Examining the absorption of post-internship medical officers into the public sector at county-level in devolved Kenya: a qualitative case study.

BACKGROUND: After Kenya's decentralization and constitutional changes in 2013, 47 devolved county governments are responsible for workforce planning and recruitment including for doctors/medical officers (MO). Data from the Ministry of Health suggested that less than half of these MOs are being absorbed by the public sector between 2015 and 2018. We aimed to examine how post-internship MOs are absorbed into the public sector at the county-level, as part of a broader project focusing on Kenya's human resources for health. METHODS: We employed a qualitative case study design informed by a simplified health labour market framework. Data included interviews with 30 MOs who finished their internship after 2018, 10 consultants who have supervised MOs, and 51 county/sub-county-level managers who are involved in MOs' planning and recruitment. A thematic analysis approach was used to examine recruitment processes, outcomes as well as perceived demand and supply. RESULTS: We found that Kenya has a large mismatch between supply and demand for MOs. An increasing number of medical schools are offering training in medicine while the demand for MOs in the county-level public sector has not been increasing at the same pace due to fiscal resource constraints and preference for other workforce cadres. The local Department of Health put in requests and participate in interviews but do not lead the recruitment process and respondents suggested that it can be subject to political interference and corruption. The imbalance of supply and demand is leading to unemployment, underemployment and migration of post-internship MOs with further impacts on MOs' wages and contract conditions, especially in the private sector. CONCLUSION: The mismatched supply and demand of MO accompanied by problematic recruitment processes led to many MOs not being absorbed by the public sector and subsequent unemployment and underemployment. Although Kenya has ambitious workforce norms, it may need to take a more pragmatic approach and initiate constructive policy dialogue with stakeholders spanning the education, public and private health sectors to better align MO training, recruitment and management.

Examining the influence of health sector coordination on the efficiency of county health systems in Kenya.

BACKGROUND: Health systems are complex, consisting of multiple interacting structures and actors whose effective coordination is paramount to enhancing health system goals. Health sector coordination is a potential source of inefficiency in the health sector. We examined how the coordination of the health sector affects health system efficiency in Kenya. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative cross-sectional study, collecting data at the national level and in two purposely selected counties in Kenya. We collected data using in-depth interviews (n = 37) with national and county-level respondents, and document reviews. We analyzed the data using a thematic approach. RESULTS: The study found that while formal coordination structures exist in the Kenyan health system, duplication, fragmentation, and misalignment of health system functions and actor actions compromise the coordination of the health sector. These challenges were observed in both vertical (coordination within the ministry of health, within the county departments of health, and between the national ministry of health and the county department of health) and horizontal coordination mechanisms (coordination between the ministry of health or the county department of health and non-state partners, and coordination among county governments). These coordination challenges are likely to impact the efficiency of the Kenyan health system by increasing the transaction costs of health system functions. Inadequate coordination also impairs the implementation of health programmes and hence compromises health system performance. CONCLUSION: The efficiency of the Kenyan health system could be enhanced by strengthening the coordination of the Kenyan health sector. This can be achieved by aligning and harmonizing the intergovernmental and health sector-specific coordination mechanisms, strengthening the implementation of the Kenya health sector coordination framework at the county level, and enhancing donor coordination through common funding arrangements and integrating vertical disease programs with the rest of the health system. The ministry of health and county departments of health should also review internal organizational structures to enhance functional and role clarity of organizational units and staff, respectively. Finally, counties should consider initiating health sector coordination mechanisms between counties to reduce the fragmentation of health system functions across neighboring counties.

Management of human resources for health: implications for health systems efficiency in Kenya.

BACKGROUND: Human resources for health consume a substantial share of healthcare resources and determine the efficiency and overall performance of health systems. Under Kenya's devolved governance, human resources for health are managed by county governments. The aim of this study was to examine how the management of human resources for health influences the efficiency of county health systems in Kenya. METHODS: We conducted a case study using a mixed methods approach in two purposively selected counties in Kenya. We collected data through in-depth interviews (n = 46) with national and county level HRH stakeholders, and document and secondary data reviews. We analyzed qualitative data using a thematic approach, and quantitative data using descriptive analysis. RESULTS: Human resources for health in the selected counties was inadequately financed and there were an insufficient number of health workers, which compromised the input mix of the health system. The scarcity of medical specialists led to inappropriate task shifting where nonspecialized staff took on the roles of specialists with potential undesired impacts on quality of care and health outcomes. The maldistribution of staff in favor of higher-level facilities led to unnecessary referrals to higher level (referral) hospitals and compromised quality of primary healthcare. Delayed salaries, non-harmonized contractual terms and incentives reduced the motivation of health workers. All of these effects are likely to have negative effects on health system efficiency. CONCLUSIONS: Human resources for health management in counties in Kenya could be reformed with likely positive implications for county health system efficiency by increasing the level of funding, resolving funding flow challenges to address the delay of salaries, addressing skill mix challenges, prioritizing the allocation of health workers to lower-level facilities, harmonizing the contractual terms and incentives of health workers, and strengthening monitoring and supervision.

