Addressing the challenges to health sector decentralization in Nepal: an inquiry into the policy and implementation processes.

The objective of the study was to analyze the status and explore the challenges to decentralization policy implementation in Nepal. Thirty seven key informants rich in experience and knowledge, seven focus group discussions, observation of six health facilities and analysis of about 25 key policy documents provided the data for this study. The study identified the challenges to the implementation of decentralization reforms in the public health sector as: (i) centralised and weak management and programming practices of the government; (ii) weak legal and institutional framework; (iii) conflicting policy objectives; (iv) lack of implementation strategy; (v) poor financial and human resource management system; (vi) lack of adequate preparation for managing the reform; (vii) weak capacity at all levels; (viii) political instability. It was revealed that the implementation of the policy in Nepal was extremely poor as many of the important policy measures were either never initiated or they were only partially implemented. The challenges lie both at - policy design and implementation phase. Clear policy objectives, appropriate structure, sound planning, financing and human resources policy, adequate capacity, responsive information system, defined service packages, active participation of stakeholders and a conducive socio-political environment are considered imperative for successful implementation of the policy. Preparation for managing reform implementation at national and district levels is prerequisite for decentralization to work. Pushing for decentralization in a politically fragile environment may rather lead to further fragmentation, instead of strengthening government legitimacy.

Financing reforms for the Thai health card scheme.

The Thai health card scheme originated from a pilot study on community financing and primary health care in maternal and child health in 1983. The scheme later changed to one of voluntary health insurance and finally received a matching subsidy from the government. The coverage of the scheme is described by a U-curve, i.e. it started with 5% of the total population in 1987, declined to 3% in 1992, with an upturn to 14% in 1997. The upturn has been the result of concerns about universal coverage policy, together with reforms of fund management. The provincial fund is responsible for basic health, basic medical, referral, and accident and emergency services. The central fund takes 2.5% of the total fund to manage cross-boundary services and high cost care (a reinsurance policy). On average, the utilization rate of the voluntary health card was higher than that of the compulsory (social security) scheme. And amongst three variants of health cards, the voluntary health card holders used health services twice to three times more than the community and health volunteer card holders. Cost recovery was low, especially in the provinces with low coverage. In the province with highest coverage, cost recovery was as high as 90% of the non-labour recurrent cost. Only 10% of the budgeted fund for reinsurance was disbursed, implying considerable management inefficiency. The management information system as well as the management capacity of the Health Insurance Office should be strengthened. After comparing the health card with other insurance schemes in terms of coverage, cost recovery, utilization and management cost, it is recommended that this voluntary health insurance should be modified to be a compulsory insurance, with some other means of premium collection and minimal co-payment at the point of delivery.

Situational analysis of the health insurance market and related educational needs in the era of health care reform in Thailand.

The purposes of this study were to explore the situation of health insurance in Thailand, to compare public and private perspectives and to identify related educational needs. Between March and April of 1998, the study employed in-depth interviews of 12 public and private major stakeholders of the health insurance systems, including policy makers, providers and insurers. Additional inputs were gathered in a brainstorming session with 41 participants from organizations with important roles in regulating, monitoring, paying, or providing health care services, as well as research and education. The findings indicated the health insurance market was expanding. But there was no national policy on health insurance. Insurance-related law was outdated. Public and private schemes overlapped, and were generally characterized by inadequate risk diversification, overutilization of services, lack of effective cost containment, inconsistent service quality, and poor understanding of health insurance principles. There were needs for more education and training in various aspects of health services management and health-insurance related functions. Consequently, continuing education and training related to health insurance services for policy makers, system administrators, managers, providers and insurers are strongly recommended during the health-care reform process.