Promoting universal financial protection: health insurance for the poor in Georgia--a case study.

BACKGROUND: The present study focuses on the program "Medical Insurance for the Poor (MIP)" in Georgia. Under this program, the government purchased coverage from private insurance companies for vulnerable households identified through a means testing system, targeting up to 23% of the total population. The benefit package included outpatient and inpatient services with no co-payments, but had only limited outpatient drug benefits. This paper presents the results of the study on the impact of MIP on access to health services and financial protection of the MIP-targeted and general population. METHODS: With a holistic case study design, the study employed a range of quantitative and qualitative methods. The methods included document review and secondary analysis of the data obtained through the nationwide household health expenditure and utilisation surveys 2007-2010 using the difference-in-differences method. RESULTS: The study findings showed that MIP had a positive impact in terms of reduced expenditure for inpatient services and total household health care costs, and there was a higher probability of receiving free outpatient benefits among the MIP-insured. However, MIP insurance had almost no effect on health services utilisation and the households' expenditure on outpatient drugs, including for those with MIP insurance, due to limited drug benefits in the package and a low claims ratio. In summary, the extended MIP coverage and increased financial access provided by the program, most likely due to the exclusion of outpatient drug coverage from the benefit package and possibly due to improper utilisation management by private insurance companies, were not able to reverse adverse effects of economic slow-down and escalating health expenditure. MIP has only cushioned the negative impact for the poorest by decreasing the poor/rich gradient in the rates of catastrophic health expenditure. CONCLUSIONS: The recent governmental decision on major expansion of MIP coverage and inclusion of additional drug benefit will most likely significantly enhance the overall MIP impact and its potential as a viable policy instrument for achieving universal coverage. The Georgian experience presented in this paper may be useful for other low- and middle-income countries that are contemplating ways to ensure universal coverage for their populations.

Has global fund support for civil society advocacy in the former Soviet Union established meaningful engagement or 'a lot of jabber about nothing'?

Although civil society advocacy for health issues such as HIV transmission through injecting drug use is higher on the global health agenda than previously, its impact on national policy reform has been limited. In this paper we seek to understand why this is the case through an examination of civil society advocacy efforts to reform HIV/AIDS and drugs-related policies and their implementation in three former Soviet Union countries. In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted in Georgia, Kyrgyzstan and Ukraine by national researchers with representatives from a sample of 49 civil society organizations (CSOs) and 22 national key informants. We found that Global Fund support resulted in the professionalization of CSOs, which increased confidence from government and increased CSO influence on policies relating to HIV/AIDS and illicit drugs. Interviewees also reported that the amount of funding for advocacy from the Global Fund was insufficient, indirect and often interrupted. CSOs were often in competition for Global Fund support, which caused resentment and limited collective action, further weakening capacity for effective advocacy.

Circus monkeys or change agents? Civil society advocacy for HIV/AIDS in adverse policy environments.

This paper explores the factors enabling and undermining civil society efforts to advocate for policy reforms relating to HIV/AIDS and illicit drugs in three countries in Eastern Europe and Central Asia: Georgia, Kyrgyzstan and Ukraine. It examines how political contexts and civil society actors' strengths and weaknesses inhibit or enable advocacy for policy change - issues that are not well understood in relation to specific policy areas such as HIV/AIDS, or particular regions of the world where national policies are believed to be major drivers of the HIV/AIDS epidemic. The study is based on in-depth interviews with representatives of civil society organizations (CSOs) (n = 49) and national level informants including government and development partners (n = 22). Our policy analysis identified a culture of fear derived from concerns for personal safety but also risk of losing donor largesse. Relations between CSOs and government were often acrimonious rather than synergistic, and while we found some evidence of CSO collective action, competition for external funding - in particular for HIV/AIDS grants from the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria was often divisive. Development partners and government tend to construct CSOs as service providers rather than advocates. While some advocacy was tolerated by governments, CSO participation in the policy process was, ultimately, perceived to be tokenistic. This was because there are financial interests in maintaining prohibitionist legislation: efforts to change punitive laws directed at the behaviors of minority groups such as injecting drug users have had limited impact.

National and subnational HIV/AIDS coordination: are global health initiatives closing the gap between intent and practice?

BACKGROUND: A coordinated response to HIV/AIDS remains one of the 'grand challenges' facing policymakers today. Global health initiatives (GHIs) have the potential both to facilitate and exacerbate coordination at the national and subnational level. Evidence of the effects of GHIs on coordination is beginning to emerge but has hitherto been limited to single-country studies and broad-brush reviews. To date, no study has provided a focused synthesis of the effects of GHIs on national and subnational health systems across multiple countries. To address this deficit, we review primary data from seven country studies on the effects of three GHIs on coordination of HIV/AIDS programmes: the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), and the World Bank's HIV/AIDS programmes including the Multi-country AIDS Programme (MAP). METHODS: In-depth interviews were conducted at national and subnational levels (179 and 218 respectively) in seven countries in Europe, Asia, Africa and South America, between 2006 and 2008. Studies explored the development and functioning of national and subnational HIV coordination structures, and the extent to which coordination efforts around HIV/AIDS are aligned with and strengthen country health systems. RESULTS: Positive effects of GHIs included the creation of opportunities for multisectoral participation, greater political commitment and increased transparency among most partners. However, the quality of participation was often limited, and some GHIs bypassed coordination mechanisms, especially at the subnational level, weakening their effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: The paper identifies residual national and subnational obstacles to effective coordination and optimal use of funds by focal GHIs, which these GHIs, other donors and country partners need to collectively address.