Institute of Development Studies

Permanent URI for this collection

https://repository.udsm.ac.tz/handle/123456789/259

Browse

Browsing Institute of Development Studies by Author "Borghi, Jo"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Bank accounts for public primary health care facilities: Reflections on implementation from three districts in Tanzania
    (WILLEY & Sons, 2019-01) Kuwawenaruwa, August; Remme, M; Mtei, Gemini; Makawia, Suzan; Maluka, Stephen; Kapologwe, Ntuli; Borghi, Jo
    Health care financing reforms are gaining popularity in a number of African countries to increase financial resources and promote financial autonomy, particularly at peripheral health care facilities. The paper explores the establishment of facility bank accounts at public primary facilities in Tanzania, with the intention of informing other countries embarking on such reform of the lessons learned from its implementation process. A case study approach was used, in which three district councils were purposively sampled. A total of 34 focus group discussions and 14 in‐depth interviews were conducted. Thematic content analysis was used during analysis. The study revealed that the main use of bank account revenue was for the purchase of drugs, medical supplies, and minor facility needs. To ensure accountability for funds, health care facilities had to submit monthly reports of expenditures incurred. District managers also undertook quality control of facility infrastructure, which had been renovated using facility resources and purchases of facility needs. Facility autonomy in the use of revenue retained in their accounts would improve the availability of drugs and service delivery. The experienced process of opening facility bank accounts, managing, and using the funds highlights the need to strengthen the capacity of staff and health‐governing committees.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Using Stakeholder Analysis to Support Moves towards Universal Coverage: Lessons from the SHIELD Project
    (Oxford University Press, 2012) Gilson, Lucy; Erasmus, Ermin; Borghi, Jo; Macha, Janet; Kamuzora, Peter; Mtei, Gemini
    Stakeholder analysis is widely recommended as a tool for gathering insights on policy actor interests in, positions on, and power to influence, health policy issues. Such information is recognized to be critical in developing viable health policy proposals, and is particularly important for new health care financing proposals that aim to secure universal coverage (UC). However, there remain surprisingly few published accounts of the use of stakeholder analysis in health policy development generally, and health financing specifically, and even fewer that draw lessons from experience about how to do and how to use such analysis. This paper, therefore, aims to support those developing or researching UC reforms to think both about how to conduct stakeholder analysis, and how to use it to support evidence-informed pro-poor health policy development. It presents practical lessons and ideas drawn from experience of doing stakeholder analysis around UC reforms in South Africa and Tanzania, combined with insights from other relevant material. The paper has two parts. The first presents lessons of experience for conducting a stakeholder analysis, and the second, ideas about how to use the analysis to support policy design and the development of actor and broader political management strategies. Comparison of experience across South Africa and Tanzania shows that there are some commonalities concerning which stakeholders have general interests in UC reform. However, differences in context and in reform proposals generate differences in the particular interests of stakeholders and their likely positioning on reform proposals, as well as in their relative balance of power. It is, therefore, difficult to draw cross-national policy comparisons around these specific issues. Nonetheless, the paper shows that cross-national policy learning is possible around the approach to analysis, the factors influencing judgements and the implications for, and possible approaches to, management of policy processes. Such learning does not entail generalization about which UC reform package offers most gain in any setting, but rather about how to manage the reform process within a particular context.