56
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Global health initiative investments and health systems strengthening: a content analysis of global fund investments

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Millions of dollars are invested annually under the umbrella of national health systems strengthening. Global health initiatives provide funding for low- and middle-income countries through disease-oriented programmes while maintaining that the interventions simultaneously strengthen systems. However, it is as yet unclear which, and to what extent, system-level interventions are being funded by these initiatives, nor is it clear how much funding they allocate to disease-specific activities – through conventional ‘vertical-programming’ approach. Such funding can be channelled to one or more of the health system building blocks while targeting disease(s) or explicitly to system-wide activities.

          Methods

          We operationalized the World Health Organization health system framework of the six building blocks to conduct a detailed assessment of Global Fund health system investments. Our application of this framework framework provides a comprehensive quantification of system-level interventions. We applied this systematically to a random subset of 52 of the 139 grants funded in Round 8 of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (totalling approximately US$1 billion).

          Results

          According to the analysis, 37% (US$ 362 million) of the Global Fund Round 8 funding was allocated to health systems strengthening. Of that, 38% (US$ 139 million) was for generic system-level interventions, rather than disease-specific system support. Around 82% of health systems strengthening funding (US$ 296 million) was allocated to service delivery, human resources, and medicines & technology, and within each of these to two to three interventions. Governance, financing, and information building blocks received relatively low funding.

          Conclusions

          This study shows that a substantial portion of Global Fund’s Round 8 funds was devoted to health systems strengthening. Dramatic skewing among the health system building blocks suggests opportunities for more balanced investments with regard to governance, financing, and information system related interventions. There is also a need for agreement, by researchers, recipients, and donors, on keystone interventions that have the greatest system-level impacts for the cost-effective use of funds. Effective health system strengthening depends on inter-agency collaboration and country commitment along with concerted partnership among all the stakeholders working in the health system.

          Related collections

          Most cited references44

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          An assessment of interactions between global health initiatives and country health systems.

          (2009)
          Since 2000, the emergence of several large disease-specific global health initiatives (GHIs) has changed the way in which international donors provide assistance for public health. Some critics have claimed that these initiatives burden health systems that are already fragile in countries with few resources, whereas others have asserted that weak health systems prevent progress in meeting disease-specific targets. So far, most of the evidence for this debate has been provided by speculation and anecdotes. We use a review and analysis of existing data, and 15 new studies that were submitted to WHO for the purpose of writing this Report to describe the complex nature of the interplay between country health systems and GHIs. We suggest that this Report provides the most detailed compilation of published and emerging evidence so far, and provides a basis for identification of the ways in which GHIs and health systems can interact to mutually reinforce their effects. On the basis of the findings, we make some general recommendations and identify a series of action points for international partners, governments, and other stakeholders that will help ensure that investments in GHIs and country health systems can fulfil their potential to produce comprehensive and lasting results in disease-specific work, and advance the general public health agenda. The target date for achievement of the health-related Millennium Development Goals is drawing close, and the economic downturn threatens to undermine the improvements in health outcomes that have been achieved in the past few years. If adjustments to the interactions between GHIs and country health systems will improve efficiency, equity, value for money, and outcomes in global public health, then these opportunities should not be missed.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Human resources and health outcomes: cross-country econometric study.

            Only a few studies have investigated the link between human resources for health and health outcomes, and they arrive at different conclusions. We tested the strength and significance of density of human resources for health with improved methods and a new WHO dataset. We did cross-country multiple regression analyses with maternal mortality rate, infant mortality rate, and under-five mortality rate as dependent variables. Aggregate density of human resources for health was an independent variable in one set of regressions; doctor and nurse densities separately were used in another set. We controlled for the effects of income, female adult literacy, and absolute income poverty. Density of human resources for health is significant in accounting for maternal mortality rate, infant mortality rate, and under-five mortality rate (with elasticities ranging from -0.474 to -0.212, all p values < or = 0.0036). The elasticities of the three mortality rates with respect to doctor density ranged from -0.386 to -0.174 (all p values < or = 0.0029). Nurse density was not associated except in the maternal mortality rate regression without income poverty (p=0.0443). In addition to other determinants, the density of human resources for health is important in accounting for the variation in rates of maternal mortality, infant mortality, and under-five mortality across countries. The effect of this density in reducing maternal mortality is greater than in reducing child mortality, possibly because qualified medical personnel can better address the illnesses that put mothers at risk. Investment in human resources for health must be considered as part of a strategy to achieve the Millennium Development Goals of improving maternal health and reducing child mortality.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Framework for assessing governance of the health system in developing countries: gateway to good governance.

              Governance is thought to be a key determinant of economic growth, social advancement and overall development, as well as for the attainment of the MDGs in low- and middle-income countries. Governance of the health system is the least well-understood aspect of health systems. A framework for assessing health system governance (HSG) at national and sub-national levels is presented, which has been applied in countries of the Eastern Mediterranean. In developing the HSG framework key issues considered included the role of the state vs. the market; role of the ministries of health vs. other state ministries; role of actors in governance; static vs. dynamic health systems; and health reform vs. human rights-based approach to health. Four existing frameworks were considered: World Health Organization's (WHO) domains of stewardship; Pan American Health Organization's (PAHO) essential public health functions; World Bank's six basic aspects of governance; and United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) principles of good governance. The proposed HSG assessment framework includes the following 10 principles-strategic vision, participation and consensus orientation, rule of law, transparency, responsiveness, equity and inclusiveness, effectiveness and efficiency, accountability, intelligence and information, and ethics. The framework permits 'diagnoses of the ills' in HSG at the policy and operational levels and points to interventions for its improvement. In the case of Pakistan, where the framework was applied, a positive aspect was the growing participation and consensus orientation among stakeholders, while weaknesses were identified in relation to strategic vision, accountability, transparency, effectiveness and efficiency and rule of law. In using the HSG framework it needs to be recognized that the principles are value driven and not normative and are to be seen in the social and political context; and the framework relies on a qualitative approach and does not follow a scoring or ranking system. It does not directly address aid effectiveness but provides insight on the ability to utilize external resources and has the ability to include the effect of global health governance on national HSG as the subject itself gets better crystallized. The improved performance of the ministries of health and state health departments is at the heart of this framework. The framework helps raise the level of awareness among policymakers of the importance of HSG. The road to good governance in health is long and uneven. Assessing HSG is only the first step; the challenge that remains is to carry out effective governance in vastly different institutional contexts.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Global Health
                Global Health
                Globalization and Health
                BioMed Central
                1744-8603
                2013
                26 July 2013
                : 9
                : 30
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Socinstrasse 57, 4002, Basel, Switzerland
                [2 ]University of Basel, Petersplatz 1, 4003, Basel, Switzerland
                [3 ]Swiss Centre for International Health, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Socinstrasse 57, 4002, Basel, Switzerland
                [4 ]The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, Geneva, Switzerland
                [5 ]Imperial College London, South Kensington Campus, London SW7 2AZ, UK
                [6 ]Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard School of Public Health, Harvard University, Cambridge, USA
                Article
                1744-8603-9-30
                10.1186/1744-8603-9-30
                3750586
                23889824
                c0bdc685-925f-42e8-af09-53554c0929ee
                Copyright ©2013 Warren et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 14 August 2012
                : 3 July 2013
                Categories
                Research

                Health & Social care
                Health & Social care

                Comments

                Comment on this article