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
Vietnam: Compulsory and Voluntary Health Insurance Schemes
  • Both Public & Non-state
980 85

Beneficiaries of the national health insurance scheme are able to seek care at all public facilities. Additionally, the VSS has begun contracting with a small number private providers. Of those currently registered with the VSS, the majority are general practitioner clinics. Enrollees in all public schemes are required to register with a local facility and are expected to use that facility when they require treatment. Referrals are sanctioned when the registered facility lacks the necessary expertise to treat the patient’s condition. Health services in Vietnam are delivered by both public and private providers.

Read full section

Beneficiaries of the national health insurance scheme are able to seek care at all public facilities. Additionally, the VSS has begun contracting with a small number private providers. Of those currently registered with the VSS, the majority are general practitioner clinics. Enrollees in all public schemes are required to register with a local facility and are expected to use that facility when they require treatment. Referrals are sanctioned when the registered facility lacks the necessary expertise to treat the patient’s condition. Health services in Vietnam are delivered by both public and private providers.

The health public care network is organized under state administrative units: central, provincial, district, commune and village level, with the MoH at the central level. In the public sector, there are 980 hospitals (39 central, 331 provincial and 610 district hospitals) and 11,544 primary health centers. Communes Health Centers (CHCs) provide primary health care services, including consultation, outbreak prevention and surveillance, treatment of common diseases, maternal and child health care, family planning, hygiene, and health promotion. Although CHCs are widespread, they are underutilized. On average, a CHC serves just 7,000 people. Hospitals, on the other hand, exhibit high occupancy rates, often exceeding 100%. This trend may reflect perceptions in quality of care, or may represent the strong bias in reimbursements towards higher-level facilities and inpatient care.

Across Vietnam, there are approximately 35,000 private clinics and 85 private hospitals, accounting for 8.7 % of the total number of hospitals nationwide, with 5,800 beds, accounting for 3.8% of the total number of hospital beds nationwide.

VSS has begun contracting with private providers, but they still represent a small portion of care provided under the national insurance program. Of private providers registered with VSS, general practitioner clinics represent the largest groups.

VSS reimburses approved facilities, which include all public facilities and some contracted private facilities. Enrollees may also use non-contracted facilities, including providers abroad, but reimbursement in this case is to the patient, who pays the facility directly and subsequently files a claim, and is limited to the costs incurred on average by public facilities in Vietnam.

Chile: National Health Fund (FONASA)
  • Both Public & Non-state

In 1985, two modalities of health service provision were established for FONASA beneficiaries. Under the Institutional Modality (IM), FONASA beneficiaries can access the public system in order to use public hospitals. Financial coverage under this modality is dependent upon the income of the beneficiary. Under the Free Election Modality (FEM), FONASA beneficiaries can opt to use private health service providers that have entered into agreements with FONASA. Financial coverage under this modality depends on the category to which the health service provider is subscribed. Generally, FEM copayments are larger than IM copayments.

Read full section

In 1985, two modalities of health service provision were established for FONASA beneficiaries. Under the Institutional Modality (IM), FONASA beneficiaries can access the public system in order to use public hospitals. Financial coverage under this modality is dependent upon the income of the beneficiary. Under the Free Election Modality (FEM), FONASA beneficiaries can opt to use private health service providers that have entered into agreements with FONASA. Financial coverage under this modality depends on the category to which the health service provider is subscribed. Generally, FEM copayments are larger than IM copayments.

Chile’s service delivery system is composed of 26 autonomous health authorities responsible for hospital care. Primary health care was decentralized down to the level of the municipality. In Chile, 80% of hospital beds are public. FONASA is required to purchase most of its health services from public institutions, although it does provide a subsidy to its enrollees wishing to purchase services from private providers. Public health care providers must sell most of their services to FONASA and have strict guidelines on the type and number of services they can make available to private patients or ISAPRE beneficiaries. FONASA categories B, C, and D can elect to receive care outside of the public system for a higher co-payment. Category A enrollees must receive services from the public provider system.

Of all the AUGE procedures carried out, 86% are conducted at the primary health level. Meanwhile, of the AUGE procedures for FONASA beneficiaries performed in the private sector, 90% correspond to dialysis treatment. Whenever there is a risk of falling behind on the guarantees, services must be purchased from elsewhere. For example, in the case of cancer a public hospital will normally purchase services from another public hospital. In the case of cataracts, however, a public hospital will normally purchase services from the private sector.

The AUGE plan has changed the manner in which health service delivery is viewed. In the past, supply determined how many cataract interventions were performed based on the internal capacity of the institution. But now, with certain services explicitly guaranteed, the health system has to detect the prevalence of cataracts and determine how to best reorganize resources in order to satisfy demand.

Chile has also instituted a free telephone line that responds to inquiries regarding a number of different health situations. It is staffed by a team that has the ability to provide medical advice and set up consultations. This service has led to a significant reduction in emergency room visits, as problems that are deemed non-urgent can be resolved through primary care personnel.

Finally, it is worth noting that ISAPREs are not allowed to provide health services directly to their enrollees. They must rely on horizontal networks of health care providers and hospitals for the delivery of services.

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.

Mexico: Seguro Popular
  • Both Public & Non-state

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 section

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.