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. |
| 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. |
||
| Kenya: National Hospital Insurance Fund |
|
150 | 450 |
National Hospital Insurance Fund contracts with about 600 health facilities that are managed by both the public and private sector throughout Kenya’s 8 provinces. About 150 of these facilities are state-run, while the remaining hospitals are managed by private and mission organizations. Individuals who are members of NHIF are able to access their benefits at any of the hospitals affiliated with NHIF regardless of locations. Read full sectionNational Hospital Insurance Fund contracts with about 600 health facilities that are managed by both the public and private sector throughout Kenya’s 8 provinces. About 150 of these facilities are state-run, while the remaining hospitals are managed by private and mission organizations. Individuals who are members of NHIF are able to access their benefits at any of the hospitals affiliated with NHIF regardless of locations. NHIF has an accreditation and contracting process with is administered at the branch level of the NHIF. This process begins with the hospital submitting an application to join the NHIF network. The NHIF branch manager then visits the hospital and uses a master checklist to rate the hospital based on a diverse set of standards including physical infrastructure, personnel, and services offered. The NHIF then works with hospital management to set up a Quality training process and a Quality improvement program, and train hospital staff on the operational procedures of the NHIF. Contracts are generally signed for a period of 2 years, with evaluations by the NHIF branch management at 6-month intervals which are submitted to the NHIF board for review. Outpatient services are not currently covered by the NHIF. In 2008 there were 4,700 health facilities nationwide, 51% of which were owned and operated by the central government, 34% were operated privately, and 15% were maintained by non-governmental organizations, foreign-based organizations, or religious groups. The private sector provides about 60% of the total medical equipment and supplies. The private sector plays a large role healthcare system, especially in the field of facilities and personnel; 47% of the poorest quintile of Kenyans uses a private facility when a child is sick. All health facilities are integrated in a hierarchy with the most sophisticated services available at the national level. The next best level of care is found in the provincial hospitals, followed by sub-district hospitals. At local and sub location levels service is provided through health centers and dispensaries, these account for about 85% of all health facilities in the country. The focus on decentralization has delegated increasing amounts of daily management to the community and district levels as the health system has progressed. The quality of care provided by health facilities is unequally distributed across the country; only 30% of the rural population has access to health facilities within 4 kilometers, while such access is available to 70% of urban dwellers. National Hospital Insurance FundService delivery system Types of Providers Empanelled: Both Public & Non-state
Number of public providers: 150
Number of non-state providers: 450 National Hospital Insurance Fund contracts with about 600 health facilities that are managed by both the public and private sector throughout Kenya’s 8 provinces. About 150 of these facilities are state-run, while the remaining hospitals are managed by private and mission organizations. Individuals who are members of NHIF are able to access their benefits at any of the hospitals affiliated with NHIF regardless of locations. NHIF has an accreditation and contracting process with is administered at the branch level of the NHIF. This process begins with the hospital submitting an application to join the NHIF network. The NHIF branch manager then visits the hospital and uses a master checklist to rate the hospital based on a diverse set of standards including physical infrastructure, personnel, and services offered. The NHIF then works with hospital management to set up a Quality training process and a Quality improvement program, and train hospital staff on the operational procedures of the NHIF. Contracts are generally signed for a period of 2 years, with evaluations by the NHIF branch management at 6-month intervals which are submitted to the NHIF board for review. Outpatient services are not currently covered by the NHIF. In 2008 there were 4,700 health facilities nationwide, 51% of which were owned and operated by the central government, 34% were operated privately, and 15% were maintained by non-governmental organizations, foreign-based organizations, or religious groups. The private sector provides about 60% of the total medical equipment and supplies. The private sector plays a large role healthcare system, especially in the field of facilities and personnel; 47% of the poorest quintile of Kenyans uses a private facility when a child is sick. All health facilities are integrated in a hierarchy with the most sophisticated services available at the national level. The next best level of care is found in the provincial hospitals, followed by sub-district hospitals. At local and sub location levels service is provided through health centers and dispensaries, these account for about 85% of all health facilities in the country. The focus on decentralization has delegated increasing amounts of daily management to the community and district levels as the health system has progressed. The quality of care provided by health facilities is unequally distributed across the country; only 30% of the rural population has access to health facilities within 4 kilometers, while such access is available to 70% of urban dwellers. |
| Philippines: PhilHealth |
|
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 sectionThe 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. PhilHealthService delivery system Types of Providers Empanelled: Both Public & Non-state
Number of public providers:
Number of non-state providers: 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 |
|
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. |
| 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. |