Intern Presentation
Health Financing in Central and West Asia:
Country Studies of Pakistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyz Republic
Yeonhee Yang
CWRD/CWPF Intern
MPH-MBA student at Johns Hopkins University
September 09, 2015
Final Version (Presentation)
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this paper/presentation are the views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), or its Board of Governors, or the
governments they represent. ADB does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this paper and accepts no responsibility for any consequence of their use. Terminology used may not necessarily be consistent
with ADB official terms.
Outline
Background
Comparative Review of Health Financing in CW Asia
Country Studies
Recommendations
Conclusion
Outline
Background
Comparative Review of Health Financing in CW Asia
Country Studies
Recommendations
Conclusion
Health financing policy focuses on
how to move closer to UHC
Health financing is much more than a matter of raising money for health.
It is also a matter of who is asked to pay, when they pay, and how the money raised is spent.
(WHO, 2011)
Health
financing
functions
Health
financing
objectives
Health
financing
policy goal
Ultimate
health
system goal
Source: Adapted from WHO
How to raise?
How to allocate?
How to use?
Revenue collection
Pooling
Purchasing/provision
The way money is raised to pay
health system costs
The accumulation and management
of financial resources to re-distribute
the financial risk
The process of paying for health
services
Financial accessibility
Optimal use of resource
Sufficient and sustainable
resource generation
Universal Health Coverage
Improved and equitable health outcome
Analytical framework to undertake
a systemic review of health financing system
Health
financing
functions
Health
Level
financing
of
performance funding
Indicators
Health
financing
objectives
Health
financing
policy goal
Ultimate
health
system goal
How to raise?
How to allocate?
How to use?
Revenue collection
Pooling
Purchasing/provision
Level of
population
coverage
Level of
equity
financing
Sufficient and sustainable
resource generation
Degree of
financial risk
protection
Level
of
pooling
Level of
administrative
efficiency
Financial accessibility
Equity
in BP
delivery
Efficiency
in BP
delivery
Costeffectiveness
& equity in
BP definition
Optimal use of resource
Universal Health Coverage
Improved and equitable health outcome
Source: WHO-OASIS; Note: OASIS=Organizational ASsessment for Improving and Strengthening Health Financing; BP=Benefit package
There are huge gaps moving toward UHC
in Central and West Asia
In the region, fiscal space for health is low...
and burden on the direct payment
by households is high
General govt. health expenditure as % of total govt. expenditure, 2013
OOP expenditure on health as % of total expenditure on health, 2013
*Abuja Declaration (WHO): a pledge of allocating at least 15% of
annual government budget to improve the health sector.
Source: World Bank, WHO; Note: OOP=Out-of-pocket
*Result Framework for the OPH (ADB): OOP expenditure kept under 30% by 2030.
In spite of growth over the decade,
the spending on health in the region is low
Total health expenditure in US$ PPP per capita from private and public sources, 1995-2013
1200
1000
US$ PPP per capita
800
600
Low and middle income countries, 2013
400
200
1995
2000
2005
2010
2013
1995
2000
2005
2010
2013
1995
2000
2005
2010
2013
1995
2000
2005
2010
2013
1995
2000
2005
2010
2013
1995
2000
2005
2010
2013
1995
2000
2005
2010
2013
1995
2000
2005
2010
2013
1995
2000
2005
2010
2013
1995
2000
2005
2010
2013
Kazakhstan
Azerbaijan
Georgia
Armenia
Public
Source: World Bank, WHO; PPP=Purchasing power parity
Uzbekistan
Private
Turkmenistan
Kyrgyz
Republic
Tajikistan
Afghanistan
Pakistan
Low and middle income countries
and most of expenditures are financed by
private funds, especially out-of-pocket
Proportion of total health expenditure by financing agent, 2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
Percentage
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Turkmenistan
Kyrgystan
Kazakhstan
Uzbekistan
State budget
Armenia
