PEA of UHC and health financing reforms is limited and underreported. Despite the challenges, however, stakeholder engagement remains key to ensuring relevance, usability and research uptake of PEA studies. More efforts are required to ensure engagement at different stages of the research process and better reporting in published articles.

Performance-based Financing versus "Unconditional" Direct Facility Financing - False Dichotomy?

A debate about how best to finance essential health care in low- and middle-income settings has been running for decades, with public health systems often failing to provide reliable and adequate funding for primary health care in particular. Since 2000, many have advocated and experimented with performance-based financing as one approach to addressing this problem. More recently, in light of concerns over high transaction costs, mixed results and challenges of sustainability, a less conditional approach, sometimes called direct facility financing, has come into favor. In this commentary, we examine the evidence for the effectiveness of both modalities and argue that they share many features and requirements for effectiveness. In the right context, both can contribute to health system strengthening, and they should be seen as potentially complementary, rather than as rivals.

Performance-Based Financing, Basic Packages of Health Services and User-Fee Exemption Mechanisms: An Analysis of Health-Financing Policy Integration in Three Fragile and Conflict-Affected Settings.

BACKGROUND: As performance-based financing (PBF) is increasingly implemented across sub-Saharan Africa, some authors have suggested that it could be a 'stepping stone' for health-system strengthening and broad health-financing reforms. However, so far, few studies have looked at whether and how PBF is aligned to and integrated with national health-financing strategies, particularly in fragile and conflict-affected settings. OBJECTIVE: This study attempts to address the existing research gap by exploring the role of PBF with reference to: (1) user fees/exemption policies and (2) basic packages of health services and benefit packages in the Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of Congo and Nigeria. METHODS: The comparative case study is based on document review, key informant interviews and focus-group discussions with stakeholders at national and subnational levels. RESULTS: The findings highlight different experiences in terms of PBF's integration. Although (formal or informal) fee exemption or reduction practices exist in all settings, their implementation is not uniform and they are often introduced by external programmes, including PBF, in an uncoordinated and vertical fashion. Additionally, the degree to which PBF indicators lists are aligned to the national basic packages of health services varies across cases, and is influenced by factors such as funders' priorities and budgetary concerns. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we find that where national leadership is stronger, PBF is better integrated and more in line with the health-financing regulations and, during phases of acute crisis, can provide structure and organisation to the system. Where governmental stewardship is weaker, PBF may result in another parallel programme, potentially increasing fragmentation in health financing and inequalities between areas supported by different donors.

Results-based financing as a strategic purchasing intervention: some progress but much further to go in Zimbabwe?

BACKGROUND: Results-Based Financing (RBF) has proliferated in the health sectors of low and middle income countries, especially those which are fragile or conflict-affected, and has been presented by some as a way of reforming and strengthening strategic purchasing. However, few if any studies have empirically and systematically examined how RBF impacts on health care purchasing. This article examines this question in the context of Zimbabwe's national RBF programme. METHODS: The article is based on a documentary review, including 60 documents from 2008 to 2018, and 40 key informant (KI) interviews conducted with international, national and district level stakeholders in early 2018 in Zimbabwe. Interviews and analysis of both datasets followed an existing framework for strategic purchasing, adapted to reflect changes over. RESULTS: We find that some functions, such as assessing service infrastructure gaps, are unaffected by RBF, while others, such as mobilising resources, are partially affected, as RBF has focused on one package of care (maternal and child health services) within the wider essential health care, and has contributed important but marginal costs. Overall purchasing arrangements remain fragmented. Limited improvements have been made to community engagement. The clearest changes to purchasing arrangements relate to providers, at least in relation to the RBF services. Its achievements included enabling flexible resources to reach primary providers, funding supervision and emphasising the importance of reporting. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests that RBF in Zimbabwe, at least at this early stage, is mainly functioning as an additional source of funding and as a provider payment mechanism, focussed on the primary care level for MCH services. RBF in this case brought focus to specific outputs but remained one provider payment mechanism amongst many, with limited traction over the main service delivery inputs and programmes. Zimbabwe's economic and political crisis provided an important entry point for RBF, but Zimbabwe did not present a 'blank slate' for RBF to reform: it was a functional health system pre-crisis, which enabled relatively swift scale-up of RBF but also meant that the potential for restructuring of institutional purchasing relationships was limited. This highlights the need for realistic and contextually tailored expectations of RBF.

The political economy of results-based financing: the experience of the health system in Zimbabwe.

