Compare: Service delivery system

Joint Learning Network for Universal Health Coverage

The Joint Learning Network for Universal Health Coverage systematically documents the reforms of its member countries and other countries that have expanded health coverage through demand-side financing. The case studies contained in these pages are brief, comparative and modular in nature, describing the key highlights and technical features of each program.


Compare various dimensions of country reform efforts using our interactive tool.


Program Service delivery system Public providers Non-state providers Service delivery system
Indonesia: Jamkesmas
  • Both Public & Non-state
926 220

Jamkesmas beneficiaries are able to seek care at both public and private outlets, though covered ambulatory services are solely public. The scheme contracts with 926 hospitals for service provision, including 220 private hospitals for certain procedures. Health services across each public scheme in Indonesia are delivered by a mix of providers, with most schemes relying heavily on the public sector for delivery of care.

Read full section

Jamkesmas beneficiaries are able to seek care at both public and private outlets, though covered ambulatory services are solely public. The scheme contracts with 926 hospitals for service provision, including 220 private hospitals for certain procedures. Health services across each public scheme in Indonesia are delivered by a mix of providers, with most schemes relying heavily on the public sector for delivery of care.

Kyrgyz Republic: Mandatory Health Insurance Fund (MHIF)
  • Both Public & Non-state

The reforms restructured the health delivery system to form a completely new PHC sector and introduced retraining mechanisms for physicians in order to establish a cadre of autonomous primary care providers across the country. From 2000 to 2003 alone, the share of primary care expenditures in total health spending increased from 17% to 31%.

Read full section

The reforms restructured the health delivery system to form a completely new PHC sector and introduced retraining mechanisms for physicians in order to establish a cadre of autonomous primary care providers across the country. From 2000 to 2003 alone, the share of primary care expenditures in total health spending increased from 17% to 31%.

Enrollees are free to choose a family group practice for their primary care and they can switch once per year during the annual registration period. In large urban settings, practices that offer higher quality services will attract a larger number of patients, leading to higher capitation payments for the practice. Rural areas, however, have too few providers in order to create this type of quality incentive.

After the primary care reforms created the undergraduate, postgraduate, and continuing education curricula, the number of primary care physicians rose significantly from 5.8 per 1,000 population in 2001 to 8.2 per 1,000 population in 2005. Furthermore, by the end of 2004, 75 percent of primary care physicians and nurses had been retrained as family physicians and family medicine nurses.

Kyrgyzstan has three types of primary care providers. First, the core of the old rural health system, Feldsher-Obstetric Ambulatory Points (FAPs) are facilities in the most remote reaches of the country that offer basic services such as neonatal care, immunizations, and health education. As of 2006 there were 875 FAPs across Kyrgyzstan, each serving between 500 and 2,000 people. Second, Family Group Practices (FGPs) are the major providers of primary care in Kyrgyzstan. FGPs are normally made up of three to five doctors. They can be freestanding and autonomous entities or units within large hospital polyclinics. Finally, Family Medicine Centers (FMCs) are large outpatient facilities staffed by varying numbers of specialists, often 10 to 20 health care professionals in addition to their affiliated FGPs. Their service offerings range from primary care to specialized care, including instrumental diagnostics. In 2006, approximately 93% of FAPs and 96% of FGPs were part of Family Medicine Centers.

Secondary care is provided by hospitals at the oblast level (generally one oblast merged hospital in each oblast), and by territorial hospitals in rayons and cities (51 hospitals nationally). The main difference between these two types of hospitals lies in the variety and complexity of conditions that they can handle. Tertiary care that provides highly specialized services is conducted in eight central-level hospitals. In terms of legal organization, most health care organizations tend to be public. The exceptions are optic, dental, urologic, and gynecological services, which tend to be private facilities and are mostly concentrated in the capital city of Bishkek.

Mali: Mutuelles
  • Both Public & Non-state

The provision of care in Mali is organized in a pyramid with four levels. At the base there are the health districts (60), divided into health areas that have a community health center (CSCOM) with a dispensary, a maternity center, and a pharmacy warehouse, altogether offering a minimum package of activities (MPA). The professional team at the CSCOM is often managed by a nurse. In 2010, about 900 of the 1,030 health areas had a CSCOM. The health area, and thus the CSCOM, is run by a community health association (ASACO). There were 954 ASACOs in 2010. The ASACO signs a contract with the government of Mali, which agrees to work toward providing public health services, for which it has some available grants.

