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 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estonia: Estonian Health Insurance Fund |
|
Health care provision in Estonia is completely decentralized. Care within the Estonian system is characterized by four tiers:
Health care provision in Estonia is completely decentralized. Care within the Estonian system is characterized by four tiers:
All health care providers operate as private, independent, legal entities. These entities can be private individuals, limited liability companies, or foundations. Most hospitals belong to local governments. They are managed as either limited companies or as non-profit foundations. Hospitals function as true business entities, with managers able to strive for better clinical practice and empowered to achieve improved financial performance. Management structures are explicit with a supervisory board and a management board governing the process. Maximum waiting times for specialized services vary by type. Ambulatory care is capped at four weeks, inpatient care and day surgeries are capped at eight months, and other interventions such as joint replacements have maximum waiting times of up to two and a half years. This initially led some patients to jump the queue by seeking care privately. However, queue jumping rules have recently been established to prevent private patients from getting quicker access to treatment. Cutting in the queue is only permitted in cases where the waiting list is caused by a provider having reached the EHIF contract volume. Service delivery must take place within agreed time limits. Emergency care must be provided immediately, outpatient specialist care must be provided within four weeks, and inpatient care must be provided within six months. Estonian Health Insurance FundService delivery system Types of Providers Empanelled: Both Public & Non-state
Number of public providers:
Number of non-state providers: Health care provision in Estonia is completely decentralized. Care within the Estonian system is characterized by four tiers:
All health care providers operate as private, independent, legal entities. These entities can be private individuals, limited liability companies, or foundations. Most hospitals belong to local governments. They are managed as either limited companies or as non-profit foundations. Hospitals function as true business entities, with managers able to strive for better clinical practice and empowered to achieve improved financial performance. Management structures are explicit with a supervisory board and a management board governing the process. Maximum waiting times for specialized services vary by type. Ambulatory care is capped at four weeks, inpatient care and day surgeries are capped at eight months, and other interventions such as joint replacements have maximum waiting times of up to two and a half years. This initially led some patients to jump the queue by seeking care privately. However, queue jumping rules have recently been established to prevent private patients from getting quicker access to treatment. Cutting in the queue is only permitted in cases where the waiting list is caused by a provider having reached the EHIF contract volume. Service delivery must take place within agreed time limits. Emergency care must be provided immediately, outpatient specialist care must be provided within four weeks, and inpatient care must be provided within six months. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Mali: Mutuelles |
|
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 sectionThe 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. MutuellesService delivery system Types of Providers Empanelled: Both Public & Non-state
Number of public providers:
Number of non-state providers: 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. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| : Taiwan: National Health Insurance |
|
Taiwan has a market-driven health care delivery system with a mix of publicly and privately owned hospitals. The National Health Insurance (NHI) program provides medical services to the insured population through contracts between the Bureau of National Health Insurance (BNHI) and providers, including hospitals, clinics, pharmacies, medical laboratories, and home nursing care. Read full sectionTaiwan has a market-driven health care delivery system with a mix of publicly and privately owned hospitals. The National Health Insurance (NHI) program provides medical services to the insured population through contracts between the Bureau of National Health Insurance (BNHI) and providers, including hospitals, clinics, pharmacies, medical laboratories, and home nursing care. For hospitals and dental clinics, the contracted rate is 98% of all health facilities in Taiwan, suggesting that the contract serves as a comprehensive and inclusive network for consumers to access providers’ services. The contracted rate of clinics for both Western medicine and Chinese medicine are in the range of 84 to 90%. The broad and inclusive range of institutions that contract with NHI allows patients to see almost any doctor within the country. Most health providers operate in the private sector and form a competitive market. Citizens have almost complete freedom of choice among providers and therapies. There is no rationing of care, no referral system, and patients are also allowed to seek out care at tertiary institutions regardless of the severity or nature of their illness. This has allowed patients large degrees of freedom in provider choice. However, doctors who practice in private clinics do not have hospital admitting privileges, thus hospitals have developed large outpatient departments and affiliated clinics for primary care, to maintain inpatient flows. Many private clinics also maintain about a dozen beds for their patients. One criticism of this system is that its delivery system is somewhat fragmented, because private physicians can practice, but have no hospital admitting privileges. This occasionally results in duplicative facilities and equipment, and can disrupt continuity of care. Table 1: Health Service Delivery System in Taiwan, 2004
