|
Convergence Sites Summary of Health Reforms in the 8 Convergence Sites Best Practices |
Philippines
Chalks Up Modest... continue..
Reasons that were cited by the review to explain the wide variance between accomplishments and set targets were: the change of government in 2001, ambitious targets, lack of budget support, and inadequate advocacy and push from top DOH management. The review concluded that although the reform program has been taken beyond the critical first steps, its momentum can grind to a halt if certain risk factors are not addressed, among which are: the proposed budget cuts for convergence sites development, high expectations generated in the expansion sites, and the lack of management capacity at the central and regional levels to implement the reforms. The meeting was attended by the Secretary of Health, the President of the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth), senior officials of the Department of Health and PhilHealth, officials from the National Economic Development Authority and the Department of Budget and Management, and representatives from local government units, civil society, the academe, and the donor community. |
MSH-HSRTAP Contributed Substantially continue.. Demand
driven project. The
initial demand for MSH-HSRTAP support was from top DOH executives who were
committed to health sector reforms. This demand was articulated in the
HSRA and its implementation plan and the project was tailor fitted to meet
such demand. Although the priorities of the current DOH top management
have changed, the HSRA continues to be valid (and declared as such by the
DOH) so that the project has remained relevant and useful. Furthermore,
MSH-HSRTAP recognized that the HSRA served not just the DOH but multiple
clients, particularly the LGUs, PHIC, and even legislators. This provided
the opportunity for the project to continue its work by directing its
support to these other clients. Fixed
targets, flexible benchmarks.
A key feature of MSH-HSRTAP was that it adopted the very outcomes that the
HSRA wanted to produce. This allowed the project to steer itself in the
direction of HSRA objectives, even in a rapidly changing political
environment. However, the project also built for itself some room for
flexibility to adapt to such changes. The key feature here was the rolling
annual plan with quarterly set and monitored benchmarks jointly determined
with client agencies. This approach, which built on the experience with
previous USAID projects like the Child Survival Project and the Health
Finance Development Project, became more effective when coupled with close
interaction between the project and its client. Venue
for reform minded health professionals.
Beyond its staff and consultants, the project also effectively served as a
venue for reform-minded health professionals in and outside the client
agencies to discuss, debate and monitor the progress of HSRA
implementation. In doing so, the project was able to sustain the
constituency behind HSRA. Moreover, the project also could be seen as a
facility to support health sector reform champions inside and outside
government. Project
management committed to reforms.
Finally, the drive behind the project could not have been sustained
without managers that were committed to the HSRA. This commitment was
consistently strong throughout the life of the project |