Read full section

The provision of care in Mali is organized in a pyramid with four levels. At the base there are the health districts (60), divided into health areas that have a community health center (CSCOM) with a dispensary, a maternity center, and a pharmacy warehouse, altogether offering a minimum package of activities (MPA). The professional team at the CSCOM is often managed by a nurse. In 2010, about 900 of the 1,030 health areas had a CSCOM. The health area, and thus the CSCOM, is run by a community health association (ASACO). There were 954 ASACOs in 2010. The ASACO signs a contract with the government of Mali, which agrees to work toward providing public health services, for which it has some available grants. However, it manages the CSCOM staff and the operating budget. CSCOM has the status of a non-profit private institution, and thus the system is “community” based. Roughly 87% of the population of Mali lives less than 15 km from a CSCOM. The CSCOMs account for 56% of all consultations, versus 20% for the entirely public entities (BCG 2010). The first referral takes place at the referral health center (CSRef), which is basically a district hospital. There is a CSRef in every health district. The CSRef has a more sophisticated technical support center and more highly skilled staff than at the CSCM level. The CSRef treats the cases that are referred from the CSCOMs. At the CSRef level, which has public status, there are about 25 private facilities (BCG 2010). At the third level (second referral), there are seven (7) public hospitals (EPH) located in the regional capitals. On the private side there are approximately 70 clinics at this level of the pyramid. (BCG 2010). At the top there are four level-three referring EPHs, two of which are for general medicine, while the other two are for specialized medicine.

Nigeria: National Health Insurance System
  • Both Public & Non-state

The National Health Insurance system (NHIS) accredits both service providers and the Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) that interface between providers, the NHIS and its beneficiaries. To receive accreditation, health facilities must meet a number of requirements for the physical facility and the personnel, including:

  • All medical professionals must be in possession of the current license to practice;
  • The facility must be appropriate for service delivery;
  • Facility must be registered with state authorities;
  • Facility and staff must possess malpractice insurance.
Read full section

The National Health Insurance system (NHIS) accredits both service providers and the Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) that interface between providers, the NHIS and its beneficiaries. To receive accreditation, health facilities must meet a number of requirements for the physical facility and the personnel, including:

  • All medical professionals must be in possession of the current license to practice;
  • The facility must be appropriate for service delivery;
  • Facility must be registered with state authorities;
  • Facility and staff must possess malpractice insurance.

In addition, an accreditation fee is required. Currently 61 HMOs have been accredited and registered by NHIS in addition to about 6,000 primary care providers, 1,000 ancillary providers, and over 600 secondary and tertiary providers. Recently the NHIS announced the suspension of accreditation of new HMOs and providers because there is a need to strengthen the scheme and improve quality of healthcare services delivery through reaccreditation.

In general, the service delivery system in Nigeria is organized on a tiered basis:

  • Tertiary facilities are operated by the central government and form the highest level of health care and serve as referral centers for patients;
  • Secondary facilities are managed by state governments and provide some specialized health services;
  • Primary facilities are run by local governments and provide the most basic entry point to the health care system at health centers, clinics, and dispensaries.

The service delivery system is mixed between private and public providers. The private health care system has grown substantially since the 1980s, to currently provide about 80% of the total health services. This sector, however, is not well regulated or supported. Of all the private facilities in Nigeria, about 50% are for-profit. Despite the large number of service providers, coverage of most key preventative and curative health services is relatively low. There are large disparities in geo-political zones, between rural and urban zones, and with regard to socio-economic status; the poorest fifth of the population are much less likely to receive medical services than their counterparts in the wealthiest 20% of the population.

Philippines: PhilHealth
  • Both Public & Non-state

The service delivery system includes both public and private centers; on average, the network is comprised of 61% private and 39% public providers.

Read full section

The service delivery system includes both public and private centers; on average, the network is comprised of 61% private and 39% public providers. In order to achieve accreditation, all in-network hospitals and day-surgery centers must be licensed by the Department of Health.

The network includes hospitals, day surgery centers, maternity care clinics, midwife-operated clinics, freestanding dialysis centers, physician clinics, dentists doing procedures in hospitals and day surgeries, government-run health centers for primary care benefits, TB DOTS and malaria, and private TB-DOTS clinics.

Non-hospitals and day-surgery centers are not required to be licensed by the DOH; however, all facilities are evaluated by an accreditation team from PhilHealth.

India: RSBY
  • Both Public & Non-state
551 1516

As of October 2009, the RSBY delivery network included 2,067 hospitals, 1,516 private and 551 public. Providers are empanelled by a state-selected insurance company based on specific structural, procedural and quality criteria, including the installation of SmartCard readers and all associated technology. A health care provider empanelled by any of the insurers in RSBY gets automatically empanelled by all the other insurers.