BACKGROUND: Since 2000, results based financing (RBF) has proliferated in health sectors in Africa in particular, including in fragile and conflict affected settings (FCAS) and there is a growing but still contested literature about its relevance and effectiveness. Less examined are the political economy factors behind the adoption of the RBF policy, as well as the shifts in influence and resources which RBF may bring about. In this article, we examine these two topics, focusing on Zimbabwe, which has rolled out RBF nationwide in the health system since 2011, with external support. METHODS: The study uses an adapted political economy framework, integrating data from 40 semi-structured interviews with local, national and international experts in 2018 and thematic analysis of 60 policy documents covering the decade between 2008 and 2018. RESULTS: Our findings highlight the role of donors in initiating the RBF policy, but also how the Zimbabwe health system was able to adapt the model to suit its particular circumstances - seeking to maintain a systemic approach, and avoiding fragmentation. Although Zimbabwe was highly resource dependent after the political-economic crisis of the 2000s, it retained managerial and professional capacity, which distinguishes it from many other FCAS settings. This active adaptation has engendered national ownership over time, despite initial resistance to the RBF model and despite the complexity of RBF, which creates dependence on external technical support. Adoption was also aided by ideological retro-fitting into an earlier government performance management policy. The main beneficiaries of RBF were frontline providers, who gained small but critical additional resources, but subject to high degrees of control and sanctions. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights resource-seeking motivations for adopting RBF in some low and middle income settings, especially fragile ones, but also the potential for local health system actors to shape and adapt RBF to suit their needs in some circumstances. This means less structural disruption in the health system and it increases the likelihood of an integrated approach and sustainability. We highlight the mix of autonomy and control which RBF can bring for frontline providers and argue for clearer understanding of the role that RBF commonly plays in these settings.

Health financing in fragile and conflict-affected settings: What do we know, seven years on?

Over the last few years, there has been growing attention to health systems research in fragile and conflict-affected setting (FCAS) from both researchers and donors. In 2012, an exploratory literature review was conducted to analyse the main themes and findings of recent literature focusing on health financing in FCAS. Seven years later, this paper presents an update of that review, reflecting on what has changed in terms of the knowledge base, and what are the on-going gaps and new challenges in our understanding of health financing in FCAS. A total of 115 documents were reviewed following a purposeful, non-systematic search of grey and published literature. Data were analysed according to key health financing themes, ensuring comparability with the 2012 review. Bibliometric analysis suggests that the field has continued to grow, and is skewed towards countries with a large donor presence (such as Afghanistan). Aid coordination remains the largest single topic within the themes, likely reflecting the dominance of external players, not just substantively but also in relation to research. Many studies are commissioned by external agencies and in addition to concerns about independence of findings there is also likely a neglect of smaller, more home-grown reforms. In addition, we find that despite efforts to coordinate approaches across humanitarian and developmental settings, the literature remains distinct between them. We highlight research gaps, including empirical analysis of domestic and external financing trends across FCAS and non-FCAS over time, to understand better common health financing trajectories, what drives them and their implications. We highlight a dearth of evidence in relation to health financing goals and objectives for UHC (such as equity, efficiency, financial access), which is significant given the relevance of UHC, and the importance of the social and political values which different health financing arrangements can communicate, which also merit in-depth study.

(How) does RBF strengthen strategic purchasing of health care? Comparing the experience of Uganda, Zimbabwe and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

BACKGROUND: Results-Based Financing (RBF) has proliferated in health sectors of low and middle income countries, especially fragile and conflict-affected ones, and has been presented as a way of reforming and strengthening strategic purchasing. However, few studies have empirically examined how RBF impacts on health care purchasing in these settings. This article examines the effects of several RBF programmes on health care purchasing functions in three fragile and post-conflict settings: Uganda, Zimbabwe and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) over the past decade. METHODS: The article is based on a documentary review, including 110 documents from 2004 to 2018, and 98 key informant (KI) interviews conducted with international, national and district level stakeholders in early 2018 in the selected districts of the three countries. Interviews and analysis followed an adapted framework for strategic purchasing, which was also used to compare across the case studies. RESULTS: Across the cases, at the government level, we find little change to the accountability of purchasers, but RBF does mobilise additional resources to support entitlements. In relation to the population, RBF appears to bring in improvements in specifying and informing about entitlements for some services. However, the engagement and consultation with the population on their needs was found to be limited. In relation to providers, RBF did not impact in any major way on provider accreditation and selection, or on treatment guidelines. However, it did introduce a more contractual relationship for some providers and bring about (at least partial) improvements in provider payment systems, data quality, increased financial autonomy for primary providers and enforcing equitable strategies. More generally, RBF has been a source of much-needed revenue at primary care level in under-funded health systems. The context - particularly the degree of stability and authority of government-, the design of the RBF programme and the potential for effective integration of RBF in existing systems and its stage of development were key factors behind differences observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our evidence suggests that expectations of RBF as an instrument of systemic reform should be nuanced, while focusing instead on expanding the key areas of potential gain and ensuring better integration and institutionalisation, towards which two of the three case study countries are working.