Social security funds
Public funds
Source: World Bank, WHO; Note: VHI=Voluntary health insurance; OOP=Out-of-pocket
Pakistan
VHI
Tajikistan
Other
Azerbaijan
Afganistan
Georgia
OOP
Private funds
Outline
Background
Comparative Review of Health Financing in CW Asia
Country Studies
Pakistan: Leaky bucket
Uzbekistan
Kyrgyz Republic
Recommendations
Conclusion
In PAK, poverty gains are fragile
and health outcomes lag behind
Economic indicators
The 18th Constitutional Amendment
GDP per capita: US$ 1,275
Sixth most populous country in the world, reaching 182.1 million people
62.1% of population lives in rural area
60.1% of population is considered as the vulnerable
Administrative unit:
Four provinces: Punjab, Sindh, Baluchistan, KP
One federal capital territory: Islamabad Capital Territory
A group of federally administered tribal areas (FATA)
(30 June 2011)
Granted provinces long-promised autonomy and
empowerment in many parts of health system
The Ministry of Health was devolved to the
provinces
Health service delivery is primarily a provincial
matter while the federal government plays a
supportive and coordinating role
(created Ministry of Inter Provincial Coordination)
Health indicators
Life expectancy: 66 years
Infant mortality rate per 1,000 live births: 69.0 (LIMC: 44.0)
Under-five mortality rate per 1,000 live births: 112.6 (LMIC: 93.4)
Maternal mortality rate per 100,000 live births: 170 (LMIC: 240)
Births attended by skilled health personnel: 52% (LMIC: 34%)
Measles immunization among 1-year-old: 61% (LMIC: 76%)
Density of health workforce per 10,000 population;
Physician: 8.3 (LMIC: 7.9)
Nursing/midwifery personnel: 5.7 (LMIC: 18.0)
Burden of disease by cause group, 2012
Pakistan
20,789
LMIC
16,641
5,000
11,796
13,554
4,893
4,611
10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000
DALYs per 100,000 population
Group I: Communicable, maternal, perinatal and nutritional conditions
Group II: Noncommunicable diseases
Group III: Injuries
Source: World Bank, WHO; Note: LMIC=Lower-middle-income countries; DALY=Disability-adjusted life year
10
Total health spending in PAK is
extremely low, compared to other LMICs
Pakistan
Lower-middleincome countries
Selected health financing index
2000
2012
2000
2012
Total health expenditure as % of GDP
3.0%
2.8%
4.0%
4.1%
Total health expenditure, per capita (US$ PPP)
$80.6
$122.4
$99.5
$217.5
General govt. health expenditure as % of total govt. expenditure
3.5%
4.7%
6.1%
6.2%
General govt. health expenditure as % of total health expenditure
21.7%
36.9%
21.7%
36.9%
OOP expenditure as % of total health expenditure
63.4%
54.8%
58.6%
54.8%
OOP expenditure as % of private expenditure on health
81.0%
86.8%
81.0%
87.2%
Private prepaid plans as % private expenditure on health
9.6%
12.2%
0.3%
0.6%
External resources for health as % total expenditure on health
0.8%
4.9%
2.7%
3.2%
Source: World Bank, WHO
11
Public financing system is highly fragmented,
and the use of private services has increased
Tax-financed
Source/
collection
MoD
Purchasing
MoD
Provision
Population
Province / district
administrations
Federal budget
Pooling
Military
Health
Care
system
Social security
Several vertical
programs
through MoIPC
PDoH
Each
autonomous
body
Each
institution
PDoH
Each
autonomous
bodies
ESSI
(province level)
Contracted
networks of
health
providers
Contracted
networks of
health
providers
3-tier public
providers
The 18th
amendment
in 2011
Employers
contributions
(BHU, MCHC,
RHC, THQ,
DHQ, provincial
tertiary care)
Coverage
Coverage
Coverage
Coverage
Military
Each
province
Autonomous
bodies
employers
ESSIregistered
employers
(2.0%)
(4.4%)
(9.7%)
(Gov employee: 4.9%)
Private funds
Households
OOP
Private
providers
(Fee-forservice)
*except from private employers
(0.6%) and safety nets (0.2%)
Uninsured*: 78.1%
(Coverage)
Source: Authors compilation; Note: MoD=Ministry of Defense; MoIPC=Ministry of Inter Provincial Coordination; PDoM=Provincial department of Health; ESSI=Employees Social Security
Institute; BHU=Basic Health Unit; RHC=Rural Health Center; MCHC=Maternal and Child Health Center; THQ=Tehsil Headquarters Hospital; DHQ=Districts Headquarter Hospital
12
In all aspects, PAKs health financing
