The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare access and utilisation in South Sudan: a cross-sectional mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on communities in fragile and conflict-affected settings may be severe due to reduced access and use of healthcare, as happened during the 2015 Ebola Virus Disease outbreak. Achieving a balance between short-term emergency response and addressing long-term health needs is particularly challenging in fragile and conflict-affected settings such as South Sudan, given the already significant barriers to accessing healthcare for the population. This study sought to characterise the effect of COVID-19 on healthcare access and South Sudan's healthcare response. This can inform efforts to mitigate the potential impacts of COVID-19 or other epidemiological threats, and contribute to understanding how these may be balanced for greater health system resilience in fragile contexts. METHODS: We conducted a mixed methods study in three of South Sudan's states, combining data from a cross-sectional quantitative household survey with qualitative interviews and Focus Group Discussions. RESULTS: Even though some fears related to COVID-19 were reported, we found these did not greatly dissuade people from seeking care and do not yield significant consequences for health system programming in South Sudan. The pillars of the response focused on risk communication and community engagement were effective in reaching communities through different channels. Respondents and participants reported behaviour changes that were in line with public health advice. We also found that the implementation of COVID-19 response activities sometimes created frictions between the national government and international health actors, and that COVID-19 caused a greater reliance on, and increased responsibility for, international donors for health planning. CONCLUSIONS: Given the fact that global priorities on COVID-19 are greatly shifting, power dynamics between international health agencies and the national government may be useful to consider in further COVID-19 planning, particularly for the vaccine roll-out. South Sudan must now navigate a period of transition where COVID-19 vaccine roll-out continues and other domestic health burdens are re-prioritised.

The political economy of priority-setting for health in South Sudan: a case study of the health pooled fund.

BACKGROUND: In fragile and conflict affected settings (FCAS) such as South Sudan, where health needs are immense, resources are scarce, health infrastructure is rudimentary or damaged, and government stewardship is weak, adequate health intervention priority-setting is especially important. There is a scarcity of research examining priority-setting in FCAS and the related political economy. Yet, capturing these dynamics is important to develop context-specific guidance for priority-setting. The objective of this study is to analyze the priority-setting practices in the Health Pooled Fund (HPF), a multi-donor fund that supports service delivery in South Sudan, using a political economy perspective. METHODS: A multi-method study was conducted combining document review, 30 stakeholder interviews, and an examination of service delivery. An adapted version of the Walt and Gilson policy analysis triangle guided the study's design and analysis. RESULTS: Priority-setting in HPF occurs in a context of immense fragility where health needs are vast, service delivery remains weak, and external funding is essential. HPF's service package gives priority to the health of mothers and children, gender-sensitive programming, immunization services, and a community health initiative. HPF is structured by a web of actors at national and local levels with pronounced power asymmetries and differing vested interests and ideas about HPF's role. Priority-setting takes place throughout program design, implementing partner (IP) contract negotiation, and implementation of the service package. In practice the BPHNS does not provide adequate guidance for priority-setting because it is too expansive and unrealistic given financial and health system constraints. At the local level, IPs must manage the competing interests of the HPF program and local health authorities as well as challenging contextual factors, including conflict and shortages of qualified health workers, which affect service provision. The resulting priority-setting process remains implicit, scarcely documented, and primarily driven by donors' interests. CONCLUSION: This study highlights power asymmetries between donors and national health authorities within a FCAS context, which drive a priority-setting process that is dominated by donor agendas and leave little room for government ownership. These findings emphasize the importance of paying attention to the influence of stakeholders and their interests on the priority-setting process in FCAS.

Measuring health system resilience in a highly fragile nation during protracted conflict: South Sudan 2011-15.

Health systems resilience (HSR) is defined as the ability of a health system to continue providing normal services in response to a crisis, making it a critical concept for analysis of health systems in fragile and conflict-affected settings (FCAS). However, no consensus for this definition exists and even less about how to measure HSR. We examine three current HSR definitions (maintaining function, improving function and achieving health system targets) using real-time data from South Sudan to develop a data-driven understanding of resilience. We used 14 maternal, newborn and child health (MNCH) coverage indicators from household surveys in South Sudan collected at independence (2011) and following 2 years of protracted conflict (2015), to construct a resilience index (RI) for 9 of the former 10 states and nationally. We also assessed health system stress using conflict-related indicators and developed a stress index. We cross tabulated the two indices to assess the relationship of resilience and stress. For maintaining function for 80% of MNCH indicators, seven state health systems were resilient, compared with improving function for 50% of the indicators (two states were resilient). Achieving the health system national target of 50% coverage in half of the MNCH indicators displayed no resilience. MNCH coverage levels were low, with state averages ranging between 15% and 44%. Central Equatoria State displayed high resilience and high system stress. Lakes and Northern Bahr el Ghazal displayed high resilience and low stress. Jonglei and Upper Nile States had low resilience and high stress. This study is the first to investigate HSR definitions using a resilience metric and to simultaneously measure health system stress in FCAS. Improving function is the HSR definition detecting the greatest variation in the RI. HSR and health system stress are not consistently negatively associated. HSR is highly complex warranting more in-depth analyses in FCAS.