Source: Health Statistics (2006) In total, there are about 5.7 beds per thousand people, 35% of which are public and 65% are private. In 2000, about 86% of hospitals were privately owned. Doctors in Taiwan are either salaried staff physicians in the hospitals or self-employed owners of clinics. A majority of clinics, about 97%, are privately owned. About 63% of physicians are employed by hospitals and paid on a salaried basis and the remaining 36% of doctors are private practitioners. Since the NHI’s inception in 1995, the capacity and use of Taiwan’s health care system has expanded. While Taiwan’s population grew by 5.2% between 1994 and 2000, the supply of health professionals overall increased by 39.6%, and the number of physicians increased by 33.5%. Over the same period the number of hospital beds increased by 32.3%. While Taiwan’s population grew 5.2% between 1994 and 2000, the volume of hospital outpatient visits increased by 16.6%, emergency room visits by 42.2%, outpatient surgery by 56.4%, and inpatient hospitalization by 18%. With the exception of certain costly high-tech treatments which require prior authorization from BNHI, there are effectively no ceilings on utilization, which has resulted in high health care usage rates, especially for outpatient care. The use of services has expanded unevenly across hospital types and locations. Services in low income and remote areas are not well-distributed and offer varying degrees of service. While the overall ratio of physicians per 1,000 people in 2001 was 1.37, it was only 0.33 among Taiwan’s aboriginal people and 0.8 in the mountainous areas and offshore islands. BNHI has since introduced incentives for providers to practice in remote areas and has exempted cost sharing for the poor and for those who live in remote areas. National Health InsuranceService delivery system Types of Providers Empanelled: Both Public & Non-state
Number of public providers:
Number of non-state providers: Taiwan has a market-driven health care delivery system with a mix of publicly and privately owned hospitals. The National Health Insurance (NHI) program provides medical services to the insured population through contracts between the Bureau of National Health Insurance (BNHI) and providers, including hospitals, clinics, pharmacies, medical laboratories, and home nursing care. For hospitals and dental clinics, the contracted rate is 98% of all health facilities in Taiwan, suggesting that the contract serves as a comprehensive and inclusive network for consumers to access providers’ services. The contracted rate of clinics for both Western medicine and Chinese medicine are in the range of 84 to 90%. The broad and inclusive range of institutions that contract with NHI allows patients to see almost any doctor within the country. Most health providers operate in the private sector and form a competitive market. Citizens have almost complete freedom of choice among providers and therapies. There is no rationing of care, no referral system, and patients are also allowed to seek out care at tertiary institutions regardless of the severity or nature of their illness. This has allowed patients large degrees of freedom in provider choice. However, doctors who practice in private clinics do not have hospital admitting privileges, thus hospitals have developed large outpatient departments and affiliated clinics for primary care, to maintain inpatient flows. Many private clinics also maintain about a dozen beds for their patients. One criticism of this system is that its delivery system is somewhat fragmented, because private physicians can practice, but have no hospital admitting privileges. This occasionally results in duplicative facilities and equipment, and can disrupt continuity of care. Table 1: Health Service Delivery System in Taiwan, 2004
Source: Health Statistics (2006) In total, there are about 5.7 beds per thousand people, 35% of which are public and 65% are private. In 2000, about 86% of hospitals were privately owned. Doctors in Taiwan are either salaried staff physicians in the hospitals or self-employed owners of clinics. A majority of clinics, about 97%, are privately owned. About 63% of physicians are employed by hospitals and paid on a salaried basis and the remaining 36% of doctors are private practitioners. Since the NHI’s inception in 1995, the capacity and use of Taiwan’s health care system has expanded. While Taiwan’s population grew by 5.2% between 1994 and 2000, the supply of health professionals overall increased by 39.6%, and the number of physicians increased by 33.5%. Over the same period the number of hospital beds increased by 32.3%. While Taiwan’s population grew 5.2% between 1994 and 2000, the volume of hospital outpatient visits increased by 16.6%, emergency room visits by 42.2%, outpatient surgery by 56.4%, and inpatient hospitalization by 18%. With the exception of certain costly high-tech treatments which require prior authorization from BNHI, there are effectively no ceilings on utilization, which has resulted in high health care usage rates, especially for outpatient care. The use of services has expanded unevenly across hospital types and locations. Services in low income and remote areas are not well-distributed and offer varying degrees of service. While the overall ratio of physicians per 1,000 people in 2001 was 1.37, it was only 0.33 among Taiwan’s aboriginal people and 0.8 in the mountainous areas and offshore islands. BNHI has since introduced incentives for providers to practice in remote areas and has exempted cost sharing for the poor and for those who live in remote areas. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Nigeria: National Health Insurance System |
|
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:
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:
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:
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. National Health Insurance SystemService delivery system Types of Providers Empanelled: Both Public & Non-state