performance is low
High
Level of
funding
Level of
population
coverage
Level of
financial risk
protection
Level of
equity in
financing
Level of
pooling across
the financing
system
Level of
efficiency and
equity in the
delivery of BP
Degree of
costeffectiveness
and equity
consideration
in BP scheme
Low
Level of
administrative
efficiency
---
Share of OOP medical spending in household
budgets by income quintiles, 2005-2006
Shocks faced by
the poor/vulnerable, 2005
Law and order
3%
Economic
shocks
28%
Trends of proportion of external resources
for health, 2000-2013
Family matters
4%
Health shocks
54%
Agricultural
shocks
4% Natural
calamities
7%
- 54.8% of external resources were not allocated to any
provinces or to any programs in 2012
- 11% of the government health expenditures are used in
administrative work in 2012
Source: Authors analysis based on PSLSMS, PSNS, HIES, NHA, etc; Note: OOP=Out-of-pocket
13
PAK: Problem tree for health financing
Poor and inequitable
health outcome
Constrained economic
growth
Inequity to access
appropriate health service
Increased poverty gap due to
catastrophic health expenditure
Effects
Core Problem
Financial hardship for the poor/vulnerable
Protection through
pre-paid mechanism
is limited
Causes
Public services
are de facto
paid
No statutory
explicit BP
scheme
No VHI
mechanism
VHI-unfriendly
environment
(lack of regular capacity
and affordability)
Various investment
level on health
across provinces
Capacity of risk
distribution is weak and
less effective
Highly frequent
pooling system
(institutional /
provincial level)
Predominant play of
private sectors w/o curb
on high cost expansion
Scarcity of
public
health
facilities
Poor quality of
services and
distrust for public
health providers
Extremely low public funding
Low
revenue
collection
No earmarked tax
for health
Source: Authors analysis; Note: BP=Benefit package; VHI=Voluntary health insurance
High inefficiency
of public resource
management
No government
purchasing
power
Weak integrated
health sector policy
and planning
No monitoring and
evaluation
No
established
referral
patterns
No regulation
of payment
for private
sector
No effective control
of multi-channel
payment system
Public sectors are
choked pipes
Lack of incentives to
improve efficiency in
service delivery
14
Outline
Background
Comparative Review of Health Financing in CW Asia
Country Studies
Pakistan
Uzbekistan: Rocky road from the Semashko model
Kyrgyz Republic
Recommendations
Conclusion
15
Overall health outcomes in UZB are commensurate
with those in LMICs, facing double burden of disease
Economic indicators
Semashko model in the Soviet period
GDP per capita: US$ 1,878
Population is 30.2 million, accounting for about 40% of Central
Asias total
63.8% of population lives in rural area
Ranked 102 out of 169 countries on the UNDPs Human
Development Index
Administrative unit:
12 regions (viloyats)
One autonomous republic: Karakalpakstan
One administrative capital: Tashkent
Highly centralized planning with minimum
discretion allowed to local managers and a strong
emphasis on curative services
Characterized by a large network of providers, a
high degree of specialization, and input-based
financing
Made tangible progress, including financial
protection through universal access to basic health
services and success in fighting infectious
diseases
Health indicators
Life expectancy: 69 years
Infant mortality rate per 1,000 live births: 36.7 (LIMC: 44.0)
Under-five mortality rate per 1,000 live births: 63.9 (LMIC: 93.4)
Maternal mortality rate per 100,000 live births: 36 (LMIC: 240)
Measles immunization among 1-year-old: 97% (LMIC: 76%)
Density of health workforce per 10,000 population;
Physician: 25.3 (LMIC: 7.9)
Nursing/midwifery personnel: 119.4 (LMIC: 18.0)
Pharmaceutical personnel: 0.4 (LMIC: 4.2)
Burden of disease by cause group, 2012
Uzbekistan
6,840
LMIC
14,571
16,641
5,000
2,713
13,554
4,611
10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000
DALYs per 100,000 population
Group I: Communicable, maternal, perinatal and nutritional conditions
Group II: Noncommunicable diseases
Group III: Injuries
Source: World Bank, WHO; Note: LMIC=Lower-middle-income countries; DALY=Disability-adjusted life year