Read full section

As of October 2009, the RSBY delivery network included 2,067 hospitals, 1,516 private and 551 public. Providers are empanelled by a state-selected insurance company based on specific structural, procedural and quality criteria, including the installation of SmartCard readers and all associated technology. A health care provider empanelled by any of the insurers in RSBY gets automatically empanelled by all the other insurers.

After an insurance company is selected by the state, the insurance company is tasked with empaneling/certifying both public and private care providers in the program. The process is based on prescribed criteria (e.g., the service providers should possess specified basic facilities, like: have at least 10 inpatient medical beds; have specified medical and surgical facilities and diagnostic facilities, etc.). In addition, hospitals must agree to need to install necessary hardware and software to be able to process beneficiaries’ SmartCard transactions. They must also set up a dedicated RSBY desk with trained staff.

The insurer must empanel enough hospitals in each district so that beneficiaries do not need to travel great distances to get to health care services. For empanelment of public hospitals, the insurer needs to coordinate with the respective health department of the state.

Once a hospital is empanelled, a nationally-unique hospital ID number is generated so that transactions can be tracked at each hospital. Each empanelled hospital is connected with the district server of the insurance company and thus able to transfer data related to hospitalization on a daily basis.

Brazil: Unified Health System (SUS)
  • Both Public & Non-state

Primary care delivery happens through primary care units and primary care teams under the Family Health Program (PSF). Primary care units are run by municipalities and are mostly managed by government-employed clinicians. These units are funded on a per capita basis based on the population size within the catchment area. While patients can use clinics outside of their area, they may be encouraged or referred back to their corresponding primary care unit.

Read full section

Primary care delivery happens through primary care units and primary care teams under the Family Health Program (PSF). Primary care units are run by municipalities and are mostly managed by government-employed clinicians. These units are funded on a per capita basis based on the population size within the catchment area. While patients can use clinics outside of their area, they may be encouraged or referred back to their corresponding primary care unit. In some municipalities, primary care units are contracted-out through RFP on a winner-take-all basis to NGOs, who receive similar per capita budgets as government health centers but are not subject to civil service rules. They can more easily hire and fire and some are experimenting with pay for performance mechanisms.

Service delivery within the Family Health Program (PSF) and the Community Health Agents Program (PACS) is the responsibility of the Municipal Health Secretariat. The PSF is the program through which the government reorganized some of the organization and delivery of publicly financed primary health care (In recent years, the PSF has also covered chronic diseases). In essence, it has turned a passive, facility-based delivery system into a dynamic, outreach model in which family healthcare providers deliver care to households and communities. There is a primary care team responsible for a territory of 800-1,000 families, or up to 4,000 people. The team includes a generalist physician, a nurse, a community health agent, and an odontologist or dental hygienist. The team monitors and evaluates the health situation of the population, provides primary care services, and makes referrals to other levels of the system. The number of PSF teams increased from zero in 1994 to close to 32,000 by 2008.

The primary purpose of the PACS is to improve the health and quality of life of the community. PACS utilizes community personnel with no higher education to engage in a wide variety of activities such as registering families, general diagnostics, sanitary health, looking out for critical situations in need of intervention, and overall follow-up with families and patients.

The delivery of secondary and tertiary health care services under the SUS is conducted through both public and private providers. Public contracting of private hospitals has a long history in Brazil, where the SUS contracts for private beds. In 1999, 67% of all SUS hospitals were privately owned, 8% were state owned, and 23% were municipally owned. In terms of clinics, 27% were privately owned, 3% were state owned, and 69% were municipally owned. Such ratios make it clear that while the SUS is a publicly funded system, the private sector is responsible for a large proportion of the services provided.

The role of the private sector in service delivery appears to be waning slightly. Between 1988 and 2005, public establishments offering hospitalizations grew by 50%, while private establishments offering the same grew by 23%.
In 2005, 34% of Brazil’s hospital beds were in public facilities while 66% were in private facilities. Of the beds in the private sector, 82.1% have indicated that they are providing services under the SUS. Thus, there were 55% more beds offering SUS services within the private sector as compared to the public sector.

Public contracting of services with private providers is allowed under MOH guidelines. Managers can complement the supply of services with private providers only when all public health capacity is being used and when the need is proven and justified. Charitable and non-profit organizations, however, are given the status of public sector partners. Furthermore, in order for private entities to be able to provide service to the SUS, they must agree to make available 60% of their capacity to the SUS. These private entities can only serve private users once capacity has been exhausted by SUS patients.