Understanding HRH recruitment in post-conflict settings: an analysis of central-level policies and processes in Timor-Leste (1999-2018).

BACKGROUND: Although human resources for health (HRH) represent a critical element for health systems, many countries still face acute HRH challenges. These challenges are compounded in conflict-affected settings where health needs are exacerbated and the health workforce is often decimated. A body of research has explored the issues of recruitment of health workers, but the literature is still scarce, in particular with reference to conflict-affected states. This study adds to that literature by exploring, from a central-level perspective, how the HRH recruitment policies changed in Timor-Leste (1999-2018), the drivers of change and their contribution to rebuilding an appropriate health workforce after conflict. METHODS: This research adopts a retrospective, qualitative case study design based on 76 documents and 20 key informant interviews, covering a period of almost 20 years. Policy analysis, with elements of political economy analysis was conducted to explore the influence of actors and structural elements. RESULTS: Our findings describe the main phases of HRH policy-making during the post-conflict period and explore how the main drivers of this trajectory shaped policy-making processes and outcomes. While initially the influence of international actors was prominent, the number and relevance of national actors, and resulting influence, later increased as aid dependency diminished. However, this created a fragmented institutional landscape with diverging agendas and lack of inter-sectoral coordination, to the detriment of the long-term strategic development of the health workforce and the health sector. CONCLUSIONS: The study provides critical insights to improve understanding of HRH policy development and effective practices in a post-conflict setting but also looking at the longer term evolution. An issue that emerges across the HRH policy-making phases is the difficulty of reconciling the technocratic with the social, cultural and political concerns. Additionally, while this study illuminates processes and dynamics at central level, further research is needed from the decentralised perspective on aspects, such as deployment, motivation and career paths, which are under-regulated at central level.

Understanding HRH recruitment in postconflict settings: an analysis of central-level policies and processes in Timor-Leste (1999­2018)

Background: Although human resources for health (HRH) represent a critical element for health systems, many countries still face acute HRH challenges. These challenges are compounded in conflict-affected settings where health needs are exacerbated and the health workforce is often decimated. A body of research has explored the issues of recruitment of health workers, but the literature is still scarce, in particular with reference to conflict-affected states. This study adds to that literature by exploring, from a central-level perspective, how the HRH recruitment policies changed in Timor-Leste (1999­2018), the drivers of change and their contribution to rebuilding an appropriate health workforce after conflict. Methods: This research adopts a retrospective, qualitative case study design based on 76 documents and 20 key informant interviews, covering a period of almost 20 years. Policy analysis, with elements of political economy analysis was conducted to explore the influence of actors and structural elements. Results: Our findings describe the main phases of HRH policy-making during the post-conflict period and explore how the main drivers of this trajectory shaped policy-making processes and outcomes. While initially the influence of international actors was prominent, the number and relevance of national actors, and resulting influence, later increased as aid dependency diminished. However, this created a fragmented institutional landscape with diverging agendas and lack of inter-sectoral coordination, to the detriment of the long-term strategic development of the health workforce and the health sector. Conclusions: The study provides critical insights to improve understanding of HRH policy development and effective practices in a post-conflict setting but also looking at the longer term evolution. An issue that emerges across the HRH policy-making phases is the difficulty of reconciling the technocratic with the social, cultural and political concerns. Additionally, while this study illuminates processes and dynamics at central level, further research is needed from the decentralised perspective on aspects, such as deployment, motivation and career paths, which are under-regulated at central level. (AU)

The bumpy trajectory of performance-based financing for healthcare in Sierra Leone: agency, structure and frames shaping the policy process.