Number of public providers:
Number of non-state providers: 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:
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:
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. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| India: Rajiv Aarogyasri |
|
98 | 244 |
The Aarogyasri network includes 244 private and 98 public hospitals, all of which must meet specific structural, procedural and pricing requirements. Individuals seeking care approach their nearest in-network health facility, where Aarogya Mithras guide them through the system. If a patient needs further care, they will be given a referral card to the appropriate network hospital(s). Beneficiaries may also seek care and receive referrals at health camps held by in-network hospitals. Read full sectionThe Aarogyasri network includes 244 private and 98 public hospitals, all of which must meet specific structural, procedural and pricing requirements. Individuals seeking care approach their nearest in-network health facility, where Aarogya Mithras guide them through the system. If a patient needs further care, they will be given a referral card to the appropriate network hospital(s). Beneficiaries may also seek care and receive referrals at health camps held by in-network hospitals. As of January 2010, there were a total of 342 hospitals in the network. The principal reason Aarogyasri Trust decided to work with private providers was the lack of resources in the public system. The government has been unable to attract the needed specialists to public facilities, while the private sector has rapidly expanded high quality healthcare services. A hospital or nursing home in Andhra Pradesh is eligible to be a part of the Aarogyasri network of care, established for indoor medical care and treatment of disease and injuries. The hospital should comply with the following minimum criteria:
All hospitals that qualify to be in-network must sign a memorandum of understanding with the insurance company. This Memorandum is subject to the approval of the Trust. A provision is made in the Memorandum for non-compliance/default; all such matters are looked into by the Trust. From the perspective of beneficiaries, the path to seeking care is made as simple as possible, as indicated in Figure 1.
Rajiv AarogyasriService delivery system Types of Providers Empanelled: Both Public & Non-state
Number of public providers: 98
Number of non-state providers: 244 The Aarogyasri network includes 244 private and 98 public hospitals, all of which must meet specific structural, procedural and pricing requirements. Individuals seeking care approach their nearest in-network health facility, where Aarogya Mithras guide them through the system. If a patient needs further care, they will be given a referral card to the appropriate network hospital(s). Beneficiaries may also seek care and receive referrals at health camps held by in-network hospitals. As of January 2010, there were a total of 342 hospitals in the network. The principal reason Aarogyasri Trust decided to work with private providers was the lack of resources in the public system. The government has been unable to attract the needed specialists to public facilities, while the private sector has rapidly expanded high quality healthcare services. A hospital or nursing home in Andhra Pradesh is eligible to be a part of the Aarogyasri network of care, established for indoor medical care and treatment of disease and injuries. The hospital should comply with the following minimum criteria:
All hospitals that qualify to be in-network must sign a memorandum of understanding with the insurance company. This Memorandum is subject to the approval of the Trust. A provision is made in the Memorandum for non-compliance/default; all such matters are looked into by the Trust. From the perspective of beneficiaries, the path to seeking care is made as simple as possible, as indicated in Figure 1.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| India: RSBY |
|
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 sectionAs 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. RSBYService delivery system Types of Providers Empanelled: Both Public & Non-state
Number of public providers: 551
Number of non-state providers: 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. 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. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Mexico: Seguro Popular |
|
The Social Protection in Health Regime (REPSS) at the state level is responsible for forming and coordinating the network of health service providers. In practice, the first option (and often the only one due to political factors or lack of technical competence) is to contract for health services from the network of State Health Services (SESA), followed by limited contracting with the private sector. These contracts are signed on a yearly basis. Out of nine states analyzed in a recent study, only two actively contracted for services with private health care providers. As of 2009, the SP has started buying services from the IMSS-Oportunidades Program and it is expected that contracting for services will extend to both IMSS and ISSSTE. Read full sectionThe Social Protection in Health Regime (REPSS) at the state level is responsible for forming and coordinating the network of health service providers. In practice, the first option (and often the only one due to political factors or lack of technical competence) is to contract for health services from the network of State Health Services (SESA), followed by limited contracting with the private sector. These contracts are signed on a yearly basis. Out of nine states analyzed in a recent study, only two actively contracted for services with private health care providers. As of 2009, the SP has started buying services from the IMSS-Oportunidades Program and it is expected that contracting for services will extend to both IMSS and ISSSTE. Some expect that such contracting schemes will lead to the ultimate financial integration of the system. The reform also created a long-term framework for expanding health care facilities. As of 2006, nearly 1,800 new facilities had been built, including four high-specialty regional hospitals in the least developed regions of Mexico. Service delivery for services that fall under the essential benefits package is decentralized at the state level due to the low-risk, high-probability nature of the interventions. High-cost tertiary care that falls under the FPGC, however, is delivered at regional or national health centers that offer highly specialized services. These types of procedures are often performed at private facilities. Seguro PopularService delivery system Types of Providers Empanelled: Both Public & Non-state
