Describing and evaluating healthcare priority setting practices at the county level in Kenya

Budgeting in Healthcare Systems and Organizations: A Systematic Review

Background

Budgeting is the process resource allocation to produce the best output according to the revenue levels involved. Among the constraints that healthcare organizations, including hospitals, both in the public and private sectors, grapple with is budgetary constraints. Therefore, cost control and resource management should be considered in healthcare organizations under such circumstances.

Methods

We aimed to identify methods of budgeting in healthcare systems and organizations as a systematic review. To extract and analyze the data, a form was designed by the researcher to define budgeting methods proposed in the literature and to identify their strengths, weaknesses, and dimensions. The search was conducted in Google Scholar, Web of science, Pub med and Scopus databases covering the period 1990-2022.

Results

Overall, 33 articles were included in the study for extraction and final analysis. The study results were reported in four main themes: healthcare system budgeting, capital budgeting, global budgeting, and performance-based budgeting.

Conclusion

Each budgeting approach has its own pros and cons and requires meeting certain requirements. These approaches are selected and implemented depending on each country's infrastructure and conditions as well as its organizations. These infrastructures need to be thoroughly examined before implementing any budgeting method, and then a budgeting method should be selected accordingly.

Political economy analysis of sub-national health sector planning and budgeting: A case study of three counties in Kenya

Devolution represented a concerted attempt to bring decision making closer to service delivery in Kenya, including within the health sector. This transformation created county governments with independent executive (responsible for implementing) and legislative (responsible for agenda-setting) arms. These new arrangements have undergone several growing pains that complicate management practices, such as planning and budgeting. Relatively little is known, however, about how these functions have evolved and varied sub-nationally. We conducted a problem-driven political economy analysis to better understand how these planning and budgeting processes are structured, enacted, and subject to change, in three counties. Key informant interviews (n = 32) were conducted with purposively selected participants in Garissa, Kisumu, and Turkana Counties; and national level in 2021, with participants drawn from a wide range of stakeholders involved in health sector planning and budgeting. We found that while devolution has greatly expanded participation in sub-national health management, it has also complicated and politicized decision-making. In this way, county governments now have the authority to allocate resources based on the preferences of their constituents, but at the expense of efficiency. Moreover, budgets are often not aligned with priority-setting processes and are frequently undermined by disbursements delays from national treasury, inconsistent supply chains, and administrative capacity constraints. In conclusion, while devolution has greatly transformed sub-national health management in Kenya with longer-term potential for greater accountability and health equity, short-to-medium term challenges persist in developing efficient systems for engaging a diverse array of stakeholders in planning and budgeting processes. Redressing management capacity challenges between and within counties is essential to ensure that the Kenya health system is responsive to local communities and aligned with the progressive aspirations of its universal health coverage movement.

A qualitative evaluation of priority-setting by the Health Benefits Package Advisory Panel in Kenya

Kenya's Ministry of Health established the Health Benefits Package Advisory Panel (HBPAP) in 2018 to develop a benefits package for universal health coverage. This study evaluated HBPAP's process for developing the benefits package against the normative procedural (acceptable way of doing things) and outcome (acceptable consequences) conditions of an ideal healthcare priority-setting process as outlined in the study's conceptual framework. We conducted a qualitative case study using in-depth interviews with national-level respondents (n = 20) and document reviews. Data were analysed using a thematic approach. HBPAP's process partially fulfilled the procedural and outcome conditions of the study's evaluative framework. Concerning the procedural conditions, transparency and publicity were partially met and were limited by the lack of publication of HBPAP's report. While HBPAP used explicit and evidence-based priority-setting criteria, challenges included lack of primary data and local cost-effectiveness threshold, weak health information systems, short timelines and political interference. While a wide range of stakeholders were engaged, this was limited by short timelines and inadequate financial resources. Empowerment of non-HBPAP members was limited by their inadequate technical knowledge and experience in priority-setting. Finally, appeals and revisions were limited by short timelines and lack of implementation of the proposed benefits package. Concerning the outcome conditions, stakeholder understanding was limited by the technical nature of the process and short timelines, while stakeholder acceptance and satisfaction were limited by lack of transparency. HBPAP's benefits package was not implemented due to stakeholder interests and opposition. Priority-setting processes for benefits package development in Kenya could be improved by publicizing the outcome of the process, allocating adequate time and financial resources, strengthening health information systems, generating local evidence and enhancing stakeholder awareness and engagement to increase their empowerment, understanding and acceptance of the process. Managing politics and stakeholder interests is key in enhancing the success of priority-setting processes.

