4 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Fostering Belonging and Civic Identity: Perspectives from Newcomer and Refugee Students in Arizona and New York
This policy report focuses on high-school-aged newcomer immigrant and resettled refugee students and explores their experiences across four schools in Arizona and New York. Using mixed research methods, the report examines the ways in which these students develop a sense of belonging and civic identity, and the role of schools in influencing student growth and development. The report presents findings on diversity and inclusion, student belonging and well-being, civic identity, rights, and civic engagement, and school and community participation, as well as policy recommendations for key stakeholders
Financing intersectoral action for health: a systematic review of co-financing models.
BACKGROUND: Addressing the social and other non-biological determinants of health largely depends on policies and programmes implemented outside the health sector. While there is growing evidence on the effectiveness of interventions that tackle these upstream determinants, the health sector does not typically prioritise them. From a health perspective, they may not be cost-effective because their non-health outcomes tend to be ignored. Non-health sectors may, in turn, undervalue interventions with important co-benefits for population health, given their focus on their own sectoral objectives. The societal value of win-win interventions with impacts on multiple development goals may, therefore, be under-valued and under-resourced, as a result of siloed resource allocation mechanisms. Pooling budgets across sectors could ensure the total multi-sectoral value of these interventions is captured, and sectors' shared goals are achieved more efficiently. Under such a co-financing approach, the cost of interventions with multi-sectoral outcomes would be shared by benefiting sectors, stimulating mutually beneficial cross-sectoral investments. Leveraging funding in other sectors could off-set flat-lining global development assistance for health and optimise public spending. Although there have been experiments with such cross-sectoral co-financing in several settings, there has been limited analysis to examine these models, their performance and their institutional feasibility. AIM: This study aimed to identify and characterise cross-sectoral co-financing models, their operational modalities, effectiveness, and institutional enablers and barriers. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature, following PRISMA guidelines. Studies were included if data was provided on interventions funded across two or more sectors, or multiple budgets. Extracted data were categorised and qualitatively coded. RESULTS: Of 2751 publications screened, 81 cases of co-financing were identified. Most were from high-income countries (93%), but six innovative models were found in Uganda, Brazil, El Salvador, Mozambique, Zambia, and Kenya that also included non-public and international payers. The highest number of cases involved the health (93%), social care (64%) and education (22%) sectors. Co-financing models were most often implemented with the intention of integrating services across sectors for defined target populations, although models were also found aimed at health promotion activities outside the health sector and cross-sectoral financial rewards. Interventions were either implemented and governed by a single sector or delivered in an integrated manner with cross-sectoral accountability. Resource constraints and political relevance emerged as key enablers of co-financing, while lack of clarity around the roles of different sectoral players and the objectives of the pooling were found to be barriers to success. Although rigorous impact or economic evaluations were scarce, positive process measures were frequently reported with some evidence suggesting co-financing contributed to improved outcomes. CONCLUSION: Co-financing remains in an exploratory phase, with diverse models having been implemented across sectors and settings. By incentivising intersectoral action on structural inequities and barriers to health interventions, such a novel financing mechanism could contribute to more effective engagement of non-health sectors; to efficiency gains in the financing of universal health coverage; and to simultaneously achieving health and other well-being related sustainable development goals
Recommended from our members
Exploring Collaboration in Early Childhood Development: Comparing the Cases of Guyana and Jamaica
This dissertation explores collaborative approaches to policy and planning across multiple policy areas and stakeholders, and contributes to research in international education development as well as collaborative governance and management on the structures and processes through which persons work collectively-crossing institutional, sectoral and disciplinary divides-to achieve shared goals.
Given the growth in policy attention and experimentation among countries to develop and implement approaches and mechanisms to facilitate collaboration across policy boundaries and sectoral silos, the specific goals of the study were to: (a) analyze how collaborative approaches emerge at the national level; (b) identify what factors support the implementation of collaborative approaches; and (c) assess how collaborative approaches affect systemic outcomes.
The dissertation uses qualitative research methods of document analysis and interviews, and develops analytical frameworks to address the emergence, implementation and assessment of collaborative approaches policy and planning at the national level. Through its comparative case study of Early Childhood Development (ECD) in two Commonwealth Caribbean countries, Guyana and Jamaica, the dissertation contributes to governance and systems scholarship in ECD.
In unpacking the stages through which the establishment of collaborative approaches unfold, the dissertation finds that political factors in the countries’ political contexts held the greatest explanatory value for differences in establishment, and specific drivers motivated progression within and between stages, for example, advocacy, and events that prompt collaborative action, recognition of interdependence, a prior history of collaboration, political will and leadership.
The dissertation also provides a framework of the factors (i.e., contextual, structural, technical, and relational) that can influence the implementation of collaborative approaches and applies this framework to the case studies. Findings indicate that each set of factors was important in explaining how stakeholders were able to work collaboratively, but technical and relational factors were the most highly valued and least addressed in the case studies.
Finally, the dissertation develops a framework that links key features of collaborative approaches to the systemic outcomes of equity, quality, and sustainability by offering analytical pathways to trace how collaboration can change the way a system functions-in the areas of system resilience, system integrity and system performance. The dissertation combines conceptual and empirical insights to analyze how the functioning of the collaborative entity and process in the case countries influenced their abilities to support equity, quality and sustainability at the systems level