Tracking health sector priority setting processes and outcomes for human resources for health, five-years after political devolution: a county-level case study in Kenya.

BACKGROUND: Health sector priority setting in Low and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) entails balancing between a high demand and low supply of scarce resources. Human Resources for Health (HRH) consume the largest allocation of health sector resources in LMICs. Health sector decentralization continues to be promoted for its perceived ability to improve efficiency, relevance and participation in health sector priority setting. Following the 2013 devolution in Kenya, both health service delivery and human resource management were decentralized to county level. Little is known about priority setting practices and outcomes of HRH within decentralized health systems in LMICs. Our study sought to examine if and how the Kenyan devolution has improved health sector priority setting practices and outcomes for HRH. METHODS: We used a mixed methods case study design to examine health sector priority setting practices and outcomes at county level in Kenya. We used three sources of data. First, we reviewed all relevant national and county level policy and guidelines documents relating to HRH management. We then accessed and reviewed county records of HRH recruitment and distribution between 2013 and 2018. We finally conducted eight key informant interviews with various stakeholder involved in HRH priority setting within our study county. RESULTS: We found that HRH numbers in the county increased by almost two-fold since devolution. The county had two forms of HRH recruitment: one led by the County Public Services Board as outlined by policy and guidelines and a parallel, politically-driven recruitment done directly by the County Department of Health. Though there were clear guidelines on HRH recruitment, there were no similar guidelines on allocation and distribution of HRH. Since devolution, the county has preferentially staffed higher level hospitals over primary care facilities. Additionally, there has been local county level innovations to address some HRH management challenges, including recruiting doctors and other highly specialized staff on fixed term contract as opposed to permanent basis; and implementation of local incentives to attract and retain HRH to remote areas within the county. CONCLUSION: Devolution has significantly increased county level decision-space for HRH priority setting in Kenya. However, HRH management and accountability challenges still exist at the county level. There is need for interventions to strengthen county level HRH management capacity and accountability mechanisms beyond additional resources allocation. This will boost the realization of the country's efforts for promoting service delivery equity as a key goal - both for the devolution and the country's quest towards Universal Health Coverage (UHC).

Political economy analysis of sub-national health sector planning and budgeting: A case study of three counties in Kenya.

Devolution represented a concerted attempt to bring decision making closer to service delivery in Kenya, including within the health sector. This transformation created county governments with independent executive (responsible for implementing) and legislative (responsible for agenda-setting) arms. These new arrangements have undergone several growing pains that complicate management practices, such as planning and budgeting. Relatively little is known, however, about how these functions have evolved and varied sub-nationally. We conducted a problem-driven political economy analysis to better understand how these planning and budgeting processes are structured, enacted, and subject to change, in three counties. Key informant interviews (n = 32) were conducted with purposively selected participants in Garissa, Kisumu, and Turkana Counties; and national level in 2021, with participants drawn from a wide range of stakeholders involved in health sector planning and budgeting. We found that while devolution has greatly expanded participation in sub-national health management, it has also complicated and politicized decision-making. In this way, county governments now have the authority to allocate resources based on the preferences of their constituents, but at the expense of efficiency. Moreover, budgets are often not aligned with priority-setting processes and are frequently undermined by disbursements delays from national treasury, inconsistent supply chains, and administrative capacity constraints. In conclusion, while devolution has greatly transformed sub-national health management in Kenya with longer-term potential for greater accountability and health equity, short-to-medium term challenges persist in developing efficient systems for engaging a diverse array of stakeholders in planning and budgeting processes. Redressing management capacity challenges between and within counties is essential to ensure that the Kenya health system is responsive to local communities and aligned with the progressive aspirations of its universal health coverage movement.