County Health Leadership Practices and Readiness for Noncommunicable Disease Services in Kenya

Background:

Premature mortality from noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) is a contemporary development challenge. Low-income and lower-middle-income countries are disproportionately affected, with the poorest in society considered the most vulnerable. A paucity of literature exists on how leadership practices at the implementation level relate to ensuring readiness for NCD services.

Objective:

This study investigated any relationship between leadership practices and readiness for NCD services.

Methods:

This correlational study investigated any relationship between leadership practices at the county level and readiness for NCD services in Kenya using secondary data from a 2013 Service Availability and Readiness Assessment survey. Correlation and multiple linear regression tests were used to determine the strength and direction of any relationship between leadership practices (annual work planning, therapeutic committees, and supportive supervision), and NCD readiness (county readiness score).

Findings:

The findings indicated a statistically significant relationship between therapeutic committee (p = .002) and supportive supervision practices (p = .023) and NCD readiness. Leadership practices also had a statistically significant predictive relationship with NCD readiness (p = .009).

Conclusion:

Health leaders should ensure that leadership practices that have a predictive relationship with NCD readiness, such as therapeutic committee activities and supportive supervision visits, are implemented appropriately. Further, county health leaders should pay particular attention to the implementation of these leadership practices at nonpublic and Tiers 2, 3, and 4 health facilities that had lower NCD readiness scores.

Examining health sector application and utility of program-based budgeting: County level experiences in Kenya

Introduction

In 2012, Kenya enacted a new Public Finance Management Act to guide the public‐sector planning and budgeting process. This new law replaced the previous line item budgeting, with a new program‐based budgeting (PBB) process. This study examined the experience of health sector PBB implementation at the county level in Kenya.

Methods

We carried out a review of the literature documenting the health sector application and utility of PBB in low‐ and middle‐income countries. We then collected empirical data to examine the experience of health sector application of PBB at County Level in Kenya.

Results

In the financial year 2017/18, counties utilised the PBB approach for health sector planning. The PBB approach was perceived by key stakeholders; to have improved the alignment of technical priorities with budgetary allocation, and to have increased transparency, accountability and openness of the process. Its challenges included lack of clear tools and guidelines to support implementation, low capacity at county level, political interference and the organisation of the public sector electronic financial management system around line item budgeting system.

Conclusion

PBB is potentially a useful tool for aligning health sector planning and budgeting and ensuring the Annual Work Plan is more result oriented. However, realisation of this goal would be enhanced by the developing clear tools and guidelines to support its implementation, building capacity for county health sector managers to better understand the PBB application, and reforming the public‐sector budgetary management system to align it with the PBB approach.

Stakeholder perceptions of current practices and challenges in priority setting for non-communicable disease control in Kenya: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

To explore the stakeholders' perceptions of current practices and challenges in priority setting for non-communicable disease (NCD) control in Kenya.

DESIGN

A qualitative study approach conducted within a 1-day stakeholder workshop that followed a deliberative dialogue process.

SETTING

Study was conducted within a 1-day stakeholder workshop that was held in October 2019 in Nairobi, Kenya.

PARTICIPANTS

Stakeholders who currently participate in the national level policymaking process for health in Kenya.

OUTCOME MEASURE

Priority setting process for NCD control in Kenya.

RESULTS

Donor funding was identified as a key factor that informed the priority setting process for NCD control. Misalignment between donors' priorities and the country's priorities for NCD control was seen as a hindrance to the process. It was identified that there was minimal utilisation of context-specific evidence from locally conducted research. Additional factors seen to inform the priority setting process included political leadership, government policies and budget allocation for NCDs, stakeholder engagement, media, people's cultural and religious beliefs.