16
Government health expenditure in UZB are
higher than peer groups, but cant lower costs
to households
Uzbekistan
Lower-middleincome countries
Selected health financing index
2000
2012
2000
2012
Total health expenditure as % of GDP
5.3%
6.1%
4.0%
4.1%
$103.5
$305.6
$99.5
$217.5
General govt. health expenditure as % of total govt. expenditure
8.7%
9.6%
6.1%
6.2%
General govt. health expenditure as % of total health expenditure
47.5%
51.1%
21.7%
36.9%
OOP expenditure as % of total health expenditure
52.3%
46.0%
58.6%
54.8%
OOP expenditure as % of private expenditure on health
99.7%
94.0%
81.0%
87.2%
Private prepaid plans as % private expenditure on health
0.6%
5.6%
0.3%
0.6%
External resources for health as % total expenditure on health
6.7%
1.4%
2.7%
3.2%
Total health expenditure, per capita (US$ PPP)
Source: World Bank, WHO; Note: PPP=Purchasing power parity
17
Inefficiency inherited from the former
Soviet system
Tax-financed
Source/
collection
Viloyat and tumans/city administrations
Private funds
Republican budget
(Region)
Pooling
Viloyat health department,
Viloyat finance department
Republican budget
Purchasing
Viloyat health department,
Viloyat finance department
Ministry of Health
Purchasing-provider spilt
capitation rate
(rural)
Provision
Households
OOP
Partially
Integration
line-item budgeting
& Self-financing
(city)
SVPs
Polyclinics
Viloyat/city
hospital
Republican
health facilities
SRBs
Coverage
Population
General population
Prevalent
Informal payments
Source: Authors compilation; Note: OOP=Out-of-pocket; SVP=Rural physician point; SRB=Outpatient clinics of central rayon hospital
18
results in households having financial
impediments in seeking healthcare
High
Level of
population
coverage
Level of
funding
Level of
financial risk
protection
Level of
equity in
financing
Level of
pooling across
the financing
system
Level of
efficiency and
equity in the
delivery of BP
Degree of
costeffectiveness
and equity
consideration
in BP scheme
Low
Level of
administrative
efficiency
---
Share of OOP medical spending in household
budgets by income quintiles, 2003
4.0
Financial barriers to health care
in Ferghana, 2001
0.60
3.8
3.4
0.50
Informal-to-formal payments
3.0
3.0
% of total expenditure
Incidence of informal payment
in rural areas, 2005
2.5
2.3
2.0
1.0
Poorest
0.49
0.45
0.44
Q2
0.40
0.30
Q3
0.26
0.24
0.19
0.20
0.18
0.10
Richest
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
140.0
% of those seeking health care in the past 30 days
0.0
Poorest
Q2
Q3
Q4
Richest
0.00
Poorest
Q2
Q3
Q4
Richest
State
doctor
Private
doctor
Source: Authors analysis based on Living Standards Assessment, Cashin et al. etc; Note: OOP=Out-of-pocket
Did not seek health care because not enough money
Finding the money to pay for health care was difficult
Needed to borrow money to pay for health care
19
UZB: Problem tree for health financing
Poor and inequitable
health outcome
Constrained economic
growth
Inequity to access
appropriate health service
Increased poverty gap due to
catastrophic health expenditure
Effects
Core Problem
Financial hardship for the poor/vulnerable
Protection through
pre-paid mechanism
is limited
Informal payment is
prevalent
Causes
Lack of
medical
supplies
Low salary
of health
workers
Shallow
BP scheme
Insufficient public funding
Low level of
external aids
Inefficient
government
revenue
Various investment
level on health
across oblast
Inefficient
resource
management
No government
purchasing
power
Capacity of risk
distribution is weak and
less effective
No VHI
mechanism
Frequent
pooling system
(vlioyat level)
Primary care is underutilized
Lack of quality
in primary care
No established
referral
procedure
VHI-unfriendly
environment
(lack of regular
capacity and demand)
Rigid input-based
financing in hospital
(line-item budgeting)
Source: Authors analysis; Note: BP=Benefit package; VHI=Voluntary health insurance
No monitoring
and evaluation
(data scarcity)
20
Outline
Background
Comparative Review of Health Financing in CW Asia
Country Studies
Pakistan
Uzbekistan
Kyrgyz Republic: Regional leader in health system reform
Recommendations
Conclusion
21