Understanding HRH recruitment in post-conflict settings: an analysis of central-level policies and processes in Timor-Leste (1999-2018).

BACKGROUND: Although human resources for health (HRH) represent a critical element for health systems, many countries still face acute HRH challenges. These challenges are compounded in conflict-affected settings where health needs are exacerbated and the health workforce is often decimated. A body of research has explored the issues of recruitment of health workers, but the literature is still scarce, in particular with reference to conflict-affected states. This study adds to that literature by exploring, from a central-level perspective, how the HRH recruitment policies changed in Timor-Leste (1999-2018), the drivers of change and their contribution to rebuilding an appropriate health workforce after conflict. METHODS: This research adopts a retrospective, qualitative case study design based on 76 documents and 20 key informant interviews, covering a period of almost 20 years. Policy analysis, with elements of political economy analysis was conducted to explore the influence of actors and structural elements. RESULTS: Our findings describe the main phases of HRH policy-making during the post-conflict period and explore how the main drivers of this trajectory shaped policy-making processes and outcomes. While initially the influence of international actors was prominent, the number and relevance of national actors, and resulting influence, later increased as aid dependency diminished. However, this created a fragmented institutional landscape with diverging agendas and lack of inter-sectoral coordination, to the detriment of the long-term strategic development of the health workforce and the health sector. CONCLUSIONS: The study provides critical insights to improve understanding of HRH policy development and effective practices in a post-conflict setting but also looking at the longer term evolution. An issue that emerges across the HRH policy-making phases is the difficulty of reconciling the technocratic with the social, cultural and political concerns. Additionally, while this study illuminates processes and dynamics at central level, further research is needed from the decentralised perspective on aspects, such as deployment, motivation and career paths, which are under-regulated at central level.

Understanding HRH recruitment in postconflict settings: an analysis of central-level policies and processes in Timor-Leste (1999­2018)

Background: Although human resources for health (HRH) represent a critical element for health systems, many countries still face acute HRH challenges. These challenges are compounded in conflict-affected settings where health needs are exacerbated and the health workforce is often decimated. A body of research has explored the issues of recruitment of health workers, but the literature is still scarce, in particular with reference to conflict-affected states. This study adds to that literature by exploring, from a central-level perspective, how the HRH recruitment policies changed in Timor-Leste (1999­2018), the drivers of change and their contribution to rebuilding an appropriate health workforce after conflict. Methods: This research adopts a retrospective, qualitative case study design based on 76 documents and 20 key informant interviews, covering a period of almost 20 years. Policy analysis, with elements of political economy analysis was conducted to explore the influence of actors and structural elements. Results: Our findings describe the main phases of HRH policy-making during the post-conflict period and explore how the main drivers of this trajectory shaped policy-making processes and outcomes. While initially the influence of international actors was prominent, the number and relevance of national actors, and resulting influence, later increased as aid dependency diminished. However, this created a fragmented institutional landscape with diverging agendas and lack of inter-sectoral coordination, to the detriment of the long-term strategic development of the health workforce and the health sector. Conclusions: The study provides critical insights to improve understanding of HRH policy development and effective practices in a post-conflict setting but also looking at the longer term evolution. An issue that emerges across the HRH policy-making phases is the difficulty of reconciling the technocratic with the social, cultural and political concerns. Additionally, while this study illuminates processes and dynamics at central level, further research is needed from the decentralised perspective on aspects, such as deployment, motivation and career paths, which are under-regulated at central level. (AU)

Performance-based financing in three humanitarian settings: principles and pragmatism.

BACKGROUND: Performance based financing (PBF) has been increasingly implemented across low and middle-income countries, including in fragile and humanitarian settings, which present specific features likely to require adaptation and to influence implementation of any health financing programme. However, the literature has been surprisingly thin in the discussion of how PBF has been adapted to different contexts, and in turn how different contexts may influence PBF. With case studies from three humanitarian settings (northern Nigeria, Central African Republic and South Kivu in the Democratic Republic of Congo), we examine why and how PBF has emerged and has been adapted to those unsettled and dynamic contexts, what the opportunities and challenges have been, and what lessons can be drawn. METHODS: Our comparative case study is based on data collected from a document review, 35 key informant interviews and 16 focus group discussions with stakeholders at national and subnational level in the three settings. Data were analysed in order to describe and compare each setting in terms of underlying fragility features and their implications for the health system, and to look at how PBF has been adopted, implemented and iteratively adapted to respond to acute crisis, deal with other humanitarian actors and involve local communities. RESULTS: Our analysis reveals that the challenging environments required a high degree of PBF adaptation and innovation, at times contravening the so-called 'PBF principles' that have become codified. We develop an analytical framework to highlight the key nodes where adaptations happen, the contextual drivers of adaptation, and the organisational elements that facilitate adaptation and may sustain PBF programmes. CONCLUSIONS: Our study points to the importance of pragmatic adaptation in PBF design and implementation to reflect the contextual specificities, and identifies elements (such as, organisational flexibility, local staff and knowledge, and embedded long-term partners) that could facilitate adaptations and innovations. These findings and framework are useful to spark a reflection among PBF donors and implementers on the relevance of incorporating, reinforcing and building on those elements when designing and implementing PBF programmes.