CONCLUSION

There is an urgent need for development aid partners to align their priorities to the specific NCD control priority areas that exist in the countries that they extend aid to. Additionally, context-specific scientific evidence on effective local interventions for NCD control is required to inform areas of priority in Kenya and other low-income and middle-income countries. Further research is needed to develop best practice guidelines and tools for the creation of national-level priority setting frameworks that are responsive to the identified factors that inform the priority setting process for NCD control.

Tracking health sector priority setting processes and outcomes for human resources for health, five-years after political devolution: a county-level case study in Kenya

BACKGROUND

Health sector priority setting in Low and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) entails balancing between a high demand and low supply of scarce resources. Human Resources for Health (HRH) consume the largest allocation of health sector resources in LMICs. Health sector decentralization continues to be promoted for its perceived ability to improve efficiency, relevance and participation in health sector priority setting. Following the 2013 devolution in Kenya, both health service delivery and human resource management were decentralized to county level. Little is known about priority setting practices and outcomes of HRH within decentralized health systems in LMICs. Our study sought to examine if and how the Kenyan devolution has improved health sector priority setting practices and outcomes for HRH.

METHODS

We used a mixed methods case study design to examine health sector priority setting practices and outcomes at county level in Kenya. We used three sources of data. First, we reviewed all relevant national and county level policy and guidelines documents relating to HRH management. We then accessed and reviewed county records of HRH recruitment and distribution between 2013 and 2018. We finally conducted eight key informant interviews with various stakeholder involved in HRH priority setting within our study county.

RESULTS

We found that HRH numbers in the county increased by almost two-fold since devolution. The county had two forms of HRH recruitment: one led by the County Public Services Board as outlined by policy and guidelines and a parallel, politically-driven recruitment done directly by the County Department of Health. Though there were clear guidelines on HRH recruitment, there were no similar guidelines on allocation and distribution of HRH. Since devolution, the county has preferentially staffed higher level hospitals over primary care facilities. Additionally, there has been local county level innovations to address some HRH management challenges, including recruiting doctors and other highly specialized staff on fixed term contract as opposed to permanent basis; and implementation of local incentives to attract and retain HRH to remote areas within the county.

CONCLUSION

Devolution has significantly increased county level decision-space for HRH priority setting in Kenya. However, HRH management and accountability challenges still exist at the county level. There is need for interventions to strengthen county level HRH management capacity and accountability mechanisms beyond additional resources allocation. This will boost the realization of the country's efforts for promoting service delivery equity as a key goal - both for the devolution and the country's quest towards Universal Health Coverage (UHC).

Responding to maternal, neonatal and child health equipment needs in Kenya: a model for an innovation ecosystem leveraging on collaborations and partnerships

Background

Up to 70% of medical devices in low-income and middle-income countries are partially or completely non-functional, impairing service provision and patient outcomes. In Sub-Saharan Africa, medical devices not designed for local conditions, lack of well-trained biomedical engineers and diverse donated equipment have led to poor maintenance and non-repair. The Maker Project’s aim was to test the effectiveness of an innovative partnership ecosystem network, the ‘Maker Hub’, in reducing gaps in the supply of essential medical devices for maternal, newborn and child health. This paper describes the first phase of the project, the building of the Maker Hub.

Methods

Key activities in setting up the Maker Hub—a collaborative partnership between the University of Nairobi (UoN) and the Kenyatta National Hospital (KNH), catalysed by Concern Worldwide Kenya—are described using a product development partnership approach. Using a health systems approach, a needs assessment identified a medical equipment shortlist. Design thinking with a capacity building component was used by the UoN (innovators, public health specialists, engineers) working closely and with KNH nurses, physicians and biomedical engineers to develop the prototypes.

Results

To date, four medical device prototypes have been developed. Two have been evaluated by the National Bureau of Standards and one has undergone clinical testing.

Conclusions

We have demonstrated an innovative partnership ecosystem that has developed medical devices that have undergone national standards evaluation and clinical testing, a first in Sub-Saharan Africa. Promoting a robust innovation ecosystem for medical equipment requires investment in building trust in the innovation ecosystem.