Number of public providers:
Number of non-state providers: The Social Protection in Health Regime (REPSS) at the state level is responsible for forming and coordinating the network of health service providers. In practice, the first option (and often the only one due to political factors or lack of technical competence) is to contract for health services from the network of State Health Services (SESA), followed by limited contracting with the private sector. These contracts are signed on a yearly basis. Out of nine states analyzed in a recent study, only two actively contracted for services with private health care providers. As of 2009, the SP has started buying services from the IMSS-Oportunidades Program and it is expected that contracting for services will extend to both IMSS and ISSSTE. Some expect that such contracting schemes will lead to the ultimate financial integration of the system. The reform also created a long-term framework for expanding health care facilities. As of 2006, nearly 1,800 new facilities had been built, including four high-specialty regional hospitals in the least developed regions of Mexico. Service delivery for services that fall under the essential benefits package is decentralized at the state level due to the low-risk, high-probability nature of the interventions. High-cost tertiary care that falls under the FPGC, however, is delivered at regional or national health centers that offer highly specialized services. These types of procedures are often performed at private facilities. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Brazil: Unified Health System (SUS) |
|
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 sectionPrimary 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%. 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. Unified Health System (SUS)Service delivery system Types of Providers Empanelled: Both Public & Non-state
Number of public providers:
Number of non-state providers: 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%. 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. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Thailand: Universal Coverage Scheme |
|
The UCS service delivery network includes both public and private health care facilities. However, prior to registration, private health facilities must submit required documentation and are investigated according to standard criteria of the UCS. No similar process exists for public health care facilities and they are automatically registered in the delivery network. Read full sectionThe UCS service delivery network includes both public and private health care facilities. However, prior to registration, private health facilities must submit required documentation and are investigated according to standard criteria of the UCS. No similar process exists for public health care facilities and they are automatically registered in the delivery network. The Thai insurance system is based on the health system that is founded on the principles of primary care. For UCS in particular, primary care provider units (PCUs) have been designated as gatekeepers to provide care for UCS beneficiaries. As gatekeepers, PCUs are expected to provide people in their catchment areas with continuous and comprehensive care with a holistic approach. According to the services provided, health facilities under the UCS can be classified into three groups:
Private health facilities are investigated by the UCS before contracts are signed. There is no such investigation for public health care facilities as they are automatically registered in the delivery network. In principle, UCS beneficiaries are free to choose their primary providers. However, because of limited number of primary providers in rural areas, beneficiaries are assigned mainly to public primary providers close to their communities or their workplaces. Universal Coverage SchemeService delivery system Types of Providers Empanelled: Both Public & Non-state
Number of public providers:
Number of non-state providers: The UCS service delivery network includes both public and private health care facilities. However, prior to registration, private health facilities must submit required documentation and are investigated according to standard criteria of the UCS. No similar process exists for public health care facilities and they are automatically registered in the delivery network. The Thai insurance system is based on the health system that is founded on the principles of primary care. For UCS in particular, primary care provider units (PCUs) have been designated as gatekeepers to provide care for UCS beneficiaries. As gatekeepers, PCUs are expected to provide people in their catchment areas with continuous and comprehensive care with a holistic approach. According to the services provided, health facilities under the UCS can be classified into three groups:
Private health facilities are investigated by the UCS before contracts are signed. There is no such investigation for public health care facilities as they are automatically registered in the delivery network. In principle, UCS beneficiaries are free to choose their primary providers. However, because of limited number of primary providers in rural areas, beneficiaries are assigned mainly to public primary providers close to their communities or their workplaces. |
