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 |
|
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 sectionBeneficiaries 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. Compulsory and Voluntary Health Insurance SchemesService delivery system Types of Providers Empanelled: Both Public & Non-state
Number of public providers: 980
Number of non-state providers: 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. 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. |
| 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. |
||
| Colombia: General System of Social Security in Health |
|
One of the central aspects of the 1993 reform involved separating the financing, stewardship, and delivery functions within the health system. While hospitals still receive some supply-side subsidies through the SGP, the spirit of the reform is to eventually transform them into demand-side subsidies. Health service providers must now compete on the basis of quality for the majority of services provided. Under this scheme EPSs and EPSSs negotiate contracts with service providers. They also coordinate service delivery between patients and a network of public and private providers. Preventive and primary care services are primarily contracted by capitation, with EPSs providing such services through vertically integrated networks and EPSSs providing such services mainly through public hospitals. Most specialist and hospital care is paid for either by service packages or on a fee-for-service basis. Read full sectionOne of the central aspects of the 1993 reform involved separating the financing, stewardship, and delivery functions within the health system. While hospitals still receive some supply-side subsidies through the SGP, the spirit of the reform is to eventually transform them into demand-side subsidies. Health service providers must now compete on the basis of quality for the majority of services provided. Under this scheme EPSs and EPSSs negotiate contracts with service providers. They also coordinate service delivery between patients and a network of public and private providers. Preventive and primary care services are primarily contracted by capitation, with EPSs providing such services through vertically integrated networks and EPSSs providing such services mainly through public hospitals. Most specialist and hospital care is paid for either by service packages or on a fee-for-service basis. Colombia’s provider market features two levels of market competition. On the first level, enrollees choose their EPS or EPSS based on the quality of its provider network. On the second level, the EPSs and EPSSs select their provider network based on their price and quality. Therefore, there are real incentives within the system for providers to supply better quality services at lower prices. Services are organized by levels of care. The first level includes facilities that offer general medicine. This level is supposed to provide the majority of services. The second level comprises providers of basic specialized medical and surgical services. Finally, the third level includes institutions that provide specialty and sub-specialty care as well as high complexity hospitalization. Providers must meet minimum quality, financial, and administrative standards that are enforced by the Ministry of Social Protection (MPS). Providers must also register at the local health authority, which issues a three year certificate. The health authority verification is met through an on-site inspection. Furthermore, since 2002 the Obligatory System to Guarantee the Quality of Health Services (SOGCS) has helped to maintain and improve the quality of health services by focusing on accreditation, audit, and information management. In terms of monitoring service providers, Law 100 mandated the establishment of a compulsory quality assurance system. However, the creation of such a mechanism lagged behind the implementation of other facets of the reform. In 2002, a quality assurance system was finally implemented that introduced a licensing and accreditation process for both public and private facilities. And in 2006 a systematic dissemination of hospitals’ quality began to take place on a regular basis. General System of Social Security in HealthService delivery system Types of Providers Empanelled: Both Public & Non-state
Number of public providers:
Number of non-state providers: One of the central aspects of the 1993 reform involved separating the financing, stewardship, and delivery functions within the health system. While hospitals still receive some supply-side subsidies through the SGP, the spirit of the reform is to eventually transform them into demand-side subsidies. Health service providers must now compete on the basis of quality for the majority of services provided. Under this scheme EPSs and EPSSs negotiate contracts with service providers. They also coordinate service delivery between patients and a network of public and private providers. Preventive and primary care services are primarily contracted by capitation, with EPSs providing such services through vertically integrated networks and EPSSs providing such services mainly through public hospitals. Most specialist and hospital care is paid for either by service packages or on a fee-for-service basis. Colombia’s provider market features two levels of market competition. On the first level, enrollees choose their EPS or EPSS based on the quality of its provider network. On the second level, the EPSs and EPSSs select their provider network based on their price and quality. Therefore, there are real incentives within the system for providers to supply better quality services at lower prices. Services are organized by levels of care. The first level includes facilities that offer general medicine. This level is supposed to provide the majority of services. The second level comprises providers of basic specialized medical and surgical services. Finally, the third level includes institutions that provide specialty and sub-specialty care as well as high complexity hospitalization. Providers must meet minimum quality, financial, and administrative standards that are enforced by the Ministry of Social Protection (MPS). Providers must also register at the local health authority, which issues a three year certificate. The health authority verification is met through an on-site inspection. Furthermore, since 2002 the Obligatory System to Guarantee the Quality of Health Services (SOGCS) has helped to maintain and improve the quality of health services by focusing on accreditation, audit, and information management. In terms of monitoring service providers, Law 100 mandated the establishment of a compulsory quality assurance system. However, the creation of such a mechanism lagged behind the implementation of other facets of the reform. In 2002, a quality assurance system was finally implemented that introduced a licensing and accreditation process for both public and private facilities. And in 2006 a systematic dissemination of hospitals’ quality began to take place on a regular basis. |
||
| Indonesia: Jamkesmas |
|
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 sectionJamkesmas 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. JamkesmasService delivery system Types of Providers Empanelled: Both Public & Non-state
Number of public providers: 926
Number of non-state providers: 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. |
| Kyrgyz Republic: Mandatory Health Insurance Fund (MHIF) |
|
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 sectionThe 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. Mandatory Health Insurance Fund (MHIF)Service delivery system Types of Providers Empanelled: Both Public & Non-state
Number of public providers:
Number of non-state providers: 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. |
||
| 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. |
||
| 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. |