Purchasing reforms and tracking health resources, Kenya

As low- and middle-income countries undertake health financing reforms to achieve universal health coverage, there is renewed interest in making allocation of pooled funds to health-care providers more strategic. To make purchasing more strategic, countries are testing different provider payment methods. They therefore need comprehensive data on funding flows to health-care providers from different purchasers to inform decision on payment methods. Tracking funding flow is the focus of several health resource tracking tools including the System of Health Accounts and public expenditure tracking surveys. This study explores whether these health resource tracking tools generate the type of information needed to inform strategic purchasing reforms, using Kenya as an example. Our qualitative assessment of three counties in Kenya shows that different public purchasers, that is, county health departments and the national health insurance agency, pay public facilities through a variety of payment methods. Some of these flows are in-kind while others are financial transfers. The nature of flows and financial autonomy of facilities to retain and spend funds varies considerably across counties and levels of care. The government routinely undertakes different health resource tracking activities to inform health policy and planning. However, a good source for comprehensive data on the flow of funds to public facilities is still lacking, because these activities were not originally designed to offer such insights. We therefore argue that the methods could be enhanced to track such information and hence improve strategic purchasing. We also offer suggestions how this enhancement can be achieved.

Healthcare equity analysis: applying the Tanahashi model of health service coverage to community health systems following devolution in Kenya

Background

Universal health coverage (UHC) is growing as a national political priority, within the context of recently devolved decision-making processes in Kenya. Increasingly voices within these discussions are highlighting the need for actions towards UHC to focus on quality of services, as well as improving coverage through expansion of national health insurance fund (NHIF) enrolment. Improving health equity is one of the most frequently described objectives for devolution of health services. Previous studies, however, highlight the complexity and unpredictability of devolution processes, potentially contributing to widening rather than reducing disparities. Our study applied Tanahashi’s equity model (according to availability, accessibility, acceptability, contact with and quality) to review perceived equity of health services by actors across the health system and at community level, following changes to the priority-setting process at sub-national levels post devolution in Kenya.

Methods

We carried out a qualitative study between March 2015 and April 2016, involving 269 key informant and in-depth interviews from different levels of the health system in ten counties and 14 focus group discussions with community members in two of these counties. Qualitative data were analysed using the framework approach.

Results

Our findings reveal that devolution in Kenya has focused on improving the supply side of health services, by expanding the availability, geographic and financial accessibility of health services across many counties. However, there has been limited emphasis and investment in promoting the demand side, including restricted efforts to promote acceptability or use of services. Respondents perceived that the quality of health services has typically been neglected within priority-setting to date.

Conclusions

If Kenya is to achieve universal health coverage for all citizens, then county governments must address all aspects of equity, including quality. Through application of the Tanahashi framework, we find that community health services can play a crucial role towards achieving health equity.

Describing and evaluating healthcare priority setting practices at the county level in Kenya

BACKGROUND

Healthcare priority setting research has focused at the macro (national) and micro (patient level), while there is a dearth of literature on meso-level (subnational/regional) priority setting practices. In this study, we aimed to describe and evaluate healthcare priority setting practices at the county level in Kenya.

METHODS

We used a qualitative case study approach to examine the planning and budgeting processes in 2 counties in Kenya. We collected the data through in-depth interviews of senior managers, middle-level managers, frontline managers, and health partners (n = 23) and document reviews. We analyzed the data using a framework approach.

FINDINGS

The planning and budgeting processes in both counties were characterized by misalignment and the dominance of informal considerations in decision making. When evaluated against consequential conditions, efficiency and equity considerations were not incorporated in the planning and budgeting processes. Stakeholders were more satisfied and understood the planning process compared with the budgeting process. There was a lack of shifting of priorities and unsatisfactory implementation of decisions. Against procedural conditions, the planning process was more inclusive and transparent and stakeholders were more empowered compared with the budgeting process. There was ineffective use of data, lack of provisions for appeal and revisions, and limited mechanisms for incorporating community values in the planning and budgeting.

CONCLUSION

County governments can improve the planning and budgeting processes by aligning them, implementing a systematic priority setting process with explicit resource allocation criteria, and adhering to both consequential and procedural aspects of an ideal priority setting process.