1 / 15

Renewing Community Participation? The case of Performance- Based Financing in Burundi .

Jean-Benoît Falisse , Bruno Meessen , Michel Bossuyt , Juvénal Ndayishimiye. Renewing Community Participation? The case of Performance- Based Financing in Burundi. Main Messages / Plan. Community Participation in Burundi: poor achievements so far.

mckenzie-english
Download Presentation

Renewing Community Participation? The case of Performance- Based Financing in Burundi .

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Jean-Benoît Falisse, Bruno Meessen, Michel Bossuyt, Juvénal Ndayishimiye Renewing Community Participation? The case of Performance-BasedFinancing in Burundi.

  2. Main Messages / Plan • Community Participation in Burundi: poor achievements so far. • Performance-based financing: an entry point for renewing community participation. • (Re-)defining things -clearly: • Who is the “voice” of the community? • What community agents to deliver services/care?

  3. Community Participation: the old ‘magic bullet’. The Bamako Initiative (1987) Based on community/users mobilization. Heterogeneous experiences. Bottom-up process. Context and Rationale

  4. Methodology and Data • Formal state: the rules. • legal and technical documents, interviews. • Actual and expected state: on the field. • interviews in 104 Health Centers. • 3 focus groups: Health Committee, Community-Based Organization, medical staff. • Triangulation to check the data.

  5. Coverage Ngozi 20 (38%) Bubanza 18 (100%) Muramvya 17 (76%) Mwaro 9 (61%) Rutana 20 (67%) Bubanza 20 (63%)

  6. The Burundian Case: community participation • A troubled context. • Various projects/programmes since the Bamako Initiative (1987). • NGO led (1993-2008 civil war). • Setting up Health Committees around the country. • Community Health Agents in vertical programmes. • Transfer to the Ministry of Public Health (2007)

  7. The state of Community Participation • Community Health Agents: out of control?. • Unknown by health center staffs (>50%) • Health Committees: • Almost no official information about them (neither NHIS nor PBF). • Existing guidelines although: • Largely unknown (<20%). • Unclear role (‘co’-management?).

  8. An under-efficient System?

  9. Decision Rights… and Conflicts decision rights of the health committee full some none conflict

  10. The PBF system • PBF: the ‘trendy’ strategy. • Based on incentives (for medical staff). • Promising experiences so far (Central Africa).

  11. PBF: where is the community? • Voicing preferences (community as an end). • Upward accountability of health centers (control mechanism). • Almost no downward accountability. • Reaching everybody (community as a tool). • Back to the rationale of community-health agents.

  12. The accountability issue • Improving accountability: “voice”. • Health Committees: • Voice in the business plan. • Now they have something to manage! • The contracted Community-Based Organisations: • Not truly the “voice” of the population. • What utilisationof the data?

  13. Reorganizing Community Health Agents • PBF: an entry point. • Contracting: no cons? • Defining the indicators to subsidize: • HIV/AIDS in Makamba. • Traditional midwifes in Ngozi. • Re-organisation: • Linking to healthcare facilities. • Grouping .

  14. Conclusion

  15. Thank you! (murakoze cane)

More Related