KGZ was quicker to embrace change and
develop comprehensive reform programs
Major changes in health
financing functions
Integrated the Health Policy Analysis and
Monitoring Unit under MoHs structure (2006)
Introduction of the Mandatory
Health Insurance Fund
(MHIF) and purchaserprovider spilt
Introduction of State
Guarantee Benefit
Package (SGBP) and
official co-payments
Replacement of line-item
health financing with new
provider payment methods
for the use of MHIF
Hospital: case-based
payment
PHC: capitation
Pooling of funds at
oblast level
1991 1996
1998
Health Reform Programs
Kyrgyz Republics
independence
2000
Launch of Additional
Drug Package (ADP)
providing drug benefits
to citizens enrolled in
the MHI
2002
2004
Manas (1996-2006)
Reforming the health care delivery system with the aim of
strengthening primary health care, developing family
medicine and restructuring the hospital sector
Reforming health financing, including introduction of
outcome-based payment methods
Improving medical education and developing human
resources
Improving the provision with pharmaceuticals
Improving quality of care
Strengthening public health
Introducing new health management methods in the
context of greater autonomy of health facilities
Source: Authors compilation
Established the Health Policy Analysis Center,
in close collaboration with MHIF (2009)
Pooling of funds at
national/republican level
(single payer system)
Improvement of
purchasing
arrangements of the
MHIF and the Ministry of
Health
Expansion of copayment exemptions
enrolled in the MHI
2006
2008
State program for NCD
prevention (2013-2020)
National program for TB
(2012-2016)
Salary
increase
for health
workers
2010
Manas Taalimi (2006-2010)
Lessons from Manas
Improving equity and
accessibility of health services
Reducing the financial burden
on the population
Increasing effectiveness of the
health system
Improving quality of care
Increasing responsiveness and
transparency of the health
system
2012
Perinatal program (20082017)
State program for HIV
prevention (2012-2016)
2014
2016
Den Sooluk (2012-2016)
Improving quality of care
Creating a strong link between
program activities and their
impact on health gains in four
priority areas;
Cardiovascular disease
Maternal and child health
TB
HIV infection
Maintaining hard-fought gains in
financial protection, access and
efficiency of health services
22
Most of health financing indicators in KGZ
are ahead those in other LMICs
Lower-middleincome countries
Kyrgyz Republic
Selected health financing index
2000
2012
2000
2012
Total health expenditure as % of GDP
4.7%
7.0%
4.0%
4.1%
76.1
$208.6
$99.5
$217.5
General govt. health expenditure as % of total govt. expenditure
12.0%
12.2%
6.1%
6.2%
General govt. health expenditure as % of total health expenditure
44.3%
60.2%
21.7%
36.9%
OOP expenditure as % of total health expenditure
49.8%
35.2%
58.6%
54.8%
OOP expenditure as % of private expenditure on health
89.3%
88.5%
81.0%
87.2%
Private prepaid plans as % private expenditure on health
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.6%
External resources for health as % total expenditure on health
6.0%
12.2%
2.7%
3.2%
Total health expenditure, per capita (US$ PPP)
Sector-wide approach to coordinate the external funds
20.0
15.2
Percentage (%)
Annually
0.6%
has been gradually decreasing the donor dependency
15.0
10.0
8.7
6.7
6.7
5.0
0.0
3.3
2006
3.9
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
External resources for health (% of total expenditure on health)
Health expenditure, total (% of GDP)
Health expenditure, public (% of GDP)
Source: World Bank, WHO; Note: PPP=Purchasing power parity
23
by squeezing efficiency gains out of the system
and using the savings to improve the coverage
Tax-financed
Source/
collection
Local budget (rayon/city
and ayilokmottu (rural))
Social security
Private funds
Social Fund
Republican budget
Households
(earmarked
2% payroll tax)
Complimentary
Pooling
Republican MHIF
(nation-level pool)
SGBP administered by republican MHIF (single-payer)
Purchasing
Health services not
included in the SGBP
Coverage
General population
Coverage
Population
FGPs, oblast and rayon hospitals,
private pharmacies, etc.