Budget monitoring, accountability practices and their influence on the efficiency of county health systems in Kenya.

Public Finance Management (PFM) practices influence the attainment of health system goals. PFM processes are implemented within the budget cycle which entails the formulation, execution, and monitoring of government budgets. Budget monitoring and accountability actors, structures, and processes are important in improving the efficiency of health systems. This study examined how the budget monitoring and accountability processes influence the efficiency of county health systems in KenyaWe conducted a qualitative case study of four counties in Kenya selected based on their relative technical efficiency. We collected data using in-depth interviews with health and finance stakeholders (n = 70), and document reviews. We analyzed data using a thematic approach, informed by our study conceptual framework. We found that weak budget monitoring and accountability mechanisms compromised county health system efficiency by a) weakening the effective implementation of the budget formulation and execution steps of the budget cycle, b) enabling the misappropriation of public resources, and c) limiting evidence-informed decision-making by weakening feedback that would be provided by effective monitoring and accountability. Devolution meant that accountability actors were closer to implementation actors which promoted timely problem solving and the relevance of solutions. Internal audit practices were supportive and provided useful feedback to health system managers that facilitated improvements in budget formulation and execution. The efficiency of county health systems can be improved by strengthening the budget monitoring and accountability processes. This can be achieved by increasing the population's budget literacy, supporting participatory budgeting, synchronizing performance and financial accountability, implementing the existent budget monitoring and accountability mechanisms, rewarding efficiency, and sanctioning inefficiency.

Examining the influence of budget execution processes on the efficiency of county health systems in Kenya.

Public financial management (PFM) processes are a driver of health system efficiency. PFM happens within the budget cycle which entails budget formulation, execution and accountability. At the budget execution phase, budgets are implemented by spending as planned to generate a desired output or outcome. Understanding how the budget execution processes influence the use of inputs and the outcomes that result is important for maximizing efficiency. This study sought to explain how the budget execution processes influence the efficiency of health systems, an area that is understudied, using a case study of county health systems in Kenya. We conducted a concurrent mixed methods case study using counties classified as relatively efficient (n = 2) and relatively inefficient (n = 2). We developed a conceptual framework from a literature review to guide the development of tools and analysis. We collected qualitative data through document reviews and in-depth interviews (n = 70) with actors from health and finance sectors at the national and county level. We collected quantitative data from secondary sources, including budgets and budget reports. We analysed qualitative data using the thematic approach and carried out descriptive analyses on quantitative data. The budget execution processes within counties in Kenya were characterized by poor budget credibility, cash disbursement delays, limited provider autonomy and poor procurement practices. These challenges were linked to an inappropriate input mix that compromised the capacity of county health systems to deliver health-care services, misalignment between county health needs and the use of resources, reduced staff motivation and productivity, procurement inefficiencies and reduced county accountability for finances and performance. The efficiency of county health systems in Kenya can be enhanced by improving budget credibility, cash disbursement processes, procurement processes and provider autonomy.

Political economy analysis of subnational health management in Kenya, Malawi and Uganda.

The need to bolster primary health care (PHC) to achieve the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) targets for health is well recognized. In Eastern and Southern Africa, where governments have progressively decentralized health decision-making, health management is critical to PHC performance. While investments in health management capacity are important, so is improving the environment in which managers operate. Governance arrangements, management systems and power dynamics of actors can have a significant influence on health managers' ability to improve PHC access and quality. We conducted a problem-driven political economy analysis (PEA) in Kenya, Malawi and Uganda to explore local decision-making environments and how they affect management and governance practices for health. This PEA used document review and key informant interviews (N = 112) with government actors, development partners and civil societies in three districts or counties in each country (N = 9). We found that while decentralization should improve PHC by supporting better decisions in line with local priorities from community input, it has been accompanied by thick bureaucracy, path-dependent and underfunded budgets that result in trade-offs and unfulfilled plans, management support systems that are less aligned to local priorities, weak accountability between local government and development partners, uneven community engagement and insufficient public administration capacity to negotiate these challenges. Emergent findings suggest that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) not only resulted in greater pressures on health teams and budgets but also improved relations with central government related to better communication and flexible funding, offering some lessons. Without addressing the disconnection between the vision for decentralization and the reality of health managers mired in unhelpful processes and politics, delivering on PHC and universal health coverage goals and the SDG agenda will remain out of reach.