TY - JOUR
T1 - Accountability mechanisms for implementing a health financing option
T2 - the case of the basic health care provision fund (BHCPF) in Nigeria Lucy Gilson
AU - Uzochukwu, Benjamin
AU - Onwujekwe, Emmanuel
AU - Mbachu, Chinyere
AU - Okeke, Chinyere
AU - Molyneux, Sassy
AU - Gilson, Lucy
N1 - Funding Information:
The project was funded by the UK Aid from the UK Department for International Development (DFID) for the benefit of developing countries. The funding body had no role in the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of data and in writing the manuscript.
Funding Information:
BHCPF: Basic Healthcare Provision Fund; CREHS: Consortium for Research in Equitable Health Systems; CRF: Consolidated Revenue Fund; CSO: Civil society Organization CSO; DP: Development partners; FGD: Focus Group Discussions; FMOF: Federal Ministry of Finance; FMOH: Federal Ministry of Health; HFC: Health facility committees; IDI: In-depth interviews; LGA: Local Government Authority; LGHA: Local Government Health Authorities; MTEF&FSP: Medium Term Expenditure Framework and Fiscal Strategy Paper; NDHS: National Demographic Health Survey; NGO: Non-governmental organizations; NHAct: National Health Act; NHIS: National Health Insurance Scheme; NPHCDA: National Primary Health Care Development Agency; NSHIP: Nigeria State Health Investment Project; P4P: Payment for performance; PBF: Performance Based Financing; PHC: Primary Health Care; PHCUOR: PHC Under One Roof; RBF: Results Based Financing; SMOF: State Ministry of Finance; SMOH: State Ministry of Health; SPHCB: State Primary Health Care Boards; U5MR: Under 5 mortality rate
Funding Information:
The authors are members of the Consortium for Resilient and Responsive Health Systems (RESYST). This document is an output from a project funded by the UK Aid from the UK Department for International Development (DFID) for the benefit of developing countries. However, the views expressed and information contained in it are not necessarily those of or endorsed by DFID, which can accept no responsibility for such views or information or for any reliance placed on them.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 The Author(s).
PY - 2018/7/11
Y1 - 2018/7/11
N2 - Background: The Nigerian National Health Act proposes a radical shift in health financing in Nigeria through the establishment of a fund - Basic Healthcare Provision Fund, (BHCPF). This Fund is intended to improve the functioning of primary health care in Nigeria. Key stakeholders at national, sub-national and local levels have raised concerns over the management of the BHCPF with respect to the roles of various stakeholders in ensuring accountability for its use, and the readiness of the implementers to manage this fund and achieve its objectives. This study explores the governance and accountability readiness of the different layers of implementation of the Fund; and it contributes to the generation of policy implementation guidelines around governance and accountability for the Fund. Methods: National, state and LGA level respondents were interviewed using a semi structured tool. Respondents were purposively selected to reflect the different layers of implementation of primary health care and the levels of accountability. Different accountability layers and key stakeholders expected to implement the BHCPF are the Federal government (Federal Ministry of Health, NPHCDA, NHIS, Federal Ministry of Finance); the State government (State Ministry of Health, SPHCB, State Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Local Government); the Local government (Local Government Health Authorities); Health facilities (Health workers, Health facility committees (HFC) and External actors (Development partners and donors, CSOs, Community members). Results: In general, the strategies for accountability encompass planning mechanisms, strong and transparent monitoring and supervision systems, and systematic reporting at different levels of the healthcare system. Non-state actors, particularly communities, must be empowered and engaged as instruments for ensuring external accountability at lower levels of implementation. New accountability strategies such as result-based or performance-based financing could be very valuable. Conclusion: The key challenges to accountability identified should be addressed and these included trust, transparency and corruption in the health system, political interference at higher levels of government, poor data management, lack of political commitment from the State in relation to release of funds for health activities, poor motivation, mentorship, monitoring and supervision, weak financial management and accountability systems and weak capacity to implement suggested accountability mechanisms due to political interference with accountability structures.
AB - Background: The Nigerian National Health Act proposes a radical shift in health financing in Nigeria through the establishment of a fund - Basic Healthcare Provision Fund, (BHCPF). This Fund is intended to improve the functioning of primary health care in Nigeria. Key stakeholders at national, sub-national and local levels have raised concerns over the management of the BHCPF with respect to the roles of various stakeholders in ensuring accountability for its use, and the readiness of the implementers to manage this fund and achieve its objectives. This study explores the governance and accountability readiness of the different layers of implementation of the Fund; and it contributes to the generation of policy implementation guidelines around governance and accountability for the Fund. Methods: National, state and LGA level respondents were interviewed using a semi structured tool. Respondents were purposively selected to reflect the different layers of implementation of primary health care and the levels of accountability. Different accountability layers and key stakeholders expected to implement the BHCPF are the Federal government (Federal Ministry of Health, NPHCDA, NHIS, Federal Ministry of Finance); the State government (State Ministry of Health, SPHCB, State Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Local Government); the Local government (Local Government Health Authorities); Health facilities (Health workers, Health facility committees (HFC) and External actors (Development partners and donors, CSOs, Community members). Results: In general, the strategies for accountability encompass planning mechanisms, strong and transparent monitoring and supervision systems, and systematic reporting at different levels of the healthcare system. Non-state actors, particularly communities, must be empowered and engaged as instruments for ensuring external accountability at lower levels of implementation. New accountability strategies such as result-based or performance-based financing could be very valuable. Conclusion: The key challenges to accountability identified should be addressed and these included trust, transparency and corruption in the health system, political interference at higher levels of government, poor data management, lack of political commitment from the State in relation to release of funds for health activities, poor motivation, mentorship, monitoring and supervision, weak financial management and accountability systems and weak capacity to implement suggested accountability mechanisms due to political interference with accountability structures.
KW - Accountability mechanisms
KW - Basic health care provision fund
KW - Equity
KW - Nigeria
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85049811036&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/s12939-018-0807-z
DO - 10.1186/s12939-018-0807-z
M3 - Article
C2 - 29996838
AN - SCOPUS:85049811036
SN - 1475-9276
VL - 17
JO - International Journal for Equity in Health
JF - International Journal for Equity in Health
IS - 1
M1 - 100
ER -