SGBP:
Type, scope and
conditions for providing
health services free and
based on benefits
Source: Authors compilation;
Note: MHIF=Mandatory Health Insurance Fund; SGBP=State-guaranteed benefit package; PHC=Primary health care; FGP=family group practices
Service coverage
Provision
Co-payment
Contract (PHC: capitation, hospital: case-based payment)
24
The KGZ health reform is successful,
but more efforts will be required
The financial protection and access improved significantly
Total OOP payments share of total household expenditure, 2003-2009
8.0%
% who needed but did not seek care due to distance or
affordability, 2000-2009
11.2%
12.0%
7.1%
10.0%
5.5%
6.0%
4.9%
4.4%
5.2%5.3%
5.0%
4.2%
3.9%
3.6%
4.0%
3.6%
4.5%
3.9%4.0%
8.0%
6.3%
6.0%
2.9%
4.4%
4.0%
2.0%
3.1%
2.0%
0.0%
Poorest
3
2003
2006
Richest
0.0%
2000
2003
2006
2009
2009
but the financing system is not targeted well to diseases or the poor
Coverage of co-payment exemptions policies, 2010
Burden of disease by cause group, 2012
% coverage of population
60
50
50
47
48
KGZ
45
5,767
13,554
4,611
39
40
30
LMIC
16,641
15,300
3,421
20
0
5,000
10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000
10
DALY per 100,000 population
0
Poorest 20%
Q2
Q3
Q4
Richest 20%
Current policy (covers 47.6% of population)
Group I: Communicable, maternal, perinatal and nutritional conditions
Group II: Noncommunicable diseases
Group III: Injuries
Source: World Bank, KIHS, WHO; Note: OOP=Out-of-pocket; DALY=Disability-adjusted life year
25
The KGZ reforms can be lessons learned to
countries with overcapacity but limited fiscal space
Successes are in part due to the comprehensive approach, not a single instruments or magic bullet
Complex reforms require careful sequencing of various reform steps
Paying attention to institutional aspects was important in order to ensure sustainable benefits
Phased implementation and careful sequencing were an effective implementation approach and helped
build capacity and stakeholder support as well as learning by doing
Strong government coordination and collaboration with the development partners facilitated
harmonized support for reform design and implementation
Well-developed health information system that facilitated effective research-to-policy channels and
central budget planning
Positive policy cycle in Kyrgyz Republic
Problem
definition
and
Options
development
Political
decision
Piloting
and
Learning
from
evidence
Evaluation
and
Redesign
Scaling
Embedding
in legal,
regulatory
framework
Health information system
Source: Authors analysis, World Bank, the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine
26
Outline
Background
Comparative Review of Health Financing in CW Asia
Country Studies
Recommendations
Conclusions
27
Comprehensive and sector-wide approach is
necessary for PAKs health reforms
Poor and inequitable
health outcome
Constrained economic
growth
Inequity to access
appropriate health service
Increased poverty gap due to
catastrophic health expenditure
Effects
Core Problem
Financial hardship for the poor/vulnerable
Protection through
pre-paid mechanism
is limited
Causes
Public services
are de facto
paid
No statutory
explicit BP
scheme
No VHI
mechanism
VHI-unfriendly
environment
(lack of regular capacity
and affordability)
Various investment
level on health
across provinces
Capacity of risk
distribution is weak and
less effective
Highly frequent
pooling system
(institutional /
provincial level)
Predominant play of
private sectors w/o curb
on high cost expansion
Scarcity of
public
health
facilities
Poor quality of
services and
distrust for public
health providers
Extremely low public funding
Low
revenue
collection
No earmarked tax
for health
No
established
referral
patterns
No regulation
of payment
for private
sector
No effective control
of multi-channel
payment system
High inefficiency
of public resource
management
No government
purchasing
power
Weak integrated
health sector policy
and planning
No monitoring and
evaluation
Lack of incentives to
improve efficiency in
service delivery
28
Comprehensive and sector-wide approach is
necessary for PAKs health reforms
Poor and inequitable
health outcome
Constrained economic
growth
Inequity to access
appropriate health service
Increased poverty gap due to
catastrophic health expenditure
Effects
Core Problem
Financial hardship for the poor/vulnerable
Protection through
pre-paid mechanism
is limited
Causes
Public services
are de facto
paid
No statutory
explicit BP
scheme
No VHI
mechanism
VHI-unfriendly
environment
(lack of regular capacity
and affordability)
Various investment
level on health
across provinces
Capacity of risk
distribution is weak and
less effective
Highly frequent
pooling system
(institutional /
provincial level)
Predominant play of
private sectors w/o curb
on high cost expansion
Scarcity of
public
health
facilities
Poor quality of
services and
distrust for public
health providers
Extremely low public funding
Low
revenue
collection
No earmarked tax
for health
No
established
referral
patterns
In Punjab
No regulation
of payment
for private
sector
No effective control
of multi-channel
payment system
High inefficiency
of public resource
management
No government
purchasing
power
Weak integrated
health sector policy
and planning
No monitoring and
evaluation
Lack of incentives to
improve efficiency in
service delivery
29
Flagship programs can be identified through
integration of operational focus in PAK
Federal
Project loan / result-based financing for national health insurance
Financing
institutional design
Provincial
Sequencing of various reform steps, beyond health financing
Possible solutions may include
Increase provincial funding for health
Strengthen government purchasing power
Establish appropriate referral process
Introduce the research-to-policy channel
Improve geographical accessibility eg.