BACKGROUND: As performance-based financing (PBF) has been increasingly implemented in low-income countries, a growing literature has developed, assessing its effectiveness and, more recently, focussing on the political dynamics of PBF introduction and implementation. This study contributes to the latter body of literature by exploring decision-making processes on PBF in Sierra Leone during the 2010-2017 period. Sierra Leone presents an interesting case because of the 'start-stop-start' trajectory of PBF. METHODS: The qualitative case study is based on a document review and 25 key informant interviews with national stakeholders and international actors. Documents and interviews were analysed based on a political economy framework focusing on actors and structure, but also making use of concepts drawn from interpretive policy analysis to look at frames. RESULTS: Our analysis describes the process of negotiation and re-negotiation of PBF in Sierra Leone, highlighting the role of different players, both internal and external, their ideas, capacity and power relations, and the shifting narratives around PBF. It is shown that external actors driving the debate make use of 'frames', both actual (i.e., defining the timing and pace of the discussions, the funding available, etc.) and metaphorical (i.e., how PBF is interpreted, defined and understood) to fit in and influence the debate. This is facilitated by the lack of capacity and resources in the fragile setting. Other strategies, such as 'venue shopping' are employed, though they may add to fragmentation in the volatile context. CONCLUSIONS: The retrospective view of the study has an analytical advantage, but findings are also relevant to guide practice. Although power relations and rent-seeking issues are difficult to overcome in resource and capacity-constrained settings, more attention could be paid to other elements. In particular, adopting shared frames to ensure a common and inclusive understanding of technical concepts such as PBF may be useful to ensure the political sustainability of reforms. Also, the 'actual frames' which define negotiation and implementation should remain flexible, allowing for disrupting events (e.g., the Ebola epidemic in Sierra Leone) as well as for time to develop national capacity and ownership in order to ensure longer-term political support and better health system integration.

[Strategies of health workforce retention in rural areas of seven countries of francophone Africa.] / Le défi de la fidélisation des personnels de santé dans les zones rurales : analyse des stratégies mises en oeuvre dans sept pays d'Afrique francophone.

OBJECTIVES: Many countries face challenges in terms of number, skill mix, quality and distribution of the health workforce. This paper provides an overview of interventions focusing on retention adopted over the last decade in seven countries of francophone Africa. We assessed these interventions with respect to WHO guidelines and evaluated the extent of application of these recommended policies. METHODS: This study was conducted according to a comparative multiple case-study design and comprised two phases. First, seven country reports were consulted to provide a mapping and preliminary analysis of the interventions. Secondly, an analytic synthesis was prepared by systematically and deliberately comparing and contrasting country cases in order to draw higher-level conclusions. RESULTS: This comparative analysis indicated that some WHO guidelines are introduced less often than others and HRH retention policies are rarely envisaged within coherent ?bundles' of interventions. This analysis identifies the efforts to develop local (informal) strategies tailored to the context, while official policy-making often remains a standardized exercise, which does not take context-specific features into account. Moreover, little information is available on the implementation and effectiveness of existing policies. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The study stresses the importance of two key issues for the design of effective policies: the availability of sound data, as well as monitoring and evaluation structures, and the creation of a supportive and coherent political environment, focused on country-driven, realistic policy-making based on contextual problem identification and actual needs. This paper also suggests that good practices are often the result of local adaptations, rather than the close adoption of standardized guidelines. Therefore, in order to be effective, international guidelines must be complemented by locally acquired and fully appropriated knowledge.

Performance-based financing in three humanitarian settings: principles and pragmatism.

BACKGROUND: Performance based financing (PBF) has been increasingly implemented across low and middle-income countries, including in fragile and humanitarian settings, which present specific features likely to require adaptation and to influence implementation of any health financing programme. However, the literature has been surprisingly thin in the discussion of how PBF has been adapted to different contexts, and in turn how different contexts may influence PBF. With case studies from three humanitarian settings (northern Nigeria, Central African Republic and South Kivu in the Democratic Republic of Congo), we examine why and how PBF has emerged and has been adapted to those unsettled and dynamic contexts, what the opportunities and challenges have been, and what lessons can be drawn. METHODS: Our comparative case study is based on data collected from a document review, 35 key informant interviews and 16 focus group discussions with stakeholders at national and subnational level in the three settings. Data were analysed in order to describe and compare each setting in terms of underlying fragility features and their implications for the health system, and to look at how PBF has been adopted, implemented and iteratively adapted to respond to acute crisis, deal with other humanitarian actors and involve local communities. RESULTS: Our analysis reveals that the challenging environments required a high degree of PBF adaptation and innovation, at times contravening the so-called 'PBF principles' that have become codified. We develop an analytical framework to highlight the key nodes where adaptations happen, the contextual drivers of adaptation, and the organisational elements that facilitate adaptation and may sustain PBF programmes. CONCLUSIONS: Our study points to the importance of pragmatic adaptation in PBF design and implementation to reflect the contextual specificities, and identifies elements (such as, organisational flexibility, local staff and knowledge, and embedded long-term partners) that could facilitate adaptations and innovations. These findings and framework are useful to spark a reflection among PBF donors and implementers on the relevance of incorporating, reinforcing and building on those elements when designing and implementing PBF programmes.

Unraveling PBF effects beyond impact evaluation: results from a qualitative study in Cameroon.

INTRODUCTION: Performance-based financing (PBF) has acquired increased prominence as a means of reforming health system purchasing structures in low-income and middle-income countries. A number of impact evaluations have noted that PBF often produces mixed and heterogeneous effects. Still, little systematic effort has been channelled towards understanding what causes such heterogeneity, including looking more closely at implementation processes. METHODS: Our qualitative study aimed at closing this gap in knowledge by attempting to unpack the mixed and heterogeneous effects detected by the PBF impact evaluation in Cameroon to inform further implementation as the country scales up the PBF approach. We collected data at all levels of the health system (national, district, facility) and at the community level, using a mixture of in-depth interviews and focus group discussions. We combined deductive and inductive analytical techniques and applied analyst triangulation. RESULTS: Our findings indicate that heterogeneity in effects across facilities could be explained by pre-existing infrastructural weaknesses coupled with rigid administrative processes and implementation challenges, while heterogeneity across indicators could be explained by providers' practices, privileging services where demand-side barriers were less substantive. CONCLUSION: In light of the country's commitment to scaling up PBF, it follows that substantial efforts (particularly entrusting facilities with more financial autonomy) should be made to overcome infrastructural and demand-side barriers and to smooth implementation processes, thus, enabling healthcare providers to use PBF resources and management models to a fuller potential.

Context matters (but how and why?) A hypothesis-led literature review of performance based financing in fragile and conflict-affected health systems.

Performance-based financing (PBF) schemes have been expanding rapidly across low and middle income countries in the past decade, with considerable external financing from multilateral, bilateral and global health initiatives. Many of these countries have been fragile and conflict-affected (FCAS), but while the influence of context is acknowledged to be important to the operation of PBF, there has been little examination of how it affects adoption and implementation of PBF. This article lays out initial hypotheses about how FCAS contexts may influence the adoption, adaption, implementation and health system effects of PBF. These are then interrogated through a review of available grey and published literature (140 documents in total, covering 23 PBF schemes). We find that PBF has been more common in FCAS contexts, which were also more commonly early adopters. Very little explanation of the rationale for its adoption, in particular in relation with the contextual features, is given in programme documents. However, there are a number of factors which could explain this, including the greater role of external actors and donors, a greater openness to institutional reform, and lower levels of trust within the public system and between government and donors, all of which favour more contractual approaches. These suggest that rather than emerging despite fragility, conditions of fragility may favour the rapid emergence of PBF. We also document few emerging adaptations of PBF to humanitarian settings and limited evidence of health system effects which may be contextually driven, but these require more in-depth analysis. Another area meriting more study is the political economy of PBF and its diffusion across contexts.

Exploring implementation practices in results-based financing: the case of the verification in Benin.

BACKGROUND: Results-based financing (RBF) has been introduced in many countries across Africa and a growing literature is building around the assessment of their impact. These studies are usually quantitative and often silent on the paths and processes through which results are achieved and on the wider health system effects of RBF. To address this gap, our study aims at exploring the implementation of an RBF pilot in Benin, focusing on the verification of results. METHODS: The study is based on action research carried out by authors involved in the pilot as part of the agency supporting the RBF implementation in Benin. While our participant observation and operational collaboration with project's stakeholders informed the study, the analysis is mostly based on quantitative and qualitative secondary data, collected throughout the project's implementation and documentation processes. Data include project documents, reports and budgets, RBF data on service outputs and on the outcome of the verification, daily activity timesheets of the technical assistants in the districts, as well as focus groups with Community-based Organizations and informal interviews with technical assistants and district medical officers. RESULTS: Our analysis focuses on the actual practices of quantitative, qualitative and community verification. Results show that the verification processes are complex, costly and time-consuming, and in practice they end up differing from what designed originally. We explore the consequences of this on the operation of the scheme, on its potential to generate the envisaged change. We find, for example, that the time taken up by verification procedures limits the time available for data analysis and feedback to facility staff, thus limiting the potential to improve service delivery. Verification challenges also result in delays in bonus payment, which delink effort and reward. Additionally, the limited integration of the verification activities of district teams with their routine tasks causes a further verticalization of the health system. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight the potential disconnect between the theory of change behind RBF and the actual scheme's implementation. The implications are relevant at methodological level, stressing the importance of analyzing implementation processes to fully understand results, as well as at operational level, pointing to the need to carefully adapt the design of RBF schemes (including verification and other key functions) to the context and to allow room to iteratively modify it during implementation. They also question whether the rationale for thorough and costly verification is justified, or rather adaptations are possible.