building hospitals, training heath workers
Establish the official co-payment and/or the
user-fee process
but should be carefully considered
with federal programs and/or directions
Health
financing
ADBs
operational
focus
Health
infrastructure
Health
governance
Federalprovincial
coordination
ICT, hospitals,
health workers
and long-term pipeline development in line with country partnership strategy
30
Reducing inefficiency and re-utilizing its
savings can address the core problem in UZB
Poor and inequitable
health outcome
Constrained economic
growth
Inequity to access
appropriate health service
Increased poverty gap due to
catastrophic health expenditure
Effects
Core Problem
Causes
Financial hardship for the poor/vulnerable
Protection through
pre-paid mechanism
is limited
Informal payment is
prevalent
Lack of
medical
supplies
Low salary
of health
workers
Shallow
BP scheme
Insufficient public funding
Inefficient
government
revenue
Various investment
level on health
across oblast
Inefficient
resource
management
No government
purchasing
power
Capacity of risk
distribution is weak and
less effective
No VHI
mechanism
Frequent
pooling system
(vlioyat level)
Primary care is underutilized
Lack of quality
in primary care
No established
referral
procedure
VHI-unfriendly
environment
(lack of regular
capacity and demand)
Rigid input-based
financing in hospital
(line-item budgeting)
No monitoring
and evaluation
(data scarcity)
31
Traditional
model
PPP can create efficiency incentives for
the private sector by linking payment to
specific performance criteria in UZB and KGZ
Government service
Initiator
(defines services
and area)
Selector
(who chooses
provider)
Manager
Production
Infrastructure
Source of
Financing
Government
Government
Government
Government
Government
Contracting can strengthen the public model
under UZB and KGZs situations
New PPP
model
Greater focus on the achievement of measurable results if contracts define
objectively verifiable outputs and outcomes
Using the private sectors greater flexibility, efficiency, and generally
better staff morale to improve services and expand access to needed
services
Use competition to increase effectiveness and efficiency
Allow governments to focus more on other roles that they are uniquely
placed to undertake, such as planning, standard setting, financing, regulation
and the various public health functions
Government has more
stewardship
Empirical evidence to work
well on a larger scale
Management
contracts
Government
Government
Private sector
Government
Government
Service delivery
contract
(clinical/non-clinical)
Government
Government
Private sector
Private sector
Government
Source: Authors analysis based on Loevinsohn B, et al.
32
PPP can be introduced not only in service
delivery, but also in medical supply
Target diseases on the companys pipeline
as well as national disease priority
MDR-TB
Stage 2
HIV
Stage 1
Janssen GPH
Building capacity (learning-by-doing) is a main objective
of our work. And partnership with development agencies is
central to all that we do.
Director, Janssen GPH
NGO/academia
Agreement with PATH, IPM
Royalty free license
Implement clinical trials targeted to the vulnerable
(women)
R&D expertise
Ensure access the treatment through affordable
pricing strategy
Building capacity and gains
in regard to clinical outcome,
accessibility to modern technology,
and/or information system Bi/multilateral Agencies
$30 million of drug
supply
Treatment protocols
Trainings for disease
management programs
Agreement with USAID
Implement the national part clinical targeted to
the vulnerable (women)
Engage with the global TB community to solicit
support
Collaborate with IDA (International Development Association)
A procurement agent for the Stop TB
Partnerships Global Drug Facility (GDF)
Facilitate access to quality-assured medicines
Source: Interview and news articles from Janssen Global Public Health; Note: IPM=International Partnership for Microbicides; MDR-TB=multi-drug resistant tuberculosis
33
Contribution of ADB on health financing will
support inclusiveness and reduce vulnerabilities,
through UHC achievement
ADBs Strategy 2020 Mid-term Review
By 2020, ADB will have expanded health operation
to 3-5% of its annual process
CWRD target: $XX XXXX
processing in 2015
No health intervention
in the pipeline
CWRD should be processing $XXXX XXXX
health interventions each year
Health Infrastructure
Health Financing
Health Governance
Central and West Asia
Universal Health Coverage in Asia and Pacific
Inclusive Economic Growth
Fighting poverty, improving lives
34
Acknowledgement
for the hottest EVER summer ;-)
Direct supervision of work
Life in ADB
Michiel Van der Auwera (CWPF)
Eduardo Banzon (SDCC)
Betty Wilkinson (CWPF)
Willdon Oller (BPMSD)
CWPF IS/NS
ADBK Staffs
and 2015 ADB Intern Fellows!
Support and review in the country context
Munir Abro (PRM)
Mamatkalil Razaev (KYRM)
Nargiza Talipova (CWUW)
Advisory / Interview
Susann Roth (SDCC)
Andaleeb Alam (YP)
Gerard Anderson (Professor, JHU)
Sachiko Ozawa (Assistant Scientist, JHU)
Hwayoung Lee (Postdoctoral Fellow, SNU)
Hyobum Jang (Fellowship, WHO WPRO)
Hoon Sang Lee (Senior Health Advisor, KOICA)
Enrique Esteban (Director, Janssen GPH)
35
Thank You!
Questions?
[email protected]
[email protected]
https://www.linkedin.com/in/yeonheeyang
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this paper/presentation are the views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), or its Board of Governors, or the
governments they represent. ADB does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this paper and accepts no responsibility for any consequence of their use. Terminology used may not necessarily be consistent
with ADB official terms.
36
Appendix
37
Main characteristics
Model
Public financing: Tax-based vs. Payroll tax
Beveridge model
Bismarck model
Also known as National Health
Services
Named after William Beveridge who
designed Britains National Health
Service in 1942
Also known as Social Security
based healthcare systems
First established by Bismarck in
Germany in late 1800s
Health services almost entirely financed by tax
revenues
Government collects funds (tax) and also
(generally) is the provides (or contracts them)
health services
Pooling takes place at Ministry of Health (federal)
level
Example of single-payer system; one entity (eg.
a government-run organization) collects all health
care funds and pays out all health care costs.
Compulsory earmarked payroll contributions;
employer-based health insurance because
covers formal sector health workers in many
countries
Clear link between these contributions and a set
of defined rights for the insured population
Financing and provision are separated in many
countries
Source: Authors compilation, based on JHSPH class Health Financing in LMIC by Prof. Ozawa
38
Purchasing Mechanisms: Pros/Cons
Payment
mechanism
Characteristics
Fee-forservice
Capitation
Determined prospectively, paid
retrospectively
Payment based on quantity of
services provided
Determined prospectively, paid
prospectively
Payment based on patient head
count
Advantages
Incentive to provide services
Incentive to operate efficiently
Predictable expenses for fund
holder
Good if you have a healthy
population
Eliminates supplier-induced
demand
Moderate administrative costs
Disadvantages
Cost escalation
Incentives for Supplier-induced demand
Unpredictable expenses for fund holder
Disincentive to provide care
Avoid sick & costly patients (creamskimming)
Possible cost shifting (referral to another
provider)
Financial risk may put provider in debt
Case-based
(include DRG)
Global budget
Line-item
budget
Determined prospectively, paid
retrospectively
Payment based on patients
case/condition
Determined prospectively, paid
prospectively
Payment based on the
organizations budget
Determined prospectively, paid
prospectively
Payment based on each line in
the organizations budget
High administrative costs (DRG
classification)
Less suitable for out-patient care (difficult
to define case)
Incentive to select low risks within case
categories
Unpredictable expenses for fund holder
No direct incentives to be efficient
Disincentive to provide care
Incentive to maintain status quo
No direct incentives to be efficient
Disincentive to provide care
Resources are fixed & cannot be
reallocated
Incentive to operate efficiently
Low administrative costs
Predictable expenses for fund
holder
Permit reallocation of resources
Allow central control
Desirable when local management
is weak
Predictable expenses for fund
holder
Source: Authors compilation, based on JHSPH class Health Financing in LMIC by Prof. Ozawa; Note: DRG=Diagnostic-related groups
39
PPP in Health: Wide Range of Options
Design &
construction
Detailed
designs
Building
construction
Medical
equipment
Capital
financing
Source: IFC
Non-clinical
services
IT
equipment &
services
Maintenance
Food
Laundry
Cleaning
Security
Primary care
Primary care
Public health
Vaccinations
Maternal &
child health
Clinical
support
services
Lab analysis
Diagnostic
tests
Medical
equipment
maintenance
Ambulance
services
Specialized
clinical
services
Dialysis
Radio-therapy
Day surgery
Other
specialist
services
Hospital
management
Management
of entire
hospital or
network of
hospitals
